I have been reading a lot about Instructional systems design (ISD) as of late (see Dick and Carey for more information on this model). My primary focus has been on the cost/benefit of developing software and application for re-usability.
While this might seem mundane or boring, this has a very important impact on the work that I do. Building learning objects that are reusable and easy to maintain have far reaching effects on the ability and effectiveness of instruction. While much of the literature that I have been reading has stressed the importance of creating reusable learning objects, I have been attempting to include these concepts into code generation.
My main focus has been on the cost effectiveness of creating learning objects that can easily be modified and maintained by the direct subject matter experts (SME). This has shifted some of my focus away building highly unique programs, and moving more towards applications that can be easily maintained by end users.
The main benifit, in my mind, is that once I have developed an application that can be modified and maintained by a SME, I can be removed from the process. This is a significant time and money saver as the expense of employing a programmer to make small modifications is very costly and time consuming.
An additional benefit that I have observed is that when the modification and alteration of the applications is left to the SMEs, the application are adapted and used in more specific ways.
I plan to post more on this subject once I gather my thoughts and have some examples to show.
The subject does not have to be exciting or spectacular to be relevant. Being able to reuse a system of training every time new information is produced would be helpful to most companies. We have new things coming out every quarter and sometimes 3 or 4 a quarter. This would help put the focus on the material not how its presented. That’s the way it should be and I think this is a very relevant subject. Thanks for the research keep up the good work.
I’m not sure what learning objects are. Can you clarify that for me?
One of my doc students, Pat Parrish, wrote an article on this subject a couple of years ago, in Educational Technology Researcn and Development (ETRD). He sounded a cautionary note, arguing that good instruction needs some crafting and care, and not just compilatons of prior objects.
David Wiley of Utah State is an interesting thinker in this area. He got into it through a passion for open learning, but then the concept got coopted by commercial interests. His attention then turned to open courseware initiatives and related open-learning developments.
I’d like to hear more about your work situation and how you see learning objects fitting in. The topic is nearly a decade old, and still we have more talk than real results. In the long term, though, I do see learning objects becoming a valuable resource for educators.
Hey Alex, I just spent 20 min looking for something that I’m not going to find, not tonight. If you can remind me when you read this so that I can look for an article that might be relevant to your interests. I printed it out and I cant remember who it’s by. I keep thinking Corso, I know he’s Italian. Anyway it was on reusability of online courses and how we can adapt them to specific learners. The idea sounds exelent to take the material and chunk it so that specific lessons can even be used as part of a similar course, or as part of a learner-specific curriculum.
Thanks for your thoughts, I’ll be bothering you with questions soon….
Alex: Here’s the paper I was talking about. … “A teacher Friendly Environment to Foster Learner-Centere Customization in the Development of Interactive Educatinal Packages” (Dante del Corso et. al) published in the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION Vol. 48, No. 4 Nov. 2005
The other day a friend of mine showed me a new… but OLD video game being sold called TV arcade. You put the controls directly into the RCA jacks of a tv, and can instantly play an ole’ video game such as Galaga, or pacman. It is battery operated. What I am saying is that although the software is considered dated, it does not mean that it does not have a value. Subjects do not have to be exciting, but informative in nature. We all have different ideas of what we think is impotant. So, what you are doing makes sense to many. I hope you understood my somewhat abstract example… your story reminded me that things that are old, or not worthy, can often be very valuable and fun. It is all about perspective.
Here’s something else I found. I’m thinking you might understand it because I probably won’t! jaj
http://www.creative-wisdom.com/pub/EISTA_paperE435JE.pdf