Teaching and Instructional Design: two sides of the same coin?

This month I decided that it was high time I started preparing for the fall semester.  Sure, my third class  -EDDE803-(and third semester) of my EdD program is 2 months away, however since I have the books (thank you Athabasca for planning ahead! :-) ), why not start now that I am a little more relaxed?  The first book that I just finished is by Diana Laurillard Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. This book was on my to-read list on Goodread for a while, so I am quite happy to finally get an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

The book makes, in my mind, a valid point that teaching should be approached from a design science perspective, implementing, analyzing, tweaking, analyzing some more, tweaking again, and so on. As I was reading this book I was thinking back to the process of instructional design. Instructional design is iterative in nature and there are many elements of this book (if not all of the elements) that I know from an instructional design lens.  When I finished reading the book, while it was interesting and it framed things in a slightly different way than I had encountered them before, I was left wondering two things:

1. What is teaching?  Being an experienced instructional designer, if teaching, as is presented by books on teaching, deals in most part with the instructional design aspects, then what separates teaching from instructional design?  I suppose that what I was hoping for was a more philosophical discussion on teaching, teaching as a philosophy, rather than teaching as a process.  Then again, the title does indicate that teaching is viewed as a design science, and instructional design is a design science, so I suppose the overlap is inevitable.

2.How much overlap is there between teaching and instructional design?  If you think of a venn diagram, with one circle being "teaching" and the other "instructional design", how big are the areas that are not mutual?  And what are those areas?  I suppose one area might be the analysis part: determining if there is a learning or performance gap, and if this gap can be remedied with instruction.  This would fall on the ID side of things.  But, are there elements like this on the teaching side of the diagram.  There must be!

I've been teaching as an adjunct for a few years now and I can pick a number of words that describe what a teacher does.  However, how one operationalizes these without going over into instructional design is something that I haven't been able to fully identify yet.  As I wrote above, I am wondering if what I am looking for is slightly out of phrase with what I am given and the answer is right in front of my eyes.

What do you think?  What is teaching? How does it differ from instructional design?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Latour: Third Source of Uncertainty - Objects have agency too!

Image
Continuing on my exploration of ANT, and asynchronous and indirect dialogue with Latour - this blog post will cover the third source of uncertainty, which according to Latour, is that Objects have agency too! As with the previous blog posts, I've pulled out quotes from the book that seemed interesting, or that I reacted to in some way, and I am responding to them here. no tie can be said to be durable and made of social stuff (p. 66) This quote seems to continue Latour's assertion that there is no such thing as "social" or "social stuff" and that "social", or the meaning of needs to be negotiated and better understood.  It also continues the thought that social can only be seen from the actions of its actors, the traces they leave behind, and that these bonds are not durable because they need continuous reinforcement. I guess Social is a perishable item. Left to its own devices, a power relationship that mobilizes nothing but social skil
Read more

MOOC participation - open door policy and analytics

The other day I was reading ZML Didaktik on the topic of MOOC participants. In MOOCs, one of the big questions is why are people lurking and not participating? If more than 500 people join a MOOC, why are only 10% contributing with any amount of regularity?  On the same blog, in a previous blog post, I had commented (it was an open stream of thought really) that perhaps there should be an open enrollment period, and then if the system sees that certain participants are bellow a threshold of activity, the system may give them the option to self-identify as a lurker, or un-register from the class. This line of thought went along a view that compared to the traditional classroom; in a traditional classroom students register for the course, they can attend classes for a week and then decide whether or not they want to stay with the course or not. If they do stay with the course they know that there is a certain amount of "lurking" that they can get away with, but they do have
Read more

You've been punk'd! However, that was an educational experience

Image
It's now the end of Teaching Goes Massive: New Skills Required (aka #massiveteaching) on coursera. Well, almost, we still have a couple of days left. I guess that the lesson here is that we were (the "learners") were punk'd† by Paul-Olivier Dehaye of the Univerisity of Zurich. After that last blog post (and subsequent pickup of the post by George Siemens and others) Inside Higher Education and the Chronicle wanted to chat with me about this MOOC experience. I only had time for one of the two before things went to press, so my 15 minutes of fame went to IHE.  Both IHE and the C hronicle have written about the topic, and have received some information from Coursera on the incident.  Others have also written about it (see here , here and here ) It's surprising to me that the University, and Coursera, waited until after this thing was a big issue in order to respond in the class, and clue people into what was happening. On Wednesday (day 3 of Week 3/3 of the
Read more