Philip Duchastel (duchaste@fcae.acast.nova.edu)
Tue, 18 May 1999 15:28:30 -0400
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 15:28:30 -0400 From: Philip Duchastel <duchaste@fcae.acast.nova.edu> Subject: Response to various comments about the discussion
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.gmd.de/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, some fascinating thoughts floating around...
Nelson mentions that hard to learn might well be equated with externally
imposed. True indeed, but how do we merge personal and public interests,
that is the tricky one? The same issue applies on a grander scale in
Buddhism and Taoism. Finding balance is the key, but what that is is big
question.
Wiles brings in Kuhn - he did not like my research views. Paradigms are
really philosophical stances in the face of uncertainty. Look at
constructivism for instance or cogntivism. They are not research-based,
but rather pre-research positions based on a general stance. A thought
framework that filters what we find acceptable as research or not. A set
of assumptions, then.
Nichols writes...
You note in your paper that there are "...learning environments that
encourage free interaction with information resources..."
I would be interested in seeing one, to examine the approach used by the
instructor (if any!).
Well, let me put one up on the table: A Tech Trends course I designed a
year or so ago and that was taught by our good comrade Romi - who did a
wonderful job at it. The URL is
http://www.nova.edu/~duchaste/trends/studyguide.htm . Your comments on
this course are most welcome. BTW, it is no longer being offered in this
version. Also, as Ling Le Wei mentions, if any of you know of excellent
online courses to recommend viewing, please signal them to the group.
He also writes...
I found your definition of information design interesting. At the risk
of
being pedantic, does "structuring information in artifacts so as to make
it
available and optimally useful" mean making it interactive, challenging,
customized to the intended student audience, able to point them to other
resources applicable to their particular learning needs? If so, then
perhaps
'information design' is being used to describe a finished, interactive
product; 'instructional design' could perhaps be just as valid a
description
for this.
Well, the idea of the two being similar is that they share much. But
they are not identical. Alongside ID, I see persuasive technologies
(attitude change), entertainment technologies, health info technologies,
all of them needing design - just like ID and no different than ID, that
is the point. But they each have their own field of application. Yet
they all aim to influence and they all structure information to do so -
hence information design. BTW, I am using ID here for instructional
design [note that online, I have used it to refer to information design
too - in works that do not deal with instruction].
And he continues...
On the other hand, if students require a more "hand-holding" approach,
then
you need to take a different tack. The information might be the same,
but
the instructional process is different. I believe the instructional
design
issue comes first.
Ah, but then the information would not be the same. It should and would
have to be different.
Stahl asks about the Reigeluth must-read book. Check it out at
http://www.erlbaum.com/html/1920.htm and see my reactions at
http://www.fcae.nova.edu/~duchaste/papers-online/Prolegomena.htm .
Happy thoughts to you all!
PD
-- Philip Duchastel, Ph.D.http://www.nova.edu/~duchaste 954 / 262-8561 [office] 954 / 202-0230 [home]
--------------------------------------------------------- Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/ Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html ---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue 18 May 1999 - 22:40:00 MET DST