September 13-14 Consulting Visit
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Planning for Workshop 1 in Instructional Design Series – Needs Analysis
2. Planning for Workshop 2 in Instructional Design Series – Instructional Analysis
3. Peer Coaching – Barb’s Class
4. Peer Coaching – I2D Workshop #1
5. ELE Web Review
6. An Instrument to Measure Faculty Development
7. Assessment of Visit by Don & Steve
1. Planning for Workshop 1 in Instructional Design Series – Needs Analysis
Needs Analysis (potential goals shown parenthetically)
- Perceived performance gap in student’s long-term behaviors
(start ID by defining the behavior desired in future contexts)
- Lack of fundamental knowledge of key components of within instructional design – e.g. learning outcomes, performance criteria, and assessment strategies (develop mindshare based on solid ID principles)
- Lack of communication across individual practice
(form community of practice)
- Application of design theory should be attractive to engineers
(generate dialogue that will inform/guide evolution of ME design stem)
2. Planning for Workshop 2 in the ID workshop series – Instructional Analysis
Instructional Analysis Methodology
Step 1: List the performance goals of the learner from workshop one
Step 2: For each performance goal – analyze the performance by modeling the performance as a methodology (5-7 components)
Step 3: State learning outcomes linked to key actions within the methodology
Step 3: Inventory the knowledge (knowledge table)
Step 4: Inventory the transferable skills
Step 5: Describe the essential attitudes
Step 6: Determine initial conditions of students coming in (pre-requisites)
Step 7: Present a visual diagram of the mapping between the skills and knowledge
Tool for Analyzing Procedural Knowledge
ComponentLabel
Description of Key Actions Observable
Factual Knowledge Required (Verbal)
Conceptual Knowledge
Required
Transferable Skills Required
Pre-requisites
Learning Outcomes
Potential Theme
Cross Reference to FGB Methodology
Learning Outcomes – Step 3 in PC Knowledge Table – Step 4 in PC
Methodology – Step 6 in PC Learning skills – Step 9 in PC
Theme – Step 5 in PC
Comparison of the Dick and Carey ISD model vs PC course design model
Dick and Carey Model / Pacific Crest Model / CommentsNeeds Analysis – gap in performance analysis & clarification of goals / Step 1 – long term Behaviors / PC assumes the need has been justified (this should be changed)
Instructional Analysis – analysis of the performance, inventorying skills, knowledge, and attitudes, pre-requisites and finally some mapping between the skills / Step 2 – Intentions & Objectives
Step 3 – Learning Outcomes
Step 4 – Knowledge table / PC needs to add step on pre-requisite performance –
Knowledge classification is not as sophisticated in D&C and they don’t look at transferable skills
Analyze learners readiness (skills, preferences, and attitudes)
Analyze context – what is the setting for the experience / This step we actually do in other processes like facilitation but need to add to ID model
Step 5 – Themes / This produces threads for structure
Step 6 – methodologies / Clarifying and modeling professional practices
Write Performance Objectives / Step 7 – performance Criteria / Disagreement – Dick & Carey focus on ‘conditions’ within a training environment – learners must be able to operate under a wider set of conditions for effective transfer
Step 8 – set of activities / The connection between macro- and micro-level instructional design is not made explicit in the Dick & Carey model
Step 9 – Identify the transferable skills / They do this as instructional analysis – but do not differentiate between transferable skills and discipline-specific skills
3. Peer Coaching – Barb’s Class
Goals
1) be productive session for Barb
2) Formalize the peer coaching process itself
3) Advance the effectiveness of the peer coaching workshop
Purpose of Peer Coaching
1) Growth model for performer
2) Assessor can leverage growth
3) Build Community
4) Models professional practice for students
5) Offers opportunity to collect data during facilitation
- Research in classroom
- Accreditation documentation
- Tenure/promotion portfolio
6) Surfaces individual talents – propagates ‘best practices’
Guidelines for peer coaching (separating performer roles from coach roles is key)
1) Identifying a peer coach
2) Decide what needs to be coached
- Don’t ‘paint a picture’ of the classroom for the coach
- Assessor should have fresh eyes, not preconceived idea of class/activity
3) Quality over quantity – okay to miss observations in order to process/document previous ones.
4) Assessor/coach should be inert to instructor.
Peer Coach Reports
Dan: Performance Area – learning environment
S:
Team formulation – preassigned, sitting in their teams, and perception check
Size of the team- size of three is effective
The addition of the spy role – increase the effectiveness and the less dependent on you
Updating the performance expectations of the team captains
Time constraints – focuses them maximizing performance and the engagement in closure activity
I:
There were a number of students who had the right answer – they were disengaged – identify and challenge them in the process of review by raising the bar
Have the students print the activity before class – quicker start up
Role of the spy – give them conventions for the role of spy
Called it quiz and activity – is this an assessment or this an evaluation – making it clear
Have a follow-on activity – do some what ifs – this allows them to analyze a system
I:
Class was very interactive for the third week of class
An activity to get them to think like engineers – creates conventions
The process of the activity was similar to the homework thus increasing performance
Steve: Performance Area - Awareness of team issues across the class
Strengths
All the questions you asked students had quick responses
You would be monitoring your facilitation plan on a recurring basis
Setup and reinforcing the roles of recorder and spy – gave means to assess and collect information.
Collecting information at the end – individual
Improvements
Adding contextual data of names on the individual SII will provide a lot more meaning
Between visiting a team skim the courses
Create a new visit pattern that moves you more quickly around the class
Asking the spies what they are learning would be a very strong opportunity.
Insights
Having a form with lines makes it more effective to collect and organize data.
The review of homework is a much more passive activity – having students present, score sheet to collect and fill out feedback
Don: Performance Area - Interventions
Strengths
The asking for help in doing interventions
The patience of letting the students progress by themselves
What else you know how to? Questions of explore
A challenging problem increases the opportunity
Personable increases opportunity for interventions – they are comfortable
Improvements
The focus on specific learning skills could be more structured – visualizing, testing boundaries, etc. – Thinking with equations
Feedback to the whole class – all transferable skills – read and interpretation of
The value of the engineering skills – make it more aware
Insights
Creating a plan for intervention opportunities enhances both activity design & facilitation
The better the articulation of skills involved, the better the awareness of and actual growth in these skills
How to intervene when they think they are on target?
Dan: Feedback for Peer Coaches
Strengths.
Observation that were ‘right on’ to the accuracy of what was going on (all 3).
Alignment & focus on areas of assessments
Improvements
Don’t qualify strengths. This discounts their value. Instead, decouple items/issues as much as possible for better shared understanding and transfer.
Insights are a not dumping ground for strengths & improvements not done before.
Insights
UI may be on its way to having the 1st long term peer coaching community. It takes a very powerful focus to sustain this.
Dan’s Feedback for Barb
Strengths
Be able to honor an individual by talking directly to one individual plus tapping into the whole class by looking around at the same time.
Informal nature of class, not like traditional class, frees up behaviors of students.
Reliance of team allows a quiet reliance of board workè this helped clarified understanding.
Summary of team roles allows success as cooperative teams.
Constantly able to get students to realize you care by your actions & body language.
Quickly recognize needs of a student and responding to that need. Students gave a lot of slack because of caring. This provides opportunities to work on practice.
Conventions (folding papers, them handing in) frees you up to focus on what you want you to get done.
SII at end builds reflective practice.
Improvements
Reduce 17 teams to 12. Go to 5 person teams w/ clear roles. Location in class room where teams can be monitored (make a map). Allow 1.5 ft walkway.
Learn to look across audience, stopping at different individuals, to monitor the whole class. Do this in a scanning manner.
Put a stack of papers on desk & have students get. Or assign to a student to handout and/or pickup.
Complete all instructions before releasing teams. Say I blew it and don’t call them back or take stacks of little paper with you and give out.
Make sure to skim the whole class before you start working with individual teams.
Limit the time at a team to 30 s. Do what you need to do and move on. Decrease amount on time to circulate. Every 2 teams at most, scan.
Awareness of spy => how many spies were up at what time? Be aware of what was happening.
Insights
Easier to facilitate smaller number of teams w/ more people! That is 12 teams of 5 students is more effective than 15 teams of 4 students.
Learning system. Team formations, assessment, etc., many things come together.
Reviewing of activity led to a decrease in energy level because the professor was
now the performer.
4. Peer Coaching - I2D Workshop #1
Facilitators
Don Elger, Steve Beyerlein
Participants
Fritz Fiedler, Edwin Odom, Dan Cordon, Bob Carson
Barb Williams, Steve Zemke, Ken Noren, Scott Metlen
Howard Peavy, Tris Utschig, Stephanie Hampton, Barry Willis
Criteria
Effectiveness of the workshop – its design
Facilitation of the workshop
Buy-in for future participation
Strengths
1. The orientation to the workshop built an understanding of who was involved and some of their interest. Since you want a community – people need to know who are the members and what their motivation for involvement. It also incorporates the walking through the syllabus to set expectations.
2. The definition of methodology was presented effectively – model of the process that clarifies the most significant actions within the process which now allows the novice to study the performance of the expert and begin to analyze how the performance is produced.
3. The speed of shifting from the overview presentation into action of doing – they were ready to get into it and responded very quickly.
4. Steve eventually went around to each team to check on them to make sure that they understood what was expected from this activity
5. The discussion of the review of the module produced an interesting discovery – instructional design is the movement from current state to a future state and produces the movement between the two.
Improvements
1. Spacing of the participants – sitting with teammates – list up on the projection system and assign to tables so they get the idea that they are working with someone at the beginning.
2. during Faculty Development you always want to set positive expectations – e.g. We invited you to be the creators of a new workshop series and be part of what we are building as a community of research-based practitioners. There will be opportunities for creative enterprises and you time will be valued and contribution a key part of the project.
3. Do a perception check of where they are after the overview session – I can’t project where they are – I would have asked them a couple of prompt questions – is there any questions about the workshop series in relationship to your expectations and clarification of the process – is there any questions?
4. Use visuals more – for each activity – have a power point slide that clarifies what you want them to do and your expectations that point them to the resources.
5. it is important to check in with each team within the first minute to make sure that your expectations are shared with them and that they have a good setup – like do you have a course in mind for the team of two, they know how much time, and what they need to produce.
6. Have the teams work on the same course produces a lot more meaning than paralleling two different courses.
7. The tool for collecting the behaviors must have the space to write them fully – the space provides room for 5 words – when you wanted 15 words - example at the beginning of each tool.
Insights
1. Focus on what you want them to do – this should be rephrased as the performance level that you want them to meet – Long term behaviors are the visual representation of what the long-term performance capacity looks like.
2. Don often lowers expectations in areas of discomfort so that he can be sure that he exceeds these expectations – the reflection of when and where you do this and why –
3. There is a major difference between what they can do versus what they look like when they are doing it - performance
Instructional Design model notes
1. Analysis – needs analysis (gap in long-term performance)
2. Design
3. Development
4. Implementation
5. Evaluation
Design Involves…
Clarifying the target (end-state), design specifications
Analyzing the methodologies of the discipline of the end-state performance
Analyze what they need to know and at what level
Analyze the transferable skill levels needed in the performance
Clarifying the relationships between all the components
Designing of the modules for the critical components
5. ELE Web Review