Jessica Pierce, Instructional Designer

Finding the Middle Ground: Connecting the Dots between Learner Needs and Learning Theory

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.

Designing with Timelines in Mind

Many components of higher education remain consistent through time; however, some changes have occurred to how the material gets presented and delivered, which have now altered the way people understand learning in this context. One change in the learning experience has been the increase in options for the length of a course.

Does Going Digital Alter Learner Retention?

People engage in learning through different formats. This can vary based on the learning environment and the stakeholders involved in the development of content. With the recent uptake in online and computer learning, as course designers and instructors we need to ponder a new question—is the option of having a digital textbook and taking notes on a computer just as effective as a paper textbook and handwritten notes? This debate includes many individuals adamantly on one side or the other, so the answer should be investigated through research to determine what the evidence tells us. To begin this conversation, let’s look at existing studies and determine how these two available options should inform course design moving forward.

Building Learning Environments to Engage Our Learners’ Attention Span

An interesting development within the expanding research on the brain and its functions is the study of attention spans in humans. Based on the new information and data found in these studies, we can build learning environments that are more interesting to our students as they are able to engage in the content more effectively since it aligns with the way their brains prefer to engage in the world.

A Melting Pot of Learning

(While I try to speak without bias, I should note that I have a Western Mind model and come from the Euro-American cultural background. I welcome any comments to discuss these ideas in greater depth as I find this topic very fascinating and relevant to what we need to be discussing in this day and age. The more perspectives we can gain from others the more we learn about their culture and our own biases.)

As an instructional designer, familiarity with how to make learning material (in whatever modality) reach as many students as necessary and possible in ways they can comprehend is essential. In this pursuit, we focus on topics such as accessibility, universal design for learning (UDL), and inclusion. However, in addition to those, I have been exploring an area that could use more data—the integration of cultural understanding in learning design.

How Much Is Too Much?: A Look at Tool Use in an Online Course

We’ve all done it. A new tool gets introduced, and we find several ways it can be applicable to the lessons we teach all in the pursuit of making sure the ways we present information to our students are relevant, interesting, efficient, and current. But is this actually helpful? Do our students get a better experience when we introduce the latest programs, software, and technologies?

The Brains Behind Assessment

In the current day and age of learning, we find a lot of variability in how we develop and provide learning environments. Many individuals have had to rethink their teaching and learning atmospheres to accommodate societal changes. In all of those alterations, the need for assessment is one of the primary components of any learning environment that needs to be addressed. But with the consistency found in needing assessment, we still need to think through what activities and evaluations fit best with the curriculum, learners, and modality. So how do we make that decision?

Limited by Modality

Many conversations addressing education lately have returned to the way various designers, instructors, learners, and stakeholders define a particular modality and its effectiveness. Some individuals focus on a modality’s apparent constraints instead of its affordances as an excuse to do less or remain stagnant, while others view the very same limitations in addition to the modalities strengths as a way to explore more options for how to reach learning goals in a new way.

But what about nonverbal communication?—A look at interactions online

With the continuing growth of online learning in the past few decades, one significant argument against it has been the perceived loss of non-verbal communication and human relationships within the course. Instructors new to the modality often believe that the online delivery format is less interactive than face-to-face, and therefore assume it’s harder (if even possible) to get to know the other participants. Some university instructors even hesitate to teach online because they feel there is a lack of connection and communication, which then creates more room for misinterpretation, negative reviews of the experience, or even failure for some students. Today, I’d like to share the data behind this topic and help to point to the fact that this is not as worrisome as these instructors assume.

Looking Through a Learning Tool

There is a spectrum of opinion about online learning, inclusive of two polar opposite sides in the discussion: it’s either new and exciting and every course should be online, or it is a scary new technology that destroys the personal communication essential for a “good class.” As I consider this debate, something that both groups should realize is that it’s easy to fall into the trap of defining instruction through the use of a tool, rather than realizing there is an inherent separation between the instruction and the tool. Today I’ll explore the differences and how this separation impacts our design.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: