This post was co-wrote by Ann Broda and Jess Pierce .
A course’s design includes many dynamics which can alter how it’s implemented. In addition, the instruction process may provide different results when it comes to meeting objectives, therefore the success of a course and its impact on student learning varies greatly. With these differences in learning spaces and learners it is often hard to know where to begin with design. But, even with various learning environments and stakeholder needs, some concepts of course design and evaluation transcend being environmentally specific—and these heuristics can be helpful tools for all learning spaces. As Ann and I reviewed various concepts and theories behind course design for this blog post, we discovered two essential components instructional designers can use in course design to create effective learning and the positive results of implementing them in the online modality: learning needs analysis and Constructivism.
Learning Needs Analysis
As we begin to explore the concepts behind course design to prepare for building content, we need to address learning needs analysis. A learning needs analysis assists in the creation of content through guiding us to what elements of the objectives need the most focus. Through this process, we acknowledge the varied needs for the course. Stakeholders include not just the learners but also the organization with objectives to be achieved. This can include the learners, instructors, program directors, employers (or future employers) of the learners, etc., and they all have needs or objectives for the learning space. Addressing each of these groups looks different when it comes to effectively implementing an analysis, but one way we can use this information to create content is to find the required learning goals and then use a learning needs analysis to find the gaps in understanding. This allows us to develop a focused perspective to address the knowledge the learners need to understand. Once we know the necessary information, our goal is to determine what assessments and analysis are feasible based on modality constraints in order to assess the learning. Jess previously covered how to determine the best assessments to use in The Brains Behind Assessment. Assessment will vary by course, but the overarching idea of focusing on learners needs analysis will solidify the curriculum’s focus and effectiveness.
Needs analysis should be a part of the beginning, implementation, and end of instruction. As a learner’s needs change over time, an analysis will lose its effectiveness and validity in its ability to have a current depiction of what the learner knows. Instructional designers, subject matter experts, and instructors need to remember to employ this process frequently to create an effective learning environment.
Morrison et al. (2011) point out that a needs analysis breaks down into four phases: “planning, collecting data, analyzing data, and preparing the final report” (p. 37). The length of these phases and what they encompass may differ, but overall the process shows we need to be curious in evaluating the needs of the learners in order to discover what will be best for their learning spaces. Assessments allow us to gather data to inform these decisions through collecting information on what learners know and need to know, which then helps to curate curriculum that is designed appropriately. This process also helps create a quantified set of data for several learners at once to create a baseline of information which the stakeholders may need to track progress. With this data, a learning needs analysis helps instructional designers create overall effectiveness in any modality—especially in the online learning environment.
Constructivism
As previously mentioned, establishing a baseline using a learning needs analysis helps the instructor understand what their learners already know so they can adjust their curriculum and pedagogy accordingly and provide the most enriching learning experience. Jean Piaget’s Constructivism or Constructivist Learning Theory reflects this idea.
Constructivism focuses on how a learner’s prior knowledge and life experiences play an active role as they learn and retain new material. Helping learners make relevant connections between their prior knowledge, life experiences, and curriculum provides them with opportunities to strengthen their skills in critical thinking and problem solving (Main, 2021). Similarly, Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction reveals routinely reviewing a learner’s prior knowledge with them not only helps strengthen their retention of the information throughout their education, but also in life outside the learning environment (Sewell, 2022).
Providing learners with opportunities to make these connections creates an avenue for collaboration and building relationships—both between the individual learner and instructor as well as between the learner and their classmates—an important aspect of Constructivism. Rather than the instructor acting as the sole subject matter expert, collaboration and relationships allow both the instructor and the learners to play an active role in sharing knowledge so everyone can learn and benefit from each other’s expertise and experiences (Main, 2021; Sewell, 2022).
In addition to collaboration, designing a constructivist learning environment includes accessibility and universal design principles (UDL) which our team has covered in past blog posts, including: providing learners with multiple, alternative options for completing assignments; presenting content through various mediums such as text, audio, video, etc.; and the implementation of interactive, experiential learning activities and assignments to help learners reflect on and be aware of their metacognition (i.e., the ways they think about the way they understand and retain information) (Foote, 2021; Main, 2021; Sewell, 2022). We must think critically and holistically about current research, best practices, and foundational concepts in order to create courses, programs, and learning environments that are relevant, accessible, UDL friendly, and engaging to learners. Sewell (2022) notes that in in the process of holistically designing and teaching research-based courses it is important to remember that “1) Motivation, readiness, and emotion all play a role in learning; 2) Learning takes place best in context; 3) Deep learning occurs when learners can apply learning to new situations.” Let’s explore some ways a learning needs analysis as well as constructivist and research-based curriculum could play out in the online learning environment.
Online Learning Environment Application
Extant research reveals the significance of learning needs analysis. So how can we implement both a learning needs analysis model and constructivism into current learning spaces, especially in the online learning environment? As discussed above, we can start by broadening our understanding of assessments (which can include tests, reflection papers, or discussion boards to name a few).
One specific example for gauging student knowledge could be implementing surveys at the beginning, middle, and end of the course. These surveys help us continually see the learner’s progress in order to alter the course accordingly. We can also use open discussion boards, polls, and similar tools (based on your LMS) to gather more feedback. These tools provide insight on the learner’s terms, which is an important form of assessment because the learner must provide a response they curate based on metacognition to meet the requirements presented by the content/instructor.
Through these different types of assessments, more stakeholders beyond the instructor are involved in the evolution of the content, which plays well into the constructivist model of making the content more interactive and engaging for the learner. Through this process, learners focus on their personal experiences and understanding as well as the requirements of an assignment to earn a grade. The more assessments and feedback we get from learners that are built to provide information about the learners’ understanding beyond rote memorization, the more the learners can develop and analyze their new knowledge in association with their previous knowledge and understanding. This will increase the effectiveness of the learning space at meeting the objectives.
Similarly, in her series on Keller’s ARCS Model of Motivation and on Charles Sanders Peirce’s Community of Inquiry (CoI), Ann discusses examples of how she designed and taught an introductory speech course from a place of Relevance (Keller’s ARCS Model) and Social Presence (CoI). She also shares ways instructional designers and instructors can use these theories to motivate learners to build on past knowledge and life experience and retain their new knowledge long after the class ends. We can use research to guide curriculum design by incorporating current real-world examples or case studies from the field into activities and assignments. In addition, depending on the discipline, the course could require on site assignments, such as a graduate counseling or social work learner conducting an interview with a professional working in the field and then writing a reflection paper on how they can apply the knowledge they gained during the conversation to their own career.
Conclusion
Rather than sticking with the same theories and ideas we have used historically, we need to examine the stakeholder’s specific needs, and use the constructivist framework in order to understand what various assessments and analysis can look like based on the contributing factors of the learning environment. From there, needs analysis can help us understand the objectives for completion as well as concerns for reaching those objectives. This allows us to develop instruction which will help the content become more effective in reaching the end goal. As the pendulum of our focus when building courses swings, we need to find the middle ground. While instructional designers, educators, and subject matter experts tend to pick favored theories or practices to implement in their design, combining learner needs analyses and Constructivism helps us provide a holistic, engaging learning experience.
References
Foote, S. (2021, December 8). Taking a metacognitive approach to active learning. East Carolina University.
Main, P. (2021, April 16). Embracing the learning theory: Constructivism. Structural Learning.
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kemp, J. E., & Kalman, H. (2011). Designing effective instruction (6th ed.). Wiley.
Sewell, A. (2022, December 14). Research-informed teaching. Structural Learning.
Model eLearning 