Right now I’m taking a course called “Foundations of Learning and Technologies,” and we were asked to read two articles on the history of instructional design and technology, both by Robert Reiser. The first article focused on instructional media and the second article focused on instructional design. This blog post is a reflection on these two articles.
Relevancy
Both articles were written in 2001, and we were asked for our opinion on whether what the author writes about is still relevant today, 16 years later. Because Reiser writes about events that have already taken place, I would find it hard to say that history is no longer relevant. A better question might be whether his interpretation of history is accurate. It’s still too early in the course for me to provide an informed opinion on that question, but I expect I’ll be able to comment on Reiser’s historical interpretations after going through more readings. In any case, his account was certainly well-researched.
Lessons from the Past
We were also asked to identify two “lessons from the past” that might apply to our work today. The general theme of the first article is that new technology seems to come out with great fanfare and promise of wonderful benefits… only to fail to live up to expectations, or be adopted much slower than anticipated. Looking forward, we might consider applying this lesson to m-learning (mobile learning) and virtual reality, both of which are hot topics right now.
The second article showed how incremental developments in instructional design built upon one another to create several robust models for instructional design, and how the field continued to expand as workplace needs continued to evolve. Going forward, I can see how learning and development departments will continue to expand the scope of their responsibilities, as organizations increasingly rely on human capital (i.e., their workforce) to differentiate themselves from competitors.
Conflicting Lessons
Taking both articles together, it’s obvious instructional media has affected instructional design throughout history, but I would like to see instructional design influence instructional media, more than the other way around. (Sadly, Reiser’s articles suggest this will not be the case anytime soon.)
I see instructional design as being a broader, more encompassing solution to learning and development problems faced by organizations, while technology may be only one small component of the solution.
Unfortunately, many organizations identify training solutions like e-learning modules as the default solution, without first examining all the root causes of an issue and considering whether the technology proposed is actually the right solution. I sometimes call this shiny object syndrome, because fascination with new technology sometimes distracts people from their strategic objectives.
I’m curious what “shiny objects” are currently being touted as the next great thing in workplace learning, and how instructional designers are responding. What are your thoughts?
I thought that this was an excellent synthesis of both articles, I thought I’d respond to your hypothetical question at the end of your post by way of explaining why this phenomenon exists: capitalism, or more specifically the by-product of capitalism – consumerism. Much of what passes for ed-tech these days has recreational uses beyond business and educational function. People are driven by greed and wanting the newest gadget (at least in western society) because it gives them an “enormous sense of well-being” ( to quote Blur’s Parklife). This applies in the workplace too. If one company starts using something, and others are not, they feel like they are not keeping up ( I am remembering an episode of the office where a tyrannical era Ryan forces the use of PowerPoint with no end game in sight). You might argue that fidgit spinners are the latest fad in instructional technology as they are marketed as a way to keep attention deficit students focussed. As a teacher who has had to physically restrain himself from throwing these “technolical educational aids” out the window of many a classroom, I look forward to the research that is hopefully being conducted on fidgit spinners in secondary classrooms.
Great take on the “shiny object syndrome” Marshall, thanks for the insight! Interesting point that if one company is doing something, others feel like they should be doing it too, even though it may not be the right approach. I saw this back in 2006 when I worked with a very traditional company that wanted to start an executive blog. Their culture was clearly not ready for blogging, but because it was the latest trend, the company felt like they should be doing it too. Not surprisingly, the blog flopped.