Blog Archives

Want good technology in classrooms? Part 2: Use a three legged stool.

2/19/2018

As I look at technology adoption in various K-12 schools, I often see the same stumbling blocks. Teachers really want to implement technology in the classroom, but they usually don't have the time to master technologies, update technologies, maintain and troubleshoot them.

The problem: It is unrealistic to expect a teacher to:

1. Stay abreast of emerging technologies.

2. Spend an immense amount of time searching for appropriate technologies, writing content into these technologies, trouble shooting technical problems and maintaining these technologies.

3. Keep up with best practices for digital content dissemination.

And, my basis for saying so is that it hasn't worked for the last 15 years. And, without a change in the model, I don't think it will work in the future.

The Solution: Instructional Designers for K-12

I do see a solution to this problem. Do what higher ed does. Staff an Instructional Designer (ID) to develop digital content for instructors. At the college where I currently work, we have a system similar to a system used at a the college where I formally worked. In order to create reliable digital content, instructors in higher ed are not left alone to become experts at technologies. Instructors partner with Instructional Designers, many of whom have a degree in the field of Education, to create materials that complete the classroom experience.

Good digital content is a three legged stool. And, as you have guessed, without one of the legs, it doesn't stand.

Leg 1: SME aka at the teacher

The Subject Matter Expert (SME) is the first leg because without the SME, the other two legs wouldn't have material to bring to learners. The SME is the person who presents the material, decides what aspects of the subject matter needs to be provided to learners and divides that material into chunks that make sense.

The SME is the content expert who specializes in a particular specific subject matter. The SME is heavily relied upon during the development process. The other two legs of the stools may only have a superficial understanding of the content, so the SME needs to keep the other two legs (Instructional Designer and Developer) on track, when the Instructional Designer (ID) and Developer need to offer up suggestions for design and functionality. At no time do the IDs and Developers take content into their own hands. There is a constant reliance upon the SME to feed the material to the Instructional Designer as the Instructional Designer is not making any choices related to what content is needed, what the course objectives are or what content needs to be assessed. All of these decisions are made by the SME and provided to the ID.

Leg 2: Instructional Designer

The Instructional Designer is the design expert trained in learning theory, digital content and how to best disseminate knowledge. The role of the Instructional Designer is to work with the SME to understand how a SME needs to approach content with learners. This is an important leg of the stool. Instructional Designers take the goals of the SME and decide how to accomplish those goals digitally.

The ID keeps abreast of the technologies available to the institution and pushes those technologies to the limit in order to meet the goals of the SME and the needs of learners. The ID strives to provide the SME with digital content that reflects the personality of the teacher and relates to learners in the same tone that a SME relates to learners in person, while at the same time providing the SME technologies and techniques to reach learners on deeper levels that aren't even possible in traditional classrooms. So, essentially IDs are maintaining the spirt of the SME, the tradition of developing a connection between teacher and student, as well as developing content that piques the interest of and taps the innate learning desire of 21st century learners.

Leg 3: Developer

The Developers are those people that bring the subject matter and the designed content and transform it into that wonderful language called html5, et al. They are the technical leg of the stool that connects content to computer so learners can access the wonderful world of knowledge.

Developers stay abreast of the constantly developing ways that content interfaces with devices. They know how to use various computer languages to ensure that learners can access the content in the ways that the SMEs and the IDs deem crucial to the learning process. Developers need to code the content to accommodate content responsiveness, the LMS as well as the design of the ID. Developers are the ones who are bringing the content to the device so learners can access it easily, without technical problems and in ways that correlate to how people need to consume content.

Why is this important?

I think this is such an important issue in K-12 schools right now. Virtual schools are popping up and offering this service to students already. It may be difficult to compete with them as they don't have the overhead that brick and mortar schools do. I DO NOT think we should let virtual schools take the place of brick and mortar schools. I don't think it is the best learning solution for our learners for many reasons. And because of that, I think staffing Instructional Designers will actually be worth the price of an ID's salary.

And, for those who think good digital content renders teachers unnecessary, please look at the model again. The stool needs all three legs to stand. The digital content isn't meant to replace teachers, it is meant to give teachers 21st century materials to use to teach, guide, inspire, and support student curiosity. It is a tool that teachers will use, just like textbooks, white boards, smart boards, posters, activities, assignments, videos, etc. It is a 21st century tool that gives all types of 21st century learners easy access to the knowledge learners need.

0 Comments

Want good technology in the classroom? Don't make teachers do it!

2/18/2018

0 Comments

I work for a small business college as an Instructional Designer. My job is to work with college instructors to interpret their content and construct a digital version of it, which will be placed into an LMS for students to access there. Often this requires a good deal of brain work because I strive to have the content stay true to the spirit of the instructor, while ensuring students can learn from the content, and maybe, dare I say it?...enjoy learning from the materials I develop.

We have a good system at the college. Instructional designers do the instructional design and instructors do the teaching. We would never ask instructors to design their digital content materials because it would take them too much time to select an appropriate technology, learn how to use it, put their content into it and then maintain it and troubleshoot technical issues. NEVER!

So, when I was working on a project with a local high school, something dawned on me. We ask K - 12 teachers to do this all the time. Since the EdTech movement began 15 or more years ago, there has been an enthusiastic response from most K - 12 teachers, and some have produced some really good digital content as a result. But, unfortunately, the movement has not made it into the mainstream. We have pockets of teachers that are thriving in the EdTech world, and maybe a school here and there, but the majority have struggled and consequently, the movement hasn't moved very much. I think everyone knows this...it isn't big news.

Here is what I struggle with. We would never ask teachers to write their own textbooks. We buy them. So, why do we ask teachers to develop their own digital materials? Maybe we should ask them to write their own textbooks because I think writing a textbook would actually be easier than making their content digital. Every teacher can use pen and pencil, or they can type on a keyboard in a word document. The textbook they would write, they'd have forever, and they could make simple edits to it over the years. Most teachers can organize their material, write out what they say in the classroom and add some graphics here and there, like textbook publishers do. I'm not saying this would be an easy process because it requires a lot of thinking and a lot of time writing. But, I am saying that the process of writing a textbook is probably an easier task for a teacher to do than creating digital content.

Creating really good digital content takes degreed professionals, who don't have a classroom full of students to manage, hours, days or weeks to complete. It is difficult and time consuming to develop good digital materials that stay true to the teacher, deliver the content in ways that are naturally consumed by multiple learning types and that students may actually enjoy. As an instructional designer, who spends her days only designing, I can say I'm pretty sure I could not do my job while 30 students sat in my space and, while I also had to teach those 30 students something, provide them feedback, assess their knowledge and get them and myself home safely.

So, why do we ask teachers to do something that is harder than something we would never ask them to do? Why do we ask them to create their own digital content or materials using technologies, when we would never ask them to write their own textbooks? I still can't figure it out.

Truthfully, I don't think the EdTech movement will ever take off if we hold to the same model we have been for more than a decade. Showing teachers new technologies in an hour or two long training session and then expecting them to add their content to it, seems unfair. The time commitment, even for "simple" technologies is quite large. Then expecting the teacher to maintain that piece of technology and trouble shoot any technical issues, that they likely aren't trained in, is daunting for a teacher, who needs to be focused on teaching, not on creating content (in a textbook form or digital form).

Even if a teacher does make use of some type of technology learned in a training session, it is likely that the teacher isn't assessing if this technology is actually the right one for that particular content. Instructional designers have a toolbox of technologies that can be used to accomplish various educational goals and before using any of those technologies, instructional designers first analyze what type of technology is right for the content and educational goals. If teachers only have time to learn one or two technologies, they don't have the ability to properly assess the the best tool/technology to accomplish the educational goal.

So, to me, it seems that this model only sets them up to fail and then feel bad about it. It is not fair to teachers to pile this responsibility on them while expecting them to be high performing teachers. You wouldn't ask an instructional designer to stand up in a classroom to teach a chemistry class because the instructional designer isn't trained to do that. So why would anyone ask a teacher to be an instructional designer? And, to do that while still being a teacher?

If this approach to getting technology in the classroom hasn't worked in the last 15 years, it probably won't work now. And if this approach hasn't worked, why haven't we started working on a different model?

I want to suggest that high schools adopt a new model to bring 21st century content into classrooms.

I believe it will make all people who rely on schools to prepare students for their personal futures and the future of society as a whole, feel that schools are not only staying current with modern learning science, but that they are the institutions that are driving learners to indulge their innate passion for learning, and also allowing learners to build content knowledge, develop critical thinking skills and become accomplished decision makers.

0 Comments

Want good technology in classrooms? Part 2: Use a three legged stool.

Want good technology in the classroom? Don't make teachers do it!

Tracy Marshall

Archives