Advanced ISD – Looking Back

My experience with advanced instructional design was impactful for a couple of reasons. Professionally, it has been many years since I have thought about instructional design theories and models beyond ADDIE, which is ubiquitous in military training. The opportunity to explore other theories and models, and to discuss them with enthusiastic peers, was enlightening. It gave me an opportunity to expand my own mental models and has improved my perspective in the day-to-day work I do as an instructional designer.

The experience was also impactful because it was the first class in my doctoral studies. This class gave me a practical model of what my life and career will be like for the next few years as I pursue my degree. To be honest, I didn’t slam-dunk the class as I expected I would at the beginning. Entering a program like this as a 49-year old professional is a lot different than when I was a hungry twenty-something working on a Master’s degree.

Having said that, I believe my professional experiences helped a lot. The filter of experience allowed me to pick up on the nuances of theory more quickly, I think.  I was also able to focus more on the expected outcomes, rather than just the “mechanics” of a theory or a model. That experience also helped me to explore the purely academic elements of the theories discussed in class because application wasn’t as abstract as it might have been years ago. I have a more concrete understanding of how ID theories apply in practical ways.

In terms of improvements, I think the course design was pretty well executed. The only thing I felt might have gone better was the class ISD project. The scenario we were given might have included more detail to guide the design teams. Having said that, I think our design team didn’t really click together during the first or even the second meeting. We had a number of people with strong opinions and stronger voices. In situations where detail is missing from a design specification, either questions must be asked or assumptions made. Perhaps that was the intent, though. A team should come to the point where they identify the need for additional data, and then decide how to address the problem of data voids. We didn’t do that. I think I’ll keep that thought handy for the next time I’m in a similar situation.