November, 2011

Rhonda Deyoung

Nazarena Garrn Ciberay

Simon Shadowlight

E-learning Emerges
Technology is the backbone of the e-learning industry where todays virtual and supplemental classroom tools include webinars, live video chat, discussion boards and virtual tours. Learners control the stream of information flowing from their computers with a click of their mouse or the swing of their finger. This stream of information flows along the internet as knowledge breaks past previous barriers of time and location. Breakthroughs in learning theory rose in instructional design, from the three different learning theories we will highlight; behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. This paper presents a brief history of instructional design and technology starting with WWII and leading to current uses of technology in instructional design.

ADDRESSING THE EMERGENCE OF THE PROFESSION

Learning Technology Boom

Technology in learning has a rich, slow history until WWII with mass training of soldiers occurring in the 1940s. Research began the rapid, systematic increase of advances in both learning theories and technologies. Founded in behaviorism, education experienced a general drift during the 1950s, toward implementing scientific approaches to the social sciences. The merging of psychology and instructional technology arrived during and after World War II as educational psychologists developed training materials for the U.S. military providing research (Berliner, 2006). The center of attention in instructional research programs were both on development of ISD (instructional systems design) methods for the investigation of content and tasks; and testing of variables of design to deliver certain learning outcomes. For the time being, the ISD methods to learning theories consisted of automation and the idea of systems as a complex association of components, progression and control of information, thorough breakdown of a task, and articulate planning and decisions (Shiffman, 1995).

A well-known model of instructional design is the ADDIE. Although some argue (Allen 2006b) that evaluation must occur along each phase as a means of providing ongoing feedback directing the curriculum towards an ultimate output, this basic model has an output which proceeds into the next phase. The following five phases (Allen, 2006a) provide a basic framework in which to think about the conception and delivery of curriculum/training: Analysis - The instructional designer identifies the problem, objective, goals, participant needs, delivery options, timelines and interface considerations in conjunction with the client and/or subject matter experts. Design The objectives are typically specified in detail as are the look and feel of the course and the user interface (i.e. the design). Development The course itself is built using the appropriate medium and tools specified during the design phase. Implementation During this phase the course and associated materials are actually delivered to the learners. Evaluation Ideally this phase involves both ongoing (formative) and end-stage (summative) evaluations (Pallof and Pratt, 2007). During this phase necessary revisions are made.

The Historical Era

In this section, we review the three different learning theories/ behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. BEHAVIORISM Prior to WWII, Pavlov presented theories focusing on observable behavior grounded in measurable research. Known for his work with animal responses to a stimulus, Pavlov became the front-runner for the behaviorist movement. The 1950s saw B.F. Skinner, a proponent of the behaviorist approach, as the most current and probably best-known advocate of teaching machines and programmed learning. Based on operant conditioning, Skinner's teaching machine required the learner to complete or answer a question and then receive feedback on the correctness of the response (Skinner, 1965).

Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) entered the arena of education and training in the 1950s. IBM was first on the scene. Technical problems notwithstanding, CAI grew rapidly in the 1960s and 1970s as federal funded research grants in education allowed for initial research and development (Stahl, Koschmann & Suthers, 2006). The U.S. government wanted to discover whether computerassisted instruction really worked, so they created two competing companies, (Control Data Corporation and MITRE Corporation) whose projects showed CAI successful as both are still around today.

Instructional technologies from the 1950s and 1960s centered on teaching machines with limited use of computers in the labs. There were also multimedia presentations as in slides with audio and programmed instruction. Most systems approaches favored flow charts, with stages that the designer flows through in the creation of instruction. Founded in research labs and the U.S. military, the systems approach relied upon identifying goals and objectives, determining resources, starting an action plan and ongoing assessment with change as needed of the program (Mergel, 1998). Donald Kirkpatrick created a model (first published in 1959) of training evaluation consisting of four levels. Each level builds upon the next, with successive levels providing more meaningful information regarding the effectiveness of the course. At the same time, successive levels tend to involve greater cost and difficulty in administering. The four levels consist of the following: (Kirkpatrick, 2007; Allen, 2006a) Level 1: Reaction - How the participants react to the training. Seeks to assess the perceptions of the participant in order to improve the training (did they like it and did they find it relevant to their work). Most commonly this involves the completion of an evaluation form at the end of the course or may involve direct questioning of the participant. This type of evaluation is fairly quick and inexpensive to perform, however, it cannot account for numerous subjective variables that might influence the participants responses which may not directly pertain to the quality of the course. Level 2: Learning -The extent to which participants change attitudes, increase knowledge, and/or increase skill. Typically involves a pre-test and a post-test in order to assess the amount of learning. Level 3: Behavior -The extent to which participants apply what they have learned by changing behavior in a practical setting (their job). This form of evaluation may occur at multiple intervals over an extended period of time after the initial training and may include formal assessment as well as observation and feedback from peers and/or managers. Level 4: Results -The extent to which targeted outcomes are met as a result of the training. Seeks to measure the actual effect (of the behavioral change) upon work setting outcomes. In other words, if the initial objective of the training is to reduce government audit findings by 10%, a level 4 evaluation attempts to assess if this measure has been achieved. On one hand, this level of evaluation truly measures if the training has been effective (i.e. have the objectives been achieved. At the same time, it can be difficult and costly to perform this type of evaluation and attribute the results directly to the training. In the example above, numerous other factors may have contributed to the drop in audit finding not directly related to the instructional program.

This model is essentially behaviorist but his work has implications for performance analysis and more complete ways of thinking that transcend that behaviorist behavior.

Instructional technologies from the 1950s and 1960s centered on teaching machines with limited use of computers in the labs. There were also multimedia presentations as in slides with audio and programmed instruction. Most systems approaches favored flow charts, with stages that the designer flows through in the creation of instruction. Founded in research labs and the U.S. military, the systems approach relied upon identifying goals and objectives, determining resources, starting an action plan and ongoing assessment with change as needed of the program (Mergel, 1998). COGNITIVISM In 1948, in an effort to identify and classify the thinking behaviors that were important to the process of learning, a group of educational psychologists, headed by Benjamin Bloom, began work on developing a classification (i.e. taxonomy) of educational goals and objectives. The initial framework included three domains or categories. These were: The cognitive domain (intellect and cognition) The affective domain (emotion and attitude) The psychomotor domain (skills and behavior)

By 1956 they had completed work on the cognitive domain, consisting of six levels. The results were published in the handbook known as Blooms Taxonomy (Orey, 2001). Work was later completed on the affective domain but not on the psychomotor domain. Within the cognitive domain, the levels are hierarchical and the implication is that learners must master lower levels before proceeding to higher levels. Thus, a learner will be able to demonstrate remembering (i.e. making a list) prior to demonstrating understanding (i.e. explaining) and will be able to demonstrate both of these prior to applying (i.e. interpreting) Beginning in the 1990s, a new group of cognitive psychologists, headed by Lorin Anderson (a former student of Blooms) updated the classification system. The table below represents the changes in termin ology
and structure:

Original Version (1956)

Classifications Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Application Comprehension Knowledge Measurable Verbs Measure, interpret, evaluate, choose Arrange, combine, propose, construct Analyze, compare, contrast, examine Apply, demonstrate, use, operate Compare, describe, discuss, explain List, name, repeat, tell, state, record
4

Revised Version (2001)

Classifications Creating Evaluating Analyzing Applying Understanding Remembering Measurable Verbs Construct, create, design, develop Appraise, defend, select, evaluate Compare, examine, differentiate, contrast Choose, demonstrate, use, interpret, write Classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify Define, duplicate, list, memorize, state

The most noticeable change is that the original terminology using nouns for the levels were revised as verbs. Additionally, the top two levels switched places in the revision (i.e. synthesis moved from second-to-the-top to the top level and was renamed creating). The taxonomy is useful in that it assists educators and instructional designers to create objectives that are based on measurable behavior and encourages the development of curriculum based on objectives that demonstrate an increasing level of cognitive mastery. A simplistic example of the six revised levels are presented below using the context of Goldilocks and the Three Bears: (Orey, 2001) Remember: Describe where Goldilocks lived. Understand: Summarize what the Goldilocks story was about. Apply: Construct a theory as to why Goldilocks went into the house. Analyze: Differentiate between how Goldilocks reacted and how you would react in each story event. Evaluate: Assess whether or not you think this really happened to Goldilocks. Create: Compose a song, skit, poem, or rap to convey the Goldilocks story in a new form. Researchers who focused on instructional design shifted from the behavioral world of stimulation/response/reinforcement theory of instruction and created theories grounded in the mental abilities of learners. Cognitivism picks up where behaviorism leaves off. One of the major players in the development of cognitivism was Jean Piaget, who developed aspects of his theory as early as the 1920s. Piaget's theories took hold in the U.S. in the 1960s thanks to George Miller and Jerome Bruner who created the Harvard Center for Cognitive studies. Memory was important, as the idea of seven plus or minus two became the standard capacity of learners abilities (Miller, 2003). In 1962, Robert Gagne broke learning down into a hierarchy of ordered content from rudimentary information to the highly complex (Kearsley, 1994). In the 1980s the taxonomy was revised to accommodate cognition skills regarding: Verbal information Intellectual skills Cognitive strategies Motor skills Attitudes

Gagne developed an instructural sequence in order to advance learners through a subject, and help instructional developers know where to start with learners. His nine events of instruction are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Gaining attention (reception) Informing learners of the object (expectancy) Stimulating recall of prior learning (retrieval) Presenting the stimulus (selective perception) Providing learning guidance (semantic encoding) Eliciting performance (responding) Providing feedback (reinforcement) Assessing performance (retrieval) Enhancing retention and transfer (generalization)
5

Bloom and Gagne are both transitional figures working in a Behavior Era and their careers continued onto a Cognitive Era. Their findings and practice helped instructional designers make the transition to Cognitive ways of thinking about our work. Their taxanomy theories in some ways reflect behaviorism because of the era they worked in but also had foresight to be thinking in cognitive terms. CONSTRUCTIVISM Although behaviorism dominates the American pshychology, the constructivistic learning theory is superior when considering the attentive building of new information steamed from prior experience by a learner (Merril, 1991). Constructivism has strong roots in psychology and philosophy per Dewey (1916), Piaget (1972), Vygotsky (1978) and Bruner (1990). It advocates a more flexible learning experience where learning is not easily measured and experience varied from learner to learner. This theory supports ongoing and changing meaning per the interactions and experiences of the learners. One way technology has helped designers tailor instruction to adapt to the different experiences of participants is through the use of hyper-text. This allows information to be presented in multiple levels of details accessible and used by participants per their pre-existing knowledge. In all, behaviorism began modern instructional design use of technology by teaching masses the behaviors and techniques of knowledge through movies and other media productions. Cognitivism looked at individual cognitions of learners as computers entered the classroom. Constructivism saw regular computer use as learners experience changed to instructor-guided information based on students current level of knowledge. This along with the three highlighted core concepts, Kirkpatricks evaluation model, Blooms Taxonomy, and the Addie model are clear examples that technology in the classroom is not only here to stay but will change and evolve as advances in processing, research and theory multiplies every couple of years. The reality instructional designers face is one of constant change, the set expectation for this group of professionals is that they are well versed of the strategies, trends, and overall impact their design and instruction has on the learner. Instructional designers must therefore create in a way that is adaptable to any change or discovery of the audience.

Conclusion
It seems evident, advances in technology and weakening funding sources result in the increasing attention of e-learning solutions. Undoubtedly this attempt immediately impacts the decreasing budgets but quickly the results from the assessed learning points out the shortcomings of the new tool. It is necessary to not only transfer best practices but translate them as they pertain to an online medium. Without the appropriate development of content and activities to an online setting, assessing the learning of audiences will continue to show a disconnect with the objectives. It is therefore detrimental to create online instruction and design that will include the wholeness of the lesson and have a strong representation of all theories, models and ideas.

Conclusion
Here to stay

References
Allen, M. (2006a). Creating successful e-learning. Pfeiffer, (pp. 169-171) Allen, M. (2006b). Creating successful e-learning. Pfeiffer, (pp. 37-41) Berliner, D. C. (2006). Educational psychology: Searching for essence throughout a century of influence. In P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds.) Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 3-27). Routledge. Good, T.L. (2000). American education: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Humana Press, (p. 155) Kearsley, G. (1994a). Conditions of learning (R. Gagne). Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/gagne.html [September 10, 2011]. Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2007) Implementing Kirkpatricks four levels. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://astd2007.astd.org/PDFs/Handouts%20for%20Web/Handouts%20Secured%20for%20Web% 205-15%20thru%205-16/TU101.pdf Merger, B. (1998). Instructional design and learning theory. Educational Communications and Technology. University of Saskatchewan Merrill, M.D. (1991), Constructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology. 31(5), 45-53 Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7(3). Elsevier Science Ltd.

Orey, M.(Ed.) (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved September 12, 2011. from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Overbaugh, R. C. , Schultz, L. Blooms taxonomy. Retrieved September 10, 2011, from http://www.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Bloom/blooms_taxonomy.htm Pallof, R. M., and Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities. Jossey-Bass, (pp. 205-206) Reiser, R.A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. ETR&D. 49(2), 57-67 Schiffman, S. S. (1995). Instructional systems design: Five views of the field. In G.J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future. (2nd ed., pp. 131-142)., Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc. Skinner, B.F. (1965). Review Lecture: The technology of teaching. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 162(989), 427-443 Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: A historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 406-427). Cambridge University Press. Tennyson, R.D. (2010). Historical reflection on learning theories and instructional design. Contemporary Educational Technology 1(1), 1-16 Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education. International 8 Journal of Educational Telecommunication.6(4), 339-362