Instructional Design for the 21st Century: From Atomistic to Holistic Approaches

1. Instructional Design for the 21st Century: From Atomistic to Holistic Approaches Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer Open University of the Netherlands Keynote for the 2007 International Conference of the Korean Society for Educational Technology (KSET), April 27-28, Seoul, Korea.

2. Contents • What is the problem of atomistic approaches to education? • Four components and ten steps to complex learning • Self-directed learning • Implications for teaching • Conclusions

3. Compartmentalization integration Fragmentation coordination Transfer paradox differentiation What is the problem with atomistic approaches? Students are not able to combine the things they have learned......

4. From compartmentalization to integration • What kind of surgeon do you prefer? • Knows a lot about the human body but has ten thumbs • Has excellent technical skills but looks down on his patients • Is friendly but his professional knowledge is outdated • None of the above

5. From fragmentation to coordination • Atomistic models • Analyze learning domain in small pieces • Teach piece-by-piece • Holistic models • Analyze learning domain in coherence; focus on relations between pieces • Teach from simple to more complex wholes • Focus on coordination of pieces

6. From the ‘transfer paradox’ to differentiation diagnose three different errors in a technical system … • E1-E1-E1 / E2-E2-E2 / E3-E3-E3 [blocked order] • Students reach the learning objectives fast • But low transfer of learning (they cannot diagnose E4) • E3-E2-E2 / E1-E3-E3 / E1-E2-E1 [random order] • Students take more time to reach the objectives • But much higher transfer of learning (able to diagnose E4!) • Differentation for complex skills • Variability for problem-solving aspects of a complex task • Repetition for routine aspects of a complex task

7. Four components in the integrated curriculum • Learning tasks • Backbone of educational program • Supportive information • Procedural information • Part-task practice

8. 1. Learning tasks • Based on real-life tasks • Integrative • Aim at transfer • variability Aristotle assignments, projects, problems, tasks, cases …

9. Organizing learning tasks • Simple-to-complex task classes • Tasks in same class are equivalent • Classes are ordered from easy to difficult • Aim at coordination • Support and guidance • From high to low in same task class (‘scaffolding’)

10. 2. Supportive information • Conceptual, causal, & structural models • Develop mental models • Case studies • Systematic Approaches to Problem solving (SAPs) • Develop cognitive strategies • Expert models Plato

11. 3. Procedural Information • Aim at routine aspects of task performance • Present in small units, precisely when necessary (JIT)

12. 4. Part-task practice • Cognitive context • Repetition • Procedural information

13. Constructing the educational blueprint

14. From 4 components to 10 steps 3 performance objectives analyse non - analyze recurrent recurrent aspects aspects 2 task classes 8 cognitive rules 5 cognitive 6 mental strategies models 9 prerequisite knowledge 10 part - task practice 1 learning tasks 7 procedural information 4 supportive information

15. Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2007). Ten steps to complex learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

16. www.enovateas.com

17. Learning, Teaching, & MediaVan Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kester, L. (2005). The four-component instructional design model: Multimedia principles in environments for complex learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 71-93). New York: Cambridge University Press. Schema construction (problem solving, reasoning) Induction 1. Learning tasks Real / simulated task environments Elaboration 2. Supportive information Hyper- & multi- mediasystems Schema automation (routines) Knowledge Compilation 3. Procedural information EPSS, on-line help systems Strengthening 4. Part-task practice Drill & practice CBT

18. Self-directed learning • Independent part-task practice • JIT open learning • On-demand education

19. Level 1Independent part-task practice • Students can do part-task practice whenever they like • “triggered” by the learning tasks • Relatively easy to implement • often individual practice • e.g., drill-and-practice computer-based training, on a computer in the corner of the classroom • application courses, re-animation, presentation skills etc.

20. Level 2JIT Open Learning • Students study supportive information whenever they like; JITOL • Triggered by learning tasks – typically tasks students come across in real-life settings • Much more difficult to implement • ad-hoc composition of groups of students • ad-hoc composition of learning contents

21. Level 3On-demand education • The self-directed learner in flexible, on-demand education • Student selects his/her own learning tasks • at right level of difficulty (i.e., task class) • with right level of support and guidance • in such a way that variability is ensured • Basis for task selection is • Assessment information (e.g., in portfolio) • Metadata on available tasks

22. Task selection & Assessment Portfolio 3 1 collection learning tasks 4 2 • task selection • student • shared responsibility assessment -student, peer, teacher -combinations perform task on-demand education is a service-oriented rather than a production-oriented educational model

23. Collection of Learning Tasks 1 2 3 • Each student has his or her own curriculum, instead of one curriculum for all students • Learning tasks are ordered in task classes (1, 2, 3) • Per task class: learning tasks with different levels of support & guidance (a, b, c) • Per level of support & guidance: learning tasks which differ on dimensions that also differ in the real world a c b

24. Assessment • Basis is provided by the performance objectives for all different aspects of task performance (Step 3) • routine, problem-solving/reasoning, attitudes • POs specify behavior, conditions, tools & objects, and standards: • Criteria (e.g., speed, accuracy) • Values (e.g., conventions, regulations) • Attitudes (e.g., friendly, client-centered)

25. Portfolio: gathering assessment results • Protocol Portfolio Scoring (PPS) • Standards for acceptable performance are the same throughout the whole educational program • Mix of assessment methods and assessors • Basis for decision making • Vertical: all information gathered with different assessment methods on one aspect of performance • Horizontal:overall assessment of performance on the whole task

26. Learning-task Selection

27. Shared responsibility over task selection • Teacher / school selects subset of N suitable tasks • N increases if students have better developed self-regulation skills • Student is given advise for selecting tasks from this subset system control student control Integration and the quality of education is jeopardized if N is too large or advise is absent/suboptimal!

28. A simple example of using a portfolio in on-demand education • Reflection • how did it go? • what are points for improvement? • Planning • Which point to work on? • Which tasks help to improve?

30. Implications for teaching • In addition to the traditional role of presenting and explaining supportive information, teachers become: • designer of learning tasks • instructor acting as “assistant looking over the shoulder” • advisor/coach for giving advice on how to plan the own learning process

31. Conclusions • Learning tasks are the “linking pin” to reach a holistic approach to education • On demand-education may help to reach integration of first-order and higher-order skills, but it comes with risks • In an integrated curriculum, teachers get additional new roles