Participatory Instructional Design: A contradiction in terms - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 21
About This Presentation
Title:

Participatory Instructional Design: A contradiction in terms

Description:

Nick: yeah, we may need the grid to show what criteria were addressed by what ... Nick: it'll provide consistency, yeah I understand that. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:90
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 22
Provided by: publicI
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Participatory Instructional Design: A contradiction in terms


1
Participatory Instructional DesignA
contradiction in terms?
  • Rema Nilakanta
  • October 3, 2006

2
Agenda
  • Research question
  • Motivation for my research
  • Literature review
  • Research design
  • Qualitative analysis, context, and participants
  • Findings and discussion
  • Contribution of dissertation
  • Future research
  • Limitations
  • Acknowledgments and questions

3
Research Questions
  • What happens when participatory approaches are
    integrated in instructional design?
  • What activities and processes were generated
    during the participatory ID process?
  • How are these activities classified as PD?
  • How did user-designers use language to negotiate
    their way through a successful participatory ID
    project?
  • What linguistic forms did user-designer
    negotiations assume in the participatory ID
    project?

4
Motivation
  • Instructional Design (Merrill, Braden, Dick
    Carey, Gustafson Branch, Reiser, Mokenda,
    Reigeluth, Jonassen, Wilson) of dominant
    discourse in Instructional Design
  • PD (Schuler Namioka, 1993, Greenbaum, Bodker
    Braetteteig,

5
Theoretical Frameworks
  • Invention Convention (Goodman, 1986)
  • From literacy education
  • Based on socio-constructivist learning theory
  • Participatory Design (Schuler Namioka, 1993)
  • Democratic end-user participation in technology
    design
  • Work-oriented design
  • Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1995)
  • Moves beyond description and interpretation of
    language use to explaining what language does
    and how does it do it (Rogers, 2004, p. 8)

6
Research Design Analysis
  • Qualitative - case study (Yin, 2003)
  • Data
  • Weekly meeting transcripts (primary)
  • Individual member interviews, documents, email
    (secondary)
  • Glaser Strauss (1967) constant comparative
    method for coding
  • 5 cycles of coding - from 23 to 8 transcripts

7
Analysis sample
  • Purposeful sampling (Miles Huberman, 1994)
  • choices of informants, episodes, and
    interactions were driven by a conceptual
    question, not by a concern for representativeness
    (p. 29)
  • 8 weekly meetings (September 9, 23, 30 October
    7, 21, 28, 2003 January 20, and April 6)

8
Coding Process
  • insert graphic

9
Reliability and Validity Check
  • Two colleagues unconnected with the project
    verified my coding (reliability)
  • An outside professional from a non-education
    background checked my case report (reliability)
  • Member checking to enhance reliability and
    validity of my interpretations

10
Context
  • CIT Ph.D. program
  • Large U.S. university in the Midwest
  • In-house funding for one year
  • Part of a larger electronic portfolio design and
    development project involving different
    departments
  • Limited resources
  • one systems analyst and one web design staff for
    all the larger project
  • Volunteer design team with other work commitments
  • Partial faculty support

11
Participants
  • Graduate students (8)
  • 5 ISU CIT, 2 international, and 1 from the
    English department
  • Familiar with educational technology
  • Relative familiarity with instructional/software
    design processes
  • CIT faculty member (1)
  • Systems analyst (1)

12
Findings
  • 5 major features of the participatory ID process
  • Transparency (revoicing, reframing)
  • Design Ethos (revoicing, reframing, cohesion, and
    modality)
  • Community
  • Contextual Design
  • Recursive Design

13
Data Snippet
  • NICK Rema, I think when Dr. D was discussing
    about the grid thing, she was more concerned
    about the Prelim portfolio. Because in the final
    portfolio, your committee is interested in seeing
    how you covered all this criteria and how is your
    level of covering? I remember her saying that
    this particular student needs to address at least
    one of these criteria on an expert level. And
    others should be advanced. So, in the annual
    portfolio, these novice, advanced, expert won't
    be so necessary.REMA so, do you think we won't
    need the grid for the annual portfolio?Nick
    yeah, we may need the grid to show what criteria
    were addressed by what artifact, but not level, I
    don't think it will be necessary..Jakob I'm
    not an expert at how you do things, not at all.
    but I'm thinking perhaps this will be useful
    for the annual portfolio because it'll be a way
    of discussing what your progress is and what
    Nick why don't we let our committee members
    decide on that.Jakob yeah, there's another
    thing I just want to mention is that by designing
    this portfolio we're also shaping somehow the way
    things will be done from now on. If there's a
    grid like this in the annual portfolio then
    Nick it'll provide consistency, yeah I
    understand that.Jakob no, but then it would be,
    it would probably be a part of practice.RICHARD
    so, this is continuous - does the matrix show
    your continuous progress like including two years
    annual portfolio, or just the current annual
    portfolio? If it includes the progress you've
    done in two years then it's good. But, if it only
    shows each year I think it has no function. (CIT
    eDoc weekly meeting, October 7, 2003)

14
Transparency Making work processes transparent
  • Design meeting conventions such as presenting
    reports took on the form of narratives
  • members experienced events vicariously through
    the reporter (experiental learning Dewey)
  • Enhanced groups transactive memory (Wegner,
    1989)
  • Members knew what each one brought to the table
  • Members created a shared history, which helped
    establish a sense of group identity

15
Data Snippet
  • NICK Rema, I think when Dr. D was discussing
    about the grid thing, she was more concerned
    about the Prelim portfolio. Because in the final
    portfolio, your committee is interested in seeing
    how you covered all this criteria and how is your
    level of covering? I remember her saying that
    this particular student needs to address at least
    one of these criteria on an expert level. And
    others should be advanced. So, in the annual
    portfolio, these novice, advanced, expert won't
    be so necessary.REMA so, do you think we won't
    need the grid for the annual portfolio?Nick
    yeah, we may need the grid to show what criteria
    were addressed by what artifact, but not level, I
    don't think it will be necessary..Jakob I'm
    not an expert at how you do things, not at all.
    but I'm thinking perhaps this will be useful
    for the annual portfolio because it'll be a way
    of discussing what your progress is and what
    Nick why don't we let our committee members
    decide on that.Jakob yeah, there's another
    thing I just want to mention is that by designing
    this portfolio we're also shaping somehow the way
    things will be done from now on. If there's a
    grid like this in the annual portfolio then
    Nick it'll provide consistency, yeah I
    understand that.Jakob no, but then it would be,
    it would probably be a part of practice.RICHARD
    so, this is continuous - does the matrix show
    your continuous progress like including two years
    annual portfolio, or just the current annual
    portfolio? If it includes the progress you've
    done in two years then it's good. But, if it only
    shows each year I think it has no function. (CIT
    eDoc weekly meeting, October 7, 2003)

16
Design Ethos Repeated invoking of groups
desiderata
  • Cuts across all activities
  • While presenting reports
  • Critiquing the evolving design
  • Updating newcomers to the group
  • Seems to have under gird the design process
  • Became the guiding light and kept work on track
  • Created a sense of group identity and community

Desiderata is the original expression of what
is desired. The designers role is to midwife
that desiderata, which could not have been
imagined fully from the beginning, by either
client or designer and to provide end results in
the form of an expected unexpected outcome
(Nelson Stolterman, 2003, p. 48)
17
Dissertation Organization
  • Three articles
  • Participatory Instructional Design A new
    approach in Instructional Design
  • Proposed Journal Educational Technology Research
    Development (ETRD). Springer.
  • Participatory Instructional Design Study of an
    emerging paradigm
  • Proposed Journal Journal of Educational
    Research. Heldref Publications. Or International
    Journal of Educational Research. Elsevier.
  • Critical discourse analysis of user-designer
    negotiation in participatory instructional design
  • Proposal sent to AERA session on Critical
    Discourse Analysis journal to be identified. Or
    Linguistics and Education. Elsevier.

18
Dissertations Contribution
  • Overall Impact
  • Introduces and empirically examines a new
    approach to designing technology (software) to
    support learning
  • Article 1 (Literature Review)
  • Starts a dialogue on integrating PD in ID
  • Article 2 (Case Study)
  • Studies an authentic case of Participatory ID
    empirically
  • Article 3 (Linguistic analysis)
  • Introduces Critical Discourse Analysis, new
    research approach, in ID

19
Application and Future Research
  • How do these findings relate to educative
    practice? (classroom practice group work,
    curriculum design, research design participatory
    research)
  • How can CDA be systematized?

20
Limitations
  • Non-generalizable
  • Specific to higher education
  • Specific to graduate program
  • Specific to educational technology design

21
Acknowledgments
  • My committee
  • CIT eDoc design team and my colleagues
  • CTLT staff and faculty
  • GMAP, ILET, and eDoc
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com