Peter Arashiro (arashiro@student.lansing.cc.mi.us)
Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:48:57 -0500
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:48:57 -0500 From: Peter Arashiro <arashiro@student.lansing.cc.mi.us> Subject: Re: Learning and DMs paper
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://zeus.gmd.de/ifets/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Hartley wrote:
> So, while David's approach is both interesting and valuable maybe it
> sidesteps the deeper questions of learning which go beyond domain resources
> and their presentation regime to interactive and engagement issues from which
> meaning, interpretation and understanding derive.
I think Roger Hartley's understanding of the significance instructional
strategies play in the design and implementation of effective
instruction is shared by many educators. Instructional strategies do
not merely serve as a means to determine what kind of content (is this
what Roger meant by "domain resources"?) needs to be included in
instruction and how it should be presented ("presentation regime").
Instructional strategies (based on David's work) also prescribes the
kind of Exploration and Learner Guidance that needs to be present for a
given type of knowledge/skill to be learned. (Merrill (1998).
Instructional Strategies that Teach. CBT Solutions, Novemeber/December,
1-11).
The "interactive and engagement issues", which Roger says are important
in acquiring meaning, interpretation and understanding, have been the
cause of many ineffective instructional products to be developed.
Creative consultants, market researchers, content experts, and
multimedia experts have come together on numerous occasions to develop
truly engaging and interactive pieces of instruction. But do they
teach? Are students learning intended knowledge/skills, or is the
meaning, interpretation, and understanding that they may (or may not)
derive from the highly engaging and interactive program unintentional?
Perhaps the deeper questions of learing as they relate to "interaction
and engagement" is more inline with ideas of motivation, as described by
Keller in his ARCS (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction)
model. I believe this model lends itself to being incorporated into the
instructional strategies being discussed.
-- Peter Arashiro Instructional Designer Lansing Community College peter_arashiro@lansing.cc.mi.us--------------------------------------------------------- Forum website: http://zeus.gmd.de/ifets/ Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org Info on Join/Leave List: http://zeus.gmd.de/ifets/maillist.html ---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon 08 Feb 1999 - 23:01:29 MET