Instructional Design Project Management 2.0: A Model of Development & Practice
7 likes2,236 views
The document outlines a framework for instructional design project management, emphasizing the development of an effective online learning environment through the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model. It details key aspects such as social, cognitive, and teaching presence, which are essential for creating a supportive learning community. Additionally, it discusses the validation of the CoI survey using multi-institutional samples to measure these presences in online education.
Instructional Design Project Management 2.0: A Model of Development & Practice
- 1. Instructional Design Project Management 2.0: A Model of Development and PracticeJennifer StaleyPhil Icewww.apus.edu
- 2. AgendaIntroductionsInstructional Development & Design ProcessCommunity of Inquiry (CoI) FrameworkCollaboration Tools & SupportsQ&AContact Info
- 3. In the Beginning…3 Employees
- 4. No Instructional Design Process
- 5. No Online Learning Framework
- 7. One year to develop, design & integrate 47 coursesInstructional Design Process w/ Project Management PrinciplesOnline Learning ModelCommunity of Inquiry (CoI) FrameworkCollaboration Tools & SupportsFacilitate Collaboration, Establish Community & Encourage Communication
- 8. ADDIE Instructional Systems Design Model
- 9. APUS ID Process Model
- 10. Instructional Design Project Management
- 11. Community of Inquiry Frameworka process model of learning in online and blended educational environmentsgrounded in a collaborative constructivist view of higher educationassumes effective online learning requires the development of a community of learners that supports meaningful inquiry and deep learning
- 12. (Garrison et al., 2000, p.2)
- 13. Social Presencethe ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally -- as ‘real’ peoplethe degree to which participants in computer mediated communication feel socially and emotionally connected
- 14. Social Presence - Elementsaffective expression (expressing emotion, self-projection)open communication (learning climate, risk free expression)group cohesion (group identity, collaboration)
- 15. Cognitive Presencethe extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry
- 16. Cognitive Presence - Elementstriggering event (sense of puzzlement)exploration (sharing information & ideas)integration (connecting ideas)resolution (synthesizing & applying new ideas)
- 17. Teaching Presencethe design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes
- 18. Teaching Presencedesign and organization (setting curriculum & activities) facilitation (shaping constructive discourse) direct instruction (focusing & resolving issues)
- 19. CoI Survey9 social presence items (3 affective expression, 3 open communication, 3 group cohesion) 12 cognitive presence items (3 triggering, 3 exploration, 3 integration, 3 resolution)13 teaching presence items (4 design & facilitation, 6 facilitation of discourse, 3 direct instruction)
- 20. CoI Survey Validationtested in graduate courses at four institutions in the US and Canadaprincipal component factor analysisthree factor model predicted by CoI framework confirmedArbaugh, Cleveland-Innes, Diaz, Garrison, Ice, Richardson, Shea & Swan - 2008
- 21. Communication, Collaboration and Community
- 22. Phil IceEmail: pice@apus.edu
- 24. Facebook & LinkedInContact UsJenn StaleyEmail: jstaley@apus.eduTwitter: jennystaleyFacebook & LinkedIn
- 25. ReferencesAbdous, M. & He, W. (2008). Streamlining the online course development process by using project management tools. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(2), 181-188. Arbaugh, J.B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S.R., Garrison, D.R., Ice, P., Richardson, J.C., and Swan, K.P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11 (3/4), 133-136.Dick, W., & Carey, L.(1978). The Systematic Design of Instruction. Glenview, IL.: Scott, Foresman.Florida Gulf Coast University. (2006). Principles of online design: Instructional design. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from http://www.fgcu.edu/onlinedesign/designDev.html. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. Ice, P. & Kupczynski, L. (2009). Student perceptions of group and individualized feedback in online courses. Conference Proposal to be presented at the SERA 2009 Conference in San Antonio. McGriff, S. (2001). Project management for instructional design in higher education (Doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 2000). Pickett, A., Shea, P., & Fredericksen, E. (2001). The sln course design process. The SUNY Learning Network: Advanced Learning and Information Services. The State University of New York. Reigeluth, C. M. & Stein, F. S. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction. C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current states. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from http://www.nwlink.com/~Donclark/hrd/learning/development.html#Reigeluth. Swan, K., Richardson, J. C., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2008). Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. eMentor, 24I(2). Retrieved August 8, 2008, fromhttp://www.e-mentor.edu.pl/artykul_v2.php?numer=24&id=543.