Selecting Design Models: Searching for the Ogopogo of Instructional Design

I am going to take a moment to be honest and admit that, upon the commencement of this course, I felt out of my element and rather anxious about my perceived gap in knowledge and understanding of Instructional Design (ID) models. However, as I navigated through the course readings, I came to realize that instructional design has been embedded in my practice all along. Without consciously labelling what I do every day, many elements of instructional design and ID models have become automatic components of best practices in my classroom teaching. Certainly I have made good use of a number of ID models including: Universal Design for Learning (UDL), Response to Intervention (RTI), Understanding by Design (UbD), Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DoK), and Problem Based Learning (PBL). 

The reality of K-12 education is that there are many factors and conditions that are out of the average teacher’s control. The content we teach is mandated by our provincial governments. Our audience is a group of students designated by geographical location to a particular school building. In the building, students are sorted into groups based on chronological age. The number of students in our classes is determined by funding provided by provincial governments (my biggest class this year has 37 middle schoolers in it!). A plethora of unique educational needs, mental health struggles, socio-economic disparities, religious beliefs, cultural diversity, and more, exists within each group of students. Students access content and skills in a number of different areas all day long. At any given time a student might be figuring out how to calculate unit rates, 30 minutes later be exploring the themes of a short story, and an hour after that playing a rousing game of volleyball. Although this might lead one to believe that K-12 education is a relatively inflexible environment in which innovation has a small role, I have come to realize how important it is to think outside of the box and take advantage of opportunities to be creative. I have learned that it is okay to step away from tradition or the ‘normal’ way of doing things in order to best reach learners. Yes, there is much that a K-12 teacher encounters that is out of their control, however; it is possible to think innovatively and design learning experiences that are rich and engaging. 

Engaging in this professional reflection while also pondering what I have learned so far in LRNT 524 prompted me to determine a number of considerations to take into account when designing learning experiences. I was particularly impacted by Brown and Green’s “Beyond teaching instructional design models: exploring the design process to advance professional development and expertise”, Parchoma et. al’s “Designing for learning in the Yellow House: A comparison of instructional and learning design origins and practices, Bates’s Teaching in the Digital Age, and Heaster-Ekholm’s “Popular instructional design models: Their theoretical roots and cultural considerations”, and want to give credit to these researchers for leading me to these thoughts regarding selecting ID models:

  • Who or what is at the centre of the learning experience? Content or the learner?
  • What are the designer’s beliefs about the nature of knowledge? Which epistemology does the designer subscribe to? Behaviourist, cognitivist, constructivist?
    • Related side-note: Does the content determine the epistemology? Bates (2015) argues that when it comes to the best way to help people acquire knowledge “the basis of that belief will vary, depending on the subject matter, and, in some areas, such as social sciences, even within a common domain of knowledge” (2.2.1, para. 1).
  • Who are the learners? Where are the learners? What are their strengths? What are their struggles? 
  • What biases or beliefs does the designer have? What biases or beliefs might the learners have?
  • How much risk does the designer want to take? Is the designer more comfortable working with tried-and-true frameworks and processes, or would the designer rather take the road less travelled? 
  • What resources and tools are available to the designer? What resources and tools is the designer permitted to use?
  • How will the designer know the learning experience has been successful?

Reflective action by the designer prior to beginning the process of design is essentially important, and it should be acknowledged it is unlikely anyone will find the elusive, ideal, one-size-fits-all ogopogo of instructional design models. As Paula (2021) so perfectly states “as I continue on the readings, I am further of the opinion that no one design model is “better” than another, and that a combination of factors must be considered when choosing the model that is most appropriate for the task or problem at hand” (para. 3), and I cannot agree more. 

References

Bates, T. (2015). Teaching in a Digital Age: Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. BCcampus. 

Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2018). Beyond teaching instructional design models: exploring the design process to advance professional development and expertise. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 176-186.

Heaster-Ekholm, K. L. (2020). Popular Instructional Design Models: Their Theoretical Roots and Cultural Considerations. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 16(3), 50–65.

Insell, P. (2021, November 17). Examining Instructional Design Models… What have I been doing!. My MALAT Journey: An Educational Blog by Paula Insell. https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0221/examining-instructional-design-models-what-have-i-been-doing/ 

Parchoma, G., Koole, M., Morrison, D., Nelson, D., & Dreaver-Charles, K. (2020). Designing for learning in the Yellow House: A comparison of instructional and learning design origins and practices. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(5), 997–1012.

5 thoughts to “Selecting Design Models: Searching for the Ogopogo of Instructional Design”

  1. Hi Amber,

    I had very similar reactions at the start, and had to truly step back to see and to acknowledge the various ID models that were a part of my practice. I believe that as we grow in our teaching experience, we understand how to embed the best theory and practice into design, and that this depends very much on the students in the classroom (as you have noted). We arrange and rearrange the pieces of the puzzle and apply them to an idea of the final product knowing full-well that there will be alterations along the way. A complete picture is negotiated with and for students, and maybe the end product only truly reveals itself once the various factors, or considerations, are sorted out.

    Upon reflection, I realize these unlabeled processes were always present, however they were hidden, or embedded, within my job. Now that they are named, I am conflicted by the amount of labour that has been exerted to bring these designs to life. I wonder if you have any thoughts on this?

    Thanks,
    Angela

  2. Hi Angela,

    Thanks so much for your comments, and I am relieved to hear that our experiences have been very similar! I had a couple of thoughts relating to your question about the labour needed to bring these designs to life. First, and I think this relates to why I am finding this content so challenging, is that as K-12 teachers, we do it all on our own. Yes, we have supportive colleagues and excellent resources to draw from, but at the end of the day it comes down to the decisions of the individual teacher in terms of planning, designing, assessing, supporting, etc. My context makes it hard for me to imagine a scenario in which a team of experts in various areas comes together to engage in instructional design that produces some sort of product.

    This also relates to my second thought. Osguthorpe et. al (2003) state “Because instructional designers are usually not present when students are learning, should they be satisfied with performance as the sole criterion for success?” (p. 2). When I first read this sentence, my bamboozled reaction was something along the lines of: why aren’t instructional designers present when students are learning? And again, this is my context and experience coming into play here, but wouldn’t an instructional designer want to be present when students are learning? Isn’t learning the most important part of instructional design???

    This is, for me, one of the most valuable and precious aspects of this program – to be able to see how different people in different industries view education and technology, and in this case, instructional design.

    I would be curious to hear your thoughts too!

    Thanks again,
    Amber

    References

    Osguthorpe, R. T., Osguthorpe, R. D., Jacob, W. J., & Davies, R. (2003). Chapter 42. The Moral Dimensions of Instructional Design. In R. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology (1st ed.). Available at https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations.

    1. Hi, Amber,

      Ah, yes, the elusive “one-size-fits-all Ogopogo of instructional design models” – educators and designers of learning and instruction have long been aware that such a beast does not exist. You are correct that reflective action is vital to engage in “prior to beginning the process of design”, but as you have noted, it is essential to gauge the success of the learning experience; therefore, in your own context, would the analysis of the design be most effective using a pre/post comparison approach for example? Or would it be best measured at critical learning junctures? What factors would influence your analysis of design decisions?

      Finally, your reflective questions are a good way to begin considering all the complexities of selecting an ID model. You might consider digging even deeper – Why does it matter? and What now? How does this directly impact your reflective actions? You could further consider how you will check your biases and beliefs when designing for learning. Ogopogo indeed!

      Lisa & Leeann

  3. Hi Amber,

    Really enjoyed your post and your comment in reply to Angela made it very clear that indeed educational design should include lots of time spent reviewing the current learning environment. Designing activities in a silo, away from the environment, is a great issue.

    I wonder if this type of assessment is however taking place but only at select schools. If that is the case, are we capturing a representative sample size during the curriculum revision process?

    Interested to learn if you have ever been interviewed by a designer or ever heard of teachers being asked.

    1. Hi Ben,

      Thank you for your comments. Curriculum redesign happens at the provincial level, and although there are some differences due to the government enacting the redesign process, teachers have been consulted at points throughout the process, along with other individuals with various educational backgrounds and experiences. All teachers are of course legally obligated to teach the curriculum outcomes as mandated by the Ministry of Education. Keep in mind that the outcomes are the content and skills that students are expected to learn at each grade level and in each subject area. However, the pedagogy and learning design are not specifically mandated. Individual teachers in individual classrooms plan and carry out learning experiences (informed by foundational knowledge of educational psychology, experience, and effective instructional models).

      My challenges with understanding instructional design models stems from my context as a K-12 teacher. I sometimes wonder (and worry!) about the public perception of K-12 teachers. We have all, at some point, come across the “those who can’t do, teach” quote, which is a complete and utter fallacy. Teacher education programs are highly competitive and students applying to those programs have very high levels of academic achievement. Although the Canadian research is somewhat lacking, overall, research has shown that a number of teachers leave the profession within the first five years (Van den Borre & Van Droogenbroeck, 2021). Teaching is a complex occupation, and teachers wear many different hats at any given moment. Teachers need to know the material, know how to reach learners, know how to design learning experiences, know how to incorporate technology effectively into said learning experiences, know how to program for a range of educational strengths and needs, know the underlying socio-economic conditions of their learners and communities, know how to engage in social problem solving and conflict resolution, among many other things.

      All of that said, I finally had a lightbulb moment earlier this week (thank you Corie and Karen!). I was able to step away from my context and recognize the significance of instructional design and the role of instructional designers in higher education and corporate settings. As we continue to progress in this course, I am looking forward to examining the different instructional design models, the contexts they are used in, and how I can apply what I learn to designing and providing rich and engaging learning experiences for the students in my classroom, and leading professional development in this area with my colleagues at my school.

      Thanks,
      Amber

      References

      Van den Borre, L., Spruyt, B., & Van Droogenbroeck, F. (2021). Early career teacher retention intention: individual, school and country characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103427

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *