eprintid: 231 rev_number: 28 eprint_status: archive userid: 64 dir: disk0/00/00/02/31 datestamp: 2019-07-24 13:01:21 lastmod: 2019-07-24 13:01:21 status_changed: 2019-07-24 13:01:21 type: conference_item metadata_visibility: show creators_name: Childs, Alice title: Instructional Design guide: Team Guide for blended courses. Griffith College Dublin. ispublished: unpub subjects: L1 subjects: LB subjects: LB2300 subjects: LC divisions: fac_training full_text_status: public pres_type: poster keywords: E-learning program and E-learning tools abstract: This project focused on blended, flexible and online programme and module design and I have already created a simplified 15 page eLearning Instructional Design (ID) guide which draws on the Learning Pyramid (2005), Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (1993) Grant Wiggin’s Backwards model (2005) and the Addie and Dick and Carey models (1996) amongst other learning theories. I developed this ID guide in response to an observed staff, learner need to understand and then apply eLearning knowledge and best practice confidently, for course development. My approach was to take learning theory which I am familiar with, as module co-ordinator on Pedagogical Practice 1, (part of a level 9 Special Purpose Award, Certificate in Training and Education (CTE) offered by Griffith College Dublin GCD and distil into a simplified, practical, user-friendly guide, to scaffold and steer the design process from traditional to blended delivery. Drawing on aspects of a practical presentation paper which I delivered to the Irish Learning Technology Association (ILTA) at their annual Ed Tech conference in 2015, entitled “Conversion course” I described the process of re-designing the three modules in our 20 ECTS CTE programme from block release, classroom based modules for blended/online delivery. Identifying the essential elements of a module and creating a hierarchy of importance and significance of tools, activities and aspects of the course, is the first stage in this dynamic process. Reflection within a team context helped clarify what these elements should be and how they would help students apply the lecture content, fulfil the course assessment and achieve the validated Learning Outcomes. The structured ID guide serves as a blue-print for this creative and reflective process. I introduced this guide document to staff at GCD this year and am in the process of creating a hand’s on web learning “object” based on my original ID guide. The motivation for this was drawing on Chickering and Gamson (1987) who identify active engagement as one of the most effective forces in education. I am developing this interactive tool in order to explain instructional design theory, while demonstrating some of the techniques which enhance active learning e.g. drag and drop problem solving, animated diagrams, use of cartoon characters etc. I am using the rapid eLearning software package Articulate Storyline 2 to enhance the user engagement and experience in understanding and applying learning theory. I would like to test the tool’s use with at least three programme teams each year, over a three year period and evaluate against other comparative studies and blended/eLearning guides. The methodology of this research proposal would involve my facilitating use of the ID guide and interactive web object with small academic teams, tasked with developing blended, flexible, online programmes and modules; this could be within Griffith College or on a broader HE scale. Evaluation of the final outcomes in the course review process would include qualitative feedback captured from team focus groups, student questionnaires (using Survey Monkey) and quantitative use of O’Neill and Cashman’s recently developed score card, evaluation tool (2016). date: 2016 event_title: International Conference on Engaging Pedagogy event_dates: 2016 event_type: conference refereed: FALSE official_url: https://go.griffith.ie/231/1/ChildsA_PosterICEP_InstructionalDesign_final.pdf referencetext: Biggs, J. "Teaching for Quality Learning at University. University Assessing for learning quality 1: principles (pp. 140-168)." (2003). Dale, Edgar. "Learning pyramid." National Training Laboratories, Bethel Maine (2005). Jennings, D, and Surgenor, P. 2014. Feedback in Practice: Assessment for Learning. UCD Ko, Susan, and Steve Rossen. Teaching online: A practical guide. Routledge, 2010. Littlejohn, A., and C. Pegler. "Documenting e-learning blends." Preparing for Blended e-Learning (2007). Teaching and Learning, UCD, Ireland Wiggins, Grant P., and Jay McTighe. Understanding by design. Ascd, 2005. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987, March). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3 – 7. Dale, Edgar. "Learning pyramid." National Training Laboratories, Bethel Maine (2005). Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction (4th ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers. Gardner, H. (1993) Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books. O’Neill, G. Cashman, D. (2016) Programme and Module Review Tool: For Online, Blended and Face to Face Contexts, UCD Teaching & Learning, Dublin, Ireland. Wiggins, Grant P., and Jay McTighe. Understanding by design. Ascd, 2005. citation: Childs, Alice (2016) Instructional Design guide: Team Guide for blended courses. Griffith College Dublin. In: International Conference on Engaging Pedagogy, 2016. (Unpublished) document_url: http://go.griffith.ie/231/1/ChildsA_PosterICEP_InstructionalDesign_final.pdf document_url: http://go.griffith.ie/231/4/Poster%20on%20Instructional%20Design%20Abstract%20ICEP%20Dec%202016.pdf document_url: http://go.griffith.ie/231/5/ChildsA_PosterICEP_InstructionalDesign_final-Bibliography.txt