For the 5th Activity of LRNT 523, we are asked to take a stance of alignment with one of the theoretical positions presented in the two readings. While the paper by Ertmer and Newby, “Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective”, offered me valuable insights on the raw theories contained within, I felt that the paper was descriptive rather than instructive. As a result, from a professional perspective, I found it offered me less value. Being in the business of pilot training, I have a strong bias toward pedagogical tools adapted for what are largely skill based training events. As a result, when I see something that will help me in that area, I gravitate to it. Sadly, with time being one of the resources I find scarce these days, it seems as though if it can’t help me immediately, I don’t have much time for it. Since many of the competencies required in my workplace, eg. Completing an ‘engine fire’ drill and checklist, require performance of a specified series of tasks; in order and to completion, this was aligned best with the behaviorist approach: “The goal of instruction
for the behaviorist is to elicit the desired response from the learner who is presented with a target stimulus.” (Ertmer and Newby, 2013, p. 47). Were I employed in a more conceptual field of education, or one that stressed knowledge over critical task performance, I would likely be more intrigued by the cognitive and constructivist components of this paper.

In contrast, I have a strong affinity for the concept presented by Merril in “First Principles of Instruction”. It offers me a structured path for application in my workplace, and I appreciate a heuristic approach to simplification in a field that seems to be continually expanding in complexity as new data and perspectives are uncovered.While I accept that collaboration is a necessary area for focus in pedagogy, and plays an important role in aviation, I believe it has limited applicability in the flight simulator beyond normal Crew Resource Management (CRM), and agree with the author “I am not yet convinced that collaboration is a first principle.” (Merril, 2002, p.57)

Using the First Principles described in Merrill’s paper, I was able to develop a checklist for content creation in the instructional design I am tasked with in my job, and can continually refer to it throughout the various phases of development:

  1. Is the lesson related to an actual problem a pilot will face?
  2. Has the pre-existing level of knowledge been factored into the lesson?
  3. Are there demonstrations of worked solution or techniques, from various perspectives?
  4. Is there opportunity for the student to practice the technique or solution in a simplified or scaffolded environment?
  5. Is the student able to perform the technique or solution fully, in a realistic scenario, with the ability to understand and reflect of their standard of performance?

In summary, I appreciated the information in both papers. I feel they afforded me a greater perspective on the work being done, and completed, in the field we are studying. Ultimately however, I felt that Merril offered me more immediate resources professionally, as well as a convenient reference of how his First Principles accommodate a number of other theories.