Reading Robert A. Reiser’s article, A History of Instructional Design and Technology: Part I: A history of instructional media, has prompted me to dig deeper and reflect more specifically of the historical journey that educational technology (edtech) has taken. Reiser states that overtime, certain technologies like instructional media, can have an increase presence in schools, but that did not directly translate into using it specifically for instructional purposes (Reiser, 2001). I believe that the underlying lesson here is that one cannot anticipate exactly how edtech discoveries would be utilized. The affects of edtech can actually be quite different. What others predict to be the next big thing, can come in waves and often take longer to gain traction. This notion holds true to many aspects edtech, especially in my current role.
For the past two years, I have been building upon my professional experience as an e-Learning instructional designer. We recently taken a popular workshop and turned it into an e-Learning course to keep up with the growing demands of our members. There are some members who are keen to learn online, while are others have been resistant. What might seem to be a logical transition, was surprisingly met with a level of resistance that I did not anticipate. I expected more uptake at the beginning, but I think ultimately it will take more time to receive buy in from our members. This lesson is valuable as I have had to be more strategic and mindful in developing strategies to transition learners into taking our e-Learning course. My assumptions may not always my reality, so I have to be open and ready to adapt to any potential changes ahead.
Before beginning my role in e-Learning, I perceived it to be the cheaper way to conduct training. This contradicted with my reality. Until I began working on the project, I did not foresee the amount of upfront and maintenance costs that would come with administering and developing an e-Learning program. According to Martin Weller’s article, Twenty Years of Edtech, there is this preconceived notion that e-Learning would be cheaper than the traditional means of learning (Weller, 2018). However, this is not the case. There was software, learning management, and instructional design costs to consider. The cost of maintaining and updating the content is now also a factor. I had to inform the organization that the budget moving forward should be increased and had to develop a business case for it. I admit that I’m still quite new to the online learning profession and so is my organization. I have learned a lot of lessons so far, and I’m quite confidant that I will continue to in the future!
Reference
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504506
Weller, Martin. (n.d.). Twenty Years of Edtech. Retrieved September 14, 2019, from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/7/twenty-years-of-edtech
September 14, 2019 at 7:51 pm
Hi, Eunice. Your comment about receiving resistance from members when updating a workshop to an online e-Learning course resonated with me because I have had the same experience from teachers when attempting to move paper tests to a more appropriate online platform. As Watters (2014) states: “while building new technologies is easy (or easy-ish), changing behaviors and culture is much, much harder” (p. 10). I strongly agree with you that it takes time and mindful strategies to assist learners with the transition to online sources even when that change solves problems or initiates improvements.
Education technology itself is generally learner-centered with formal and informal networking opportunities. Perhaps we need to encourage those same qualities when we wish to introduce new technologies, starting in the initial stages. Of course, it often requires time and money to involve learners in tech implementation, but it is an investment well spent. Even the latest and greatest education technology relies on the acceptance of learners to use it.
Watters, A. (2014). The future of education: Programmed or programmable. Chapter 1. In The Monsters of Education Technology. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/audreywatters/the-monsters-of-education-technology.pdf
September 15, 2019 at 1:19 pm
I 100% agree with your sentiments. We live in such fast paced environments that it’s important to be mindful of learners’ and their needs when implementing new edtech. It can be wonderful, but if learners are resisting, then it can be an issue and potentially a waste of time, energy and resources. Moving forward, maybe there’s more that educators and institutions can do to further support the transition from older to newer edtech.
September 15, 2019 at 5:26 pm
Hi Eunice – thank you for sharing your experience as a e-learning instructional designer. Reflecting on your comment about transitioning learners from a face to face environment to an online environment resonated strongly with me. In my experience as well, I have faced the assumption that e-learning would be perceived as more convenient – I didn’t necessarily take into account the resistance as well. Going through this program as well, I am starting to understand more about intention in design – one cannot simply recreate a face to face experience online, but rather it will require a nuanced approach and different considerations to be effective. I also think there is a growing assumption about the ease of people in general with the use of technology – building in support for learners transitioning to e-learning environments is integral for creating the most fulsome online experience. Thank you for sharing your reflection on this!