Table of Contents | Ch 1 | Ch 2 | Chapter 3 | Ch 4 | Ch 5 | Ch 6 | Conclusions | References

Chapter 3 Instruction in a Learning Environment

Introduction

This chapter looks at the many roles of education within society and vice versa and how this is manifested in curriculum and learning and teaching methodologies. It offers a different approach to educational systems which it is argued will be pivotal to the success of an on-line institute.

3.1 Common Themes

An on-line institute of the type being investigated here could have many reasons for, and paths to, existence. It may be involved in primary and secondary or tertiary education or it may have vocational education and training as its focus. A truly commercial enterprise may exist for the sole purpose of servicing a market sector such as insurance, car manufacture or paediatricians. Similarly it may be an existing institution evolving to new ways of business or a radical new organisation utilising the latest technology developments to offer `virtual reality' needlework courses.

Numerous organisational types using totally different teaching and learning styles in endless settings may be involved in the building of this on-line institute. No two may look or work the same. (We haven't seen the franchised MacLearn, yet!) So what are the themes to investigate, common to all, which would help our understanding of the on-line domain? There are many, such as teaching and learning methodologies, information conveyance methods, costing models, and the external influences driving change such as cognitive psychology, digital technology and perhaps even a post-modern perspective which frees us to consider new ways of doing things. All of these disciplines may also have common social goals such as the emancipation of the human from the drudgery of work and/or learning, or the building of wealth.

Whatever the reasons for seeking an increased understanding of on-line education, any advances would hopefully be equally useable in settings as diverse as a primary school, a manufacturing plant or a nuclear physics lab. This is because on-line learning will both influence and be influenced by classroom and workplace based learning. The on-line institute's first task will be to identify how to deliver those advances to the learner when, where and how the learner chooses since the learner exists in all aspects of society. So in this sense the on-line institute will require an important change in focus: from an institutional-based system to a societal-based system.

3.2 Education is a System

The on-line institute is still an educational system despite its emphasis on space rather than place. This educational system takes on many guises or fractal levels, as we progress through family and community systems to institutional systems of primary, secondary and tertiary education as well as workplace training which all then take their place in national and global social and economic systems.(Tiffin and Rajasingham,1995)

Tiffin and Rajasingham (1995) explain the essence of education as having four factors - a learner, a teacher, knowledge and a problem in a particular context . They also draw upon the writings of Lev Vygotsky and his concept of a Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) which is described as a measure of the difference of what a person can do or learn by themselves and what they could do or learn with help from people more experienced than themselves (Tiffin and Rajasingham, 1995:22) or to close the `gap' in performance. And just as marriage does not guarantee a good relationship the four factors of education, as outlined by Tiffin and Rajasingham, still needs the spark of intention to start and sustain engagement with the process.

This intention in many ways defines the problem. At the child level it may be as simple as "how do I know if a triangle has equal sides?" or at the adult level it could be as complex as "how do I gain a credential which will help me sustain myself and my family?". One is a concrete piece of knowledge, the other is an abstract desire. They are both problems, or gaps in performance. The former requires interaction with a teacher, the latter requires knowledge of a system, the education system.

3.2.1 The Industrialisation of Education

From the days of the sage, and the one on one teaching of family and community, we have evolved to a system of mass education. Education along with most other components of society, has borne the full brunt of industrialisation, so now education can be carried out across thousands of schools to millions of pupils with predefined, quantifiable, reproducible results. We spend millions of dollars streamlining and automating the process so that efficiency can be so tightly controlled that we know down to the dollar what it costs to educate the `average' student to a known standard. We have also effectively separated learning from work, something Logan suggests we need to reverse (1995).

So, we have evolved the school educational experience to be only of importance within the context of the particular educational system one chooses or finds oneself participating in. This is highlighted in the Australian concept of Tertiary Education Ranking or TER where your TER score at the end of 12 years of schooling defines which University courses you may or may not apply for. If a student spends many years being tutored in the attainment of a high TER by specialist teachers, who study the examination and marking systems so as to find weaknesses which their students can exploit, is the student primarily engaging in education or engaging with an education system? Is the teacher an educator or a technical facilitator? Unfortunately the product (the student) of an industrial model which stresses uniformity, fragmentation and specialisation suffers enormously when confronted with the post-school cybernetic model which stresses diversity, integration and the generalist approach of systems theory. (Logan, 1995; Marginson, 1993)

3.3 A Different Model

The above example of TER describes a teaching and evaluation system defined by, and designed to satisfy, the needs of a particular educational model. To change one or more elements of any system, or the whole system, it is useful to understand, or model, the relationships which exist in that system. Banathy has described how to construct four "distinctively different organisational models of education"(1987:97). These models are defined by which one of the four system levels dominates the entire model. This `systems hierarchy' of education recreated below identifies the four levels :

The Institutional Level;

The Administrative Level;

The Instructional Level;

The Learning Experience Level.

Banathy has also outlined the progression of the four models of educational systems from the Institutional through to the Learner centred organisation. It is worthwhile to revisit this evolution.

The Institutional Model implies a system of education that is rather closed toward the learner and represents the top-down approach of a rigidly controlled system. It is found in societies where educational authority is centralised such as in autocratic or religious societies.

The Administrative Model has the Administrative level as the dominant level and is more open than the Institutional Model, but decision making is quite removed from the learner. Much public education is centred around the administrative level.

The Instructional Model organises the educational system around the Instructional level as the primary level aided by the instructional technology of the past 30 years and the approach of discipline-based higher education.

The Learning Experience Model projects an educational system that is open toward the learner as well as to sources beyond the boundaries of the school that can support learning. Decisions relevant to the educational experience are made jointly by the instructional-resource system personnel and by the learners. (Banathy, 1987)

The Learning Experience Model is where the future educational institute needs to find its roots if it is to evolve.

3.3.1 The Learner-Centred, Societal-based Educational System

It becomes apparent when viewing educational system from the perspective of Banathy's four models just whose needs these systems have been satisfying. In three of the four they have been the needs of the institution, administrators and instructors while the learner was the raw material. Few instances of true learner-centred organisations can currently be found. As discussed elsewhere there are a number of catalytic reasons why the virtual academy must be a learner centred organisation, whatever its purpose. It must also be what Banathy calls a "societal-based organisation"(1987:105).

Simply put, a societal-based organisation recognises:

"that education is the domain of human activity that comprises all arrangements, resources, and opportunities which facilitate learning and development in children and youth and continuous learning and development of adults".(Banathy,1987:105)

That is, there exist a plethora of learning resources in society which can be defined, developed and made available to support learning, which now either get ignored or under utilised. Opening the access paths of these resources to the learner allows them to be utilised. Digital technology is revolutionary in this respect.

3.3.2 The Role of Instructional Design

So where does the typical teacher/trainer/instructional designer start to build a learner centred educational system? In some cases the system will build itself, such as in the world of the illegal computer hacker. No schooling exists so they identify, develop and share their own resources. The more lawful teacher could take a leaf from the hacker's book and realise that the instructional level's role will change from that of organising, scheduling and building of instructional systems to a role of informing about and facilitating access to the curriculum framework and the instructional/learning resources. The major change here is that the input to the instructional level will not be administrative or instructional requirements but learners' requirements. Another role will be the identification and development of instructional resources and the communication of their availability and use. This will be a function of the macro-instructional design.

3.3.3 The Curriculums Role

The curriculum is a crucially important focus point in an educational system. This focus is the meeting point of administration, academia and students. Each of these three form a symbiotic relationship which makes the `act' of education occur. Administration provides the place, materials and support to allow teachers (and in future, learners) to develop and deliver a curriculum which satisfies both the learner's goals and the institutions goals. It is a conceptual point where the passing of knowledge takes place. The curriculum is the key to this synthesis as it embodies all the other facets of the educational system. While the system itself may have many reasons for its existence the pragmatic realisation of the overall goals are there in its curriculum which, either overtly or covertly, also contains the values of the institution and the learners as well as those components of society responsible for its continuation.

The relationship of curriculum to instruction is also crucial to understand in the building of an on-line institute as it has the capability of defining one of the main features of any future system - the delivery system. Reigeluth (1983: citing Snelbecker, 1974) considers the primary difference between curriculum and instruction as areas of enquiry, is that curriculum is concerned primarily with what to teach, whereas instruction is concerned primarily with how to teach it. Said another way, curriculum contains a body of knowledge whereas the instructional design contains the methodology for its access, usage and evaluation. Our new model, should in theory put the learner one step closer to curriculum than has been in the past by reducing the control of the instructional methodology which in many cases is just another learning barrier. But will the Instructional Design (ID or ISD) world step aside so easily?

3.4 Can Instructional Design Evolve?

The push to define the science of ID, has been far too prescriptive and will require radical change in a learner-centred educational system. It would be too easy to take all the principles of ID, a system designed by instructors for instructors, and recreate the physical campus in cyberspace. All we will have gained though is a more efficient system to deliver the same institutional hegemony. Many attempts at `Distance Education' could be considered guilty of this. No, the on-line institute is capable of new levels of interactivity between students and knowledge which has the possibility to change the way we learn.

3.4.1 From Teaching to Learning - Rate of Change

The pattern of "lifelong learning" Logan (1995:11) will require a much different approach from learning institutions if they are to catch the future student's imagination and dollar. To achieve this `flip' of state from teacher to learner centred, will require time and patience since as Reinecke (1996) points out the "full-service universities" will need to change their culture, infrastructure, and ways of doing things. This will bring on many battles fought on mainly epistemological grounds for older institutions and questions of identity for the newer. Not the least of these will be centred around the role of ID. Instructional Design can be a tool of change but only if it itself can shift its focus from instruction to one of facilitation. Many teachers/academics and administrators do not understand what Reinecke means when he says "full-service". It means "how can I help" or "what can I do to facilitate your learning". Hence it is a political issue and is, as usual, about control.

3.4.2 The politics of Design

If science is a form of politics, and many protagonists of ID look upon ID as a science, then we need to address the values and intentions inherit in the systems design which takes a major role in our present and, some suggest, future education systems. Education is a highly politicised sector (Marginson,1993). Proponents of one belief system or the other wear their politics on their sleeves and it is useful to know what they represent. The Instructivist vs Constructivist debate is one such clash of beliefs.

Merrill would be labelled an Instructivist. He believes that "like all science, the science of instruction is based on specific assumptions about the real world" and "the technology of instructional design is founded on scientific principles verified by empirical data. .....instructional strategies can be discovered ..... they are natural principles which do exist, and which nature will reveal as a result of careful scientific enquiry."(1996)

This is thinking that Reeves (1996) describes as representative of the "Analytic-Empirical-Positivist-Quantitative Paradigm." Reeves also considers that few advocates of critical theory or social activists would label themselves as "instructional designers":

"After all, why would proponents of this anti-authoritarian paradigm seek to serve a process that has its roots in systems models developed for large-scale weapons production by the military-industrial complex? Nonetheless, I believe the "critical theory" perspective should be taken seriously because it encourages instructional designers to question again and again the cultural, political and gender assumptions underlying an instructional product or program." (Reeves, 1996)

Prescriptive linear instructional design guidelines lead to prescriptive linear instruction. While Merrill's adherence to the "path of scientific method" is acknowledged, much current ID is an industrial answer to an industrial problem. ID can still have an important role to play in the facilitation of learning in the future learning institution. It could for instance, design for the student's needs and so create "contextual, situated learning environments" so they can indulge in the `acceptance' of learning (Choi, 1995). And, if like Padgett (1996) suggests, there is no conflict between the ideas that "knowledge is something we give to the learner" and "knowledge is something the learner produces" then there is an obvious meeting point for the Instructivist and the Constructivist. Any future learning institution should work to foster both theories and therefore reap the benefits of all the applied thinking on the subject. Instructional design theory therefore should reject its closed system, industrial roots and put the learner at the centre of an open system surrounded by methods, tools and processes which will allow the random or mediated access to learning resources.

3.5 From Teaching to Learning

Instruction-centred systems are here now. Learner-centred systems are still in the making. Instructional design found its home in the vocational education and training based instructional-centred systems. It was designed for efficient delivery of competencies to mass audiences, particularly based around skills delivery. Current instructional systems weigh heavily with supporting teachers in the onerous task of designing and delivering instruction. This bears a real cost to administration which needs to be contained within existing budgets. The `science' of instructional design concentrates on finding ways to improve the `efficiency' of this system.

As Roblyer suggests; "more difficult to resolve than issues about design strategies are those concerning the reasons for using systematic methods at all" (1988:12). Here is one, cost. Current ID finds its popularity in its linear approach to complex problem solving. From problem, domain and task analysis, program and lesson development strategies through to media utilisation plans, there abound an almost endless supply of guidelines, strategies theories and tactics. Many of them tried and proven. From text books to computer based training the formulas can be followed.

The concern is that simple tools may make for simple solutions which some may use to build simple institutions. Accreditation, and its quality, for instance was once the sole domain of the university, but that is now a strongly contested notion. (Reinecke, 1996) Also improvements in the science could be restricting the art. As the integrity of these new institutions has never been tested could the programs they're promising be learner-centred while the programs they deliver are little more than instructional-centred credentialism? The shortfall between the marketing and the product in the private sector is well known. (Marginson, 1993)

3.6 Implementing the New Institute

Having identified the need for a learner-centred, societal-based learning institution the following is a summary of some of the major features of this new institution and what one might need to implement it. This section has been influenced and informed by the following works. (Logan, 1996; Limerick and Cunnington, 1993; Sherry and Wilson, 1996; Gery, 1993; Banathy,1987)

1. This new style of educational model takes education outside its traditional confines of the institution to utilise all available learning resources and opportunities that society can offer.

Chapter Five will discuss the organisational make up further.

2. It recognises the Learning Experience level as the primary level in an educational system.

To achieve this goal it will need to identify that current institutions are centred on the Instructional Level and this needs to change.

Some tasks the Instructional Level should continue or do more of:

Some tasks the Instructional level should stop or do less of:

3. New technologies based around the concept of performance and learning support will need to be learned, mastered and utilised in all facets of the everyday running of the organisation.

3.7 Conceptualising the Change

Think of the ultimate effective and efficient classroom. Then think of it without walls. Then think of it campus wide. Now think of that campus contained within a school, college or university but covering the whole country or even the world. If you were building that institute what would you most want it to represent or contain, if you wanted it to be known as the `best' ? The `ideal' classroom of course. Or at least the most effective classroom because this is the foundation that all other aspects of the learning institute are built upon. The simulation of the ultimate classroom (we removed its walls remember) is what every learning place should aspire to, where the learner is immersed in the task with as few barriers as possible. The ideal learning institute therefore is one that works to identify the most effective way to learn first, and then builds the learning environment, classroom, campus and educational organisation to support it. Because learning is the raison d'etre of education.

***

Table of Contents | Ch 1 | Ch 2 | Chapter 3 | Ch 4 | Ch 5 | Ch 6 | Conclusions | References
© 1997 Paul McKey