Group items tagged

The common practice of systematic design, such as the ADDIE model, simply did not fit well with the academic culture (Moore & Kearsley, 2004; Magnussen, 2005). Over the past two decades, instructional designers in higher education have needed to redefine their role and practice. The role of a change agent emerged as instructional designers worked side by side with faculty to rethink their teaching in order to integrate technology into course design and delivery (Campbell, Schwier, & Kenny, 2007). Not only do instructional designers play the role of advisers to faculty and department on issues of curriculum and course quality, they also play a vital role in faculty development and institutional change when it comes to researching and implementing new learning technologies. Undoubtedly, instructional designers in higher education need to modify their approach and design models to fulfill their widening role and to make meaningful contributions. New design prototypes have evolved through field experience in higher education (Power, 2009), and role-based design has been proposed to transform the field of instructional design (Hokanson, Miller, & Hooper, 2008).

There was strong agreement among participants that the guidelines are more helpful for new and less-experienced faculty members.

The Enrichment Triad Model was designed to encourage creative productivity on the part of young people by exposing them to various topics, areas of interest, and fields of study, and to further train them to apply advanced content, process-training skills, and methodology training to self-selected areas of interest. Accordingly, three types of enrichment are included in the Triad Model (see Fig. 2). Type I enrichment is designed to expose students to a wide variety of disciplines, topics, occupations, hobbies, persons, places, and events that would not ordinarily be covered in the regular curriculum. In schools - that use this model, an enrichment team consisting of parents, teachers, and students often organizes and plans Type I experiences by contacting speakers, arranging minicourses, demonstrations, or performances, or by ordering and distributing films, slides, videotapes, or other print or non-print media. Figure 2. The enrichment triad model. [Click on the figure to see it as a PDF file.] Type II enrichment consists of materials and methods designed to promote the development of thinking and feeling processes. Some Type II training is general, and is usually carried out both in classrooms and in enrichment programs. Training activities include the development of. (1) creative thinking and problem solving, critical thinking, and affective processes; (2) a wide variety of specific learning how-to-learn skills; (3) skills in the appropriate use of advanced-level reference materials; and (4) written, oral, and visual communication skills. Other Type II enrichment is specific, as it cannot be planned in advance and usually involves advanced methodological instruction in an interest area selected by the student. For example, students who become interested in botany after a Type I experience might pursue additional training in this area by doing advanced reading in botany; compiling, planning and carrying out plant experiments; and seeking more advanced methods training if they want to go further. Type III enrichment involves students who become interested in pursuing a self-selected area and are willing to commit the time necessary for advanced content acquisition and process training in which they assume the role of a first-hand inquirer. The goals of Type III enrichment include: providing opportunities for applying interests, knowledge, creative ideas and task commitment to a self-selected problem or area of study, acquiring advanced level understanding of the knowledge (content) and methodology (process) that are used within particular disciplines, artistic areas of expression and interdisciplinary studies, developing authentic products that are primarily directed toward bringing about a desired impact upon a specified audience, developing self-directed learning skills in the areas of planning, organization, resource utilization, time management, decision making and self-evaluation, developing task commitment, self-confidence, and feelings of creative accomplishment.

The focus of this paper is teaching presence, which has been defined as “the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile outcomes” (Garrison et al., 2000).

Instructor teaching presence is hypothesized to be an indicator of online instructional quality.  Empirical research has supported this view with evidence indicating strong correlations between the quality of teaching presence and student satisfaction and learning (Bangert, 2008; Picciano, 2002; Shea, Pickett, & Pelz, 2003)

First, there is a need to revisit two of the original three teaching presence elements.

With the pedagogical learning model, students do not take the initiative to acquire new knowledge, rather they wait until the educator believes that they are ready to absorb new ideas, subjects and practices. In this model, the learning orientation of a student is centered around the subjects studied, content of the instructional materials, and teacher experiences that are required to reach their academic goal, and any learning motivation that they possess usually comes from an external source, i.e., grades, favorable or unfavorable rewards from parents or teachers, and family duress.

An adult learner must first investigate why they must undertake the learning task, and assess the possible positive or negative outcomes associated with learning this body of knowledge, or not. Once this has been accomplished, the adult learner will focus an extreme amount of energy and time into the task of obtaining this knowledge, and be responsible for his own decisions with regards to that knowledge. Adults possess a deep desire to be recognized as self-disciplined, self-motivated, and independent self-helping individuals. If they are treated like the students in the pedagogical learning model, they become psychologically conflicted as the need to be independent and self-focused battles with the dependency that was established in early on in their education.

The andragogical learning model was designed to encompass the adult learner, and it works extremely well in that capacity, however, there are instances where a pedagogical model can be more appropriate for the adult learner, i.e., when learning unfamiliar subject matter.

This line of research indicated that the multivariate measure of learning represented by the cognitive presence factor could be predicted by the quality of teaching presence and social presence reported by learners in online courses. The relationship between these constructs is illustrated in Fig. 1 below.