Good tip on Articulate. That isn’t a product I’ve actually used. My guess is that their tracking only works if you’re developing your learning with Articulate, but I could be wrong. I’m not sure what this reader is using to develop CBTs.

Thinkwell isn’t a company I’d heard of at all before. They do look more academic than corporate, but it still might work.

Thanks!

Additionally, the college I used to work for used a company called Thinkwells that allowed for tracking of online tests, training, etc. I am not sure what mechanisms they used but it may be worth checking them out to find out.

Part of that, I think, is having multiple methods of teaching and presentation. When you use a variety of methods, you give people different ways to understand. Maybe one of those will be their preferred method, but the others will reinforce the learning from a different angle. As you said, those other methods may help the brain develop. Even if it doesn’t help develop the brain, if it helps them learn, it’s worth it.

What this research doesn’t reconcile for me is that there are individual differences. For example, think about the studying techniques of people you knew in college. I always took lots of notes in class, so studying for me usually meant rereading my notes. I almost always studied individually; being with a group took so much longer, and it never felt like it helped. Other people had to be in groups, talking it out with each other, comparing all their notes from class. I had one friend who taped every lecture and listened to them repeatedly to study. She tried several different options, none of which worked as effectively for her as listening. (Although I’m not a big fan of podcasts on their own as a learning tool–they’re too passive–I think they can be really good for study and review like this.)

This was all based on the same kind of class content. According to at least the first article, there should have been an ideal presentation medium for that content, and that’s probably how we all should have studied. It doesn’t work out like that though.

Do I think that learning styles mean we should customize learning so people are only taught in their most preferred methods? No.

Do I think that individual differences in learning mean we should use a variety of methods, ideally giving learners enough control to find their own right combination? Yes.

A very interesting set of information - an absorbing read! It is interesting the batons that education experts sometimes pick up and run with, expecting others to do the same. It looks very much as if it’s the running that’s important here and doesn’t matter about the colour of the baton or even if there is one (metaphorically speaking).

I’ll contemplate this for it has some important implications.

Frankly, I feel that if a student has a particular proclivity to learn something in a certain way that’s cool. But I also feel that the brain, being adaptive, can probably develop abilities to benefit from other ways of learning. So why use a learning method that excludes parameters that can help the brain with development anyway. Diversity has always been my motto.

What do you think about that?

Ka kite

John Curry did two posts on reading lists for instructional designers a while back. The first list is more comprehensive; the second list is what he considers essential reading.

How to get an Instructional Design education without paying tuition
An immediately accessible instructional design education

I admit, I’m not a big fan of Gagne, but many people do find his work helpful.

Cammy Bean’s Essential Reading for Instructional Designers is a good list too. It’s more focused on e-learning than just instructional design, so it depends what you’re looking for.

As far as master teachers developing curriculum, that’s not that far from having Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and instructional designers develop online courses at the higher ed level. Developing quality online content is hard, and it does make sense to separate the content development from the teaching. However, the facilitators in that higher ed model still have the same qualifications they would normally. Their job is much more about individual relationships and feedback than developing content; having all the content done for them means they have more time to spend on each student.

At the K-12 level, perhaps we could actually end up with three levels of people:

Content developers: master teachers, SMEs, instructional designers
Teachers: people who guide, coach, assess, provide individual adaptations
Classroom managers: people who are physically present while students are online, provide technical support

Content developers could work from anywhere. Teachers could be both online and face-to-face, probably in some combination of the two. Classroom managers (maybe with some better title) would mostly be there for the child care piece of the equation, but could also maybe do technical support. You’d need some sort of certification for that, but probably not a full teacher certification.

Interesting ideas–there’s just so many combinations of methods and media possible.