Chris Faulkner | Yada, Yada, Yada

Twilight....practically giving it away.

Tue, 21 May 2013 09:06:46 -0500

Twilight....practically giving it away.:

Saw this over the weekend. Oh Twilight…

Titus 2 New International Version | The New Bible.com

Sun, 05 May 2013 09:51:52 -0500

Titus 2 New International Version | The New Bible.com:

It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age… http://bit.ly/17FOmxe

1 Corinthians 10 NIV | The New Bible.com

Sun, 05 May 2013 09:40:04 -0500

1 Corinthians 10 NIV | The New Bible.com:

No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it. http://bit.ly/1290gMH

Favorite Books

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:05:08 -0500

Favorite Books:

This is my Top-15 of my all-time favorite books (in order of most favorite). Each are great reads & highly recommended.

Spider's Lunch

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 22:16:51 -0500

Spider's Lunch:

Looks like a pretty cool new iPad children’s game…

How Might Christians Respond To The Question of Homosexual Marriage?

Wed, 27 Mar 2013 08:52:30 -0500

How Might Christians Respond To The Question of Homosexual Marriage?:

I really want to stay out of this debate largely because I’m extremely conflicted. This, however, is a very thoughtful response to the question of homosexual marriage.

Class Presentations, Part 5

Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:40:39 -0500

This particular week, Godwin presented on the Summerville Integrated Model, Heather presented on Behaviorism and Instructional design, and Beth discussed project-based learning.

Godwin started things off with a description of the Summerville Integrated Model. To be perfectly honest, I don’t remember a thing about it. I remember thinking (no disrespect to him intended) that I would probably never use this model. However, during the presentation, a discussion on whether or not ADDIE was an instructional design emerged.

To expand on this idea, I believe it is an instructional design. I recognize I only believe that because of how I define what exactly an instructional design contains. I think an instructional design is a framework of design principles to present content. In this sense, ADDIE is used to design content. It helps provide structure for how the material is presented. Where ADDIE is rudimentary lays in the fact that in almost all cases still requires an instructional designer present to help design the implementation, whereas something like problem-based or project-based learning (to be discussed later in this post) could be handled by someone that is familiar with the principles established.

To sum up, yes I think ADDIE is an instructional design model. With that being said, depending on the knowledge and familiarity of the faculty member, this may be a poor choice if more advanced learning is sought.

Heather was up next and introduced the idea of behaviorism in instructional design. In this presentation, she discussed the central theorist behind behaviorist theory (Pavlov and Skinner). Perhaps my biggest takeaway centered on a quote from B.F. Skinner that I think was meant as an aside during the presentation, but really stuck something with me. Skinner’s quote was “the pigeon is never wrong”. To be perfectly honest, I didn’t understand the quote initially. I sought out a few explanations on Google and thought this was a good explanation:

“B.F. Skinner used to say, “the pigeon is never wrong.” In other words, when you conducted an experiment and the subject (a pigeon, for example) behaves in a way contrary to your expectations, the actual behavior trumps any theory you might have. It is the equivalent of saying, the employees are never wrong, in regard to their level of behavior or motivation. They are responding to the nature of contingencies, the consequences to behavior in the real environment. As the manager of those contingencies you are, therefore, responsible for their behavior. This is an attitude of science or empiricism” (Miller, 2012).

In the above quote, I really like “the actual behavior trumps any theory you might have”. To me, that hits at the crux of the issue.

Finally, Beth wrapped up the session discussing project-based learning. We discussed the various aspects of project-based learning, but another discussion emerged: what is the difference between project-based learning and problem-based learning?

For that, there is a much more concrete answer. While there are numerous similarities, project-based learning is much like the projects done in school. There is a set answer and the project is either correct or not. For problem-based learning, the answer is open-ended. There is no set answer, and provided a quality explanation, various solutions could be quite different.

Miller, L. (2012, Dec 12). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.lmmiller.com/blog/2012/12/12/general/meta-lean-2-empiricism-and-humility/

The Da Vinci Code: A Novel (Robert Langdon)

Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:12:40 -0500

The Da Vinci Code: A Novel (Robert Langdon):

If you haven’t read the Da Vinci Code yet, this is your chance. Get the Kindle version for free until March 24. Get the other ebook formats for free on his site. (Link goes to Amazon.)

How did IE get to be so bad (relative to Chrome, Safari, Firefox)?

Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:58:19 -0500

How did IE get to be so bad (relative to Chrome, Safari, Firefox)?:

Really interesting question being debated on Quora: How did IE (Internet Explorer) get to be so bad?

Class Presentations, Part 4

Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:45:00 -0600

This week, we had two presentations by Susan, who presented on TPACK (I think) and Kash, who presented on inquiry-based learning.

No doubt Susan had a great lesson on her theory (which I believe was TPACK), but we spent her presenting time trying to figure out what advanced instructional design was all about. Since she presented on her theory, we used the ideas from that theory to construct what advanced instructional design actually was. What we discovered was that advanced instructional design, what we’ve been trying to define all semester, is the result of a course naming problem.

A bit of background, this particular course is called Advanced Instructional Design, because when the Instructional Design course was offered, it was a masters-level course. Thus, when the course needed to offered at the doctoral-level, it had to be renamed to illustrate just how much more a student would get out of the course.

With this new bit of knowledge, we slowly realized we were trying to define something that potentially doesn’t exist. When I hear the word “advanced”, I think an improvement on the original. Or, at the very least, building on the foundation. As the class began discussing this, we realized advanced is very hard to measure. What makes something advanced over something else? The answer is that it is relative.

The conclusion I drew from this conversation is that no advanced instructional design exist, because it would be impossible to do. Merely, there are just different types of design, when depending on the situation used, may be correct or incorrect. Using a problem-based design in a strictly lecture-based classroom would be wrong. One of the paradigms must shift to match the other.

Kash, on the other hand, presented inquiry-based learning. In order to experience this particular instructional design, we designed a game. My biggest takeaway regarding this theory had to do with using the right theory for the job. In my opinion, a project-based approach would have been much better. In a project-based approach, students are in control of designing the game without constraints. They are able to tackle whatever they want, with whoever they want, as long as it leads to the right goal.

In this situation, I found the instructional design limiting. Many of the items of the design were confusing and didn’t quite fit into the process for designing a game.

Do the Harlem Shake - YouTube

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:49:28 -0600

Do the Harlem Shake - YouTube:

Oh this is so awesome. Search “Do the Harlem Shake” on Youtube. They’ve added a really cool easter egg. (Or, just click the link.)

ACU Calling Center

Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:46:14 -0600

ACU Calling Center:

An update on the ACU Calling Center issue:

I have received quite a bit of internal assistance to make this issue known and to get my issue resolved. I never actually expected anything to happen, but extremely pleased to be heard….and have my number removed.

I was made aware there is a simple process you can go through to have your name removed. Just takes an email. I’m still a tad skeptical (I’m a pessimist in this sense apparently) it will work, but anything is better than paying AT&T and this is certainly worth a try.

All the information needed (as well as some helpful FAQs) are with the link.

Class Presentations, Part 3

Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:44:00 -0600

This week, we had presentations over the work of Lev Vygotsky and dual-coding theory. Let the fun begin!

Pam and Mark presented over the works of Lev Vygotsky. She highlighted his three main ideas: social interaction, more knowledgeable other (MKO), and zone of proximal development (ZPD). During this discussion, it was revealed that a MKO could include peers, older kids, parents, or other resources. Put another way, I realized a MKO could be anyone relative to oneself. To further that thought, it would be possible for the MKO to transition to the other person and vice versa, potentially multiple times throughout a conversation. For example, the conversation slowly transitions from a farmer who is knowledgeable about farming technique and a nutritionist who is more knowledgeable about the nutrition in fruits and vegetables. A conversation between these two could easily result in the move of the MKO title to be transferred multiple times. It should also be clarified that the MKO does not mean one has to have a mastery of a certain topic or another, merely knowledge the other does not have. In group situations, for instance, it would be possible for the MKO designation to remain undefined while peer assessment is conducted.

The same can be reflected in the zone of proximal development (ZPD), one of the other ideas discussed in this presentation. The ZPD is relative to knowledge already known to oneself. The ZPD is always in a state of flux because it is always changing. As knowledge is gained, ZPD increases. The question is: how much time would have to pass for the ZPD to contract? I imagine it would be different for every person. Side note: It’d be interesting to see if a map could be developed of one’s ZPD.

Phyllis presented ideas on the dual-coding theory, in which the learner can retain more information if a word is spoke and simultaneously seen on a screen at the same time. The learning can be further enhanced by adding media. During this presentation, I could help but that this was merely a knowledge repetition scenario. In other words, information presented in two different ways (potentially three different way) would be retained more than information presented in one way. Isn’t that common sense? To me, seems like if someone was presented orally, then a video was played explaining the same principle, and then a graphic was used to cement the knowledge gained, the user would be much more likely to retain that information. This seems to be just good practice, not necessarily ground-breaking. Perhaps I’m missing something.

Physics teacher hit me with this one today.

Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:11:04 -0600

Physics teacher hit me with this one today.:

Have to say I have never thought about it this way…

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition

Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:23:45 -0600

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition:

Always good to have a reminder…

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition

Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:23:43 -0600

Top 11 Biggest Lies of Mainstream Nutrition:

Always good to have a reminder…

Vegas 2013

Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:00:50 -0600

Vegas 2013:

If you are interested, I’ve created an album of the pictures I took in Vegas. Had a fantastic time!

Class Presentations, Part 2

Fri, 15 Feb 2013 16:32:00 -0600

Last week during class, we discussed Component Display Theory (Paul), Gagne’s Nine Steps of Instruction, and Kolb’s Learning Styles.

Component Display Theory was presented by Paul. This was one of those situations where I learned something completely unexpected, largely because he used the instructional design to teach something. He taught us about the lights on a boat and their meaning. Since none us were mariners but been on a boat before, we were able to immediately draw on our memories and make connections.

I presented the Nine Steps of Instruction. I was given the choice to choose any instructional design I wanted and I choose Gagne’s Nine Steps of Instruction. As I mentioned in class and in blog post #2, I chose this particular instructional design because it was one I had heard about but never took the time to learn. After looking at it, I was pleasantly pleased. The main discussion centered on whether or not Gagne’s Nine Steps should be considered an advanced instructional design or not. If we consider an advanced instructional design is focused on learner-centered teaching and allows for flexibility, I think that Gagne’s Nine Steps is unique enough to be stringent or flexible. To clarify, the Nine Steps can be as simple as a checklist for the instructor (though that is bad pedagogy) or can merely be interpreted as a guide.

While I must admit I may be subject to bias (as this is the instructional design I chose so I feel a little need to defend it), but I believe that because this design is depended upon the interpretation, Gagne’s Nine Steps is the very definition of an advanced instructional design. It helps the instructor design the instructional elements of a lesson. The presentation ended and there was still quite a bit of discussion, so I don’t think I was very convincing in my argument.

The last instructional design/theory we discussed was the controversial learning styles. If you are unfamiliar, learning styles focuses on identifying whether a learner is an auditory, visual, or kinesthetic learner. Once the learner is identified, the instructors presents lesson material within that preference. I have many problems with this. Largely because once a child is identified, rarely is the child re-categorized. Additionally, the student starts believing the only way he or she will ever understand is through their established learning style.

Class Presentations, Part 1

Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:23:33 -0600

Last week during class, we discussed Socio-cultural learning, Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL), and Dick and Carey’s instructional design model. (Please note that the comments below are discussing just the actual learning theory and not the style of presentation or the presenter.)

Out of the three we discussed last week, going into last week I was most excited to learn about Dick and Carey’s instructional model. In my career as an instructional designer, I’ve routinely seen that model mentioned, but have never taken the time to learn the specifics of that particular model. I must say, however, I was less than impressed. This particular model had very little to say about the actually instruction of teaching and mostly death with the course development. Additionally, this model was attempted to simplify the ADDIE model by breaking the process down into more steps. In having the luxury of looking back on the impact of this particular model, in my opinion, breaking down the process in to more steps complicates the process.

We also discussed the socio-cultural learning theory which attempted to build a design around the culture of the existing learning environment. For me, this particular learning theory sounds good in practice, but is relatively difficult to plan for. When developing courses, most of the construction happens long before the courses first meeting. However, this model was the most flexible of the three we discussed in class. It allows for the instructor to modify certain assignments and outcomes based upon the culture within the classroom. The instructor is not cemented into one style or one activity, as they would have several to choose on based upon the current environment. This is actually pretty good practice, as it encourages students and teachers to still be creative, yet still focuses on the learning outcomes.

Finally, we discussed the computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) theory, which is focused around students communicating with each other through technological means. This is a practical application of social constructivism though technology. After much discussion throughout the class, I’m still not convinced this is an instructional design. While it does present a pedagogical approach to process to incorporate technology, that process is not flexible for ideas outside of technology. Its sole purpose is to integrate technology into a course. It seems like this would be done after it has already been decided that technology is the best course of action, however that decision process, is not mentioned anywhere in the design.

Out of the three we discussed, I liked Dick and Carey’s model the best, because it was actually a model. It has its own failings, but it doesn’t pretend to be something it is not.

New Instructional Design Models

Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:38:00 -0600

What do you understand about instructional design from what you have read so far? What model will you present for class? Why? What interests you about it?

Before this course, I hadn’t thought much about different instructional design models. I knew about them, but hadn’t really thought about what they mean and how they are different. I’ve realized that many people (including most faculty) are the same way. Typically, they have a model (or process) that has worked for them and they always use it. This make perfect sense; why break something that isn’t broken? Ahh…the problem. It is broken, it just hasn’t been realized.

Learning a different instructional design model can assist in breaking that cycle. When I started in faculty development about a decade ago, I learned ADDIE. It was and is the industry standard. I’ve used it so much I now think in that model when it comes to organizing courses, content…etc. I have no reason to change, do I?

Essentially, yes I do. Like any good process, sometimes you need to relight creativity and potentially engage students in an entirely different way. Even if I don’t feel I’m in a rut, I need to at least try other designs to make sure I’m engaging my students in the right way.

For class, I’ve chosen to present Gagne’s Theory of Instruction. When I finalized that selection, I didn’t really think too much about it, but as I’ve been reading more about it, I’m really glad that is what I ended up with. It is a well-established theory that has been traditionally used as a basic instructional design model. I think it is a perfect candidate to be used as an advanced model (which is the goal of this particular assignment) because, despite being systematic, it is very flexible.

What I love about this model is that it uses the same ideas as ADDIE (they all do really) but breaks the ideas up differently. In addition to being new, I’m excited about the new avenues of creativity coming through this exercise.