week #2 reflection

2
In one part of this week’s reading, The Application of General Systems Theory to Instructional Development, Thomas (1972) introduced a lot of new terms in general systems theory which are helpful in the identification of instructional problem and the analysis of setting. Additionally, in each Guidepost, some basic concepts of system theory have been mentioned. Some highlights of those concepts are the relative and all-at-once characteristic of the system, the importance of separating the symptoms from the problem during problem definition, the concept of open and closed systems, two basic influential factors (functional and human) operating in instructional system, the influence of decision-making characteristics in functional relationships and lastly the problem of “control” in the system. A lot of these terms and concepts would make more sense if more specific examples are provided. Another reading, Identifying Instructional Goals using Front-End Analysis by Dick and Carey, discusses three important planning processes in front-end analysis before instructional design. Those include performance analysis, needs assessment and job analysis. Performance analysis is important in verifying the problem, identifying the real causes of the problem and determining whether or not the instruction is necessary. The text mentions a couple times that instruction is not always the solution to the problem, and alternatives should be considered. Needs assessment, which is also used in performance analysis, will only occur when the solution to the problem is training. (It is called training needs assessment). Needs assessment is the identification of need(s) through the comparison of the desired status and actual status. Needs assessment is very important in identifying instructional goals and the whole design process, and careful descriptions of desired status and actual status which lead to a precise need/gap must be emphasized. Job analysis is the process of collecting and analyzing the tasks that people do in their jobs. The importance of job analysis is to identify the tasks that are crucial in the job performance and to help prepare necessary training to assure the productivity and satisfaction in the performance in such tasks, which also leads to the satisfaction of the job performance. In the later part of the reading, the author introduces the criteria in establishing clear and complete instructional goals, and these are much more understandable through examples and case study. The processes in front-end analysis in this reading, particularly performance analysis, reminded me of a training workshop I attended in my previous workplace which failed to solve the problem it intended to. The workshop was conducted to help improve the teaching performance of the lecturing staff who had received a below-standard evaluation from the students. The desired status was 85% of students’ satisfaction, and the actual status of about 25% of the lecturing staff was in average 65% of students’ satisfaction. This means the gap is 20% of students’ satisfaction. The program coordinator decided to put together the workshop in which a high performing lecturing staff shared the successful tools and techniques he used in his classes. The workshop failed to solve the problem because the cause of the problem didn’t lie in the knowledge of using the teaching tools and techniques, but the motivation in using such tools

Upload: thearith-s-makara

Post on 13-Dec-2015

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Week #2 Reflection

In one part of this week’s reading, The Application of General Systems Theory to Instructional Development, Thomas (1972) introduced a lot of new terms in general systems theory which are helpful in the identification of instructional problem and the analysis of setting. Additionally, in each Guidepost, some basic concepts of system theory have been mentioned. Some highlights of those concepts are the relative and all-at-once characteristic of the system, the importance of separating the symptoms from the problem during problem definition, the concept of open and closed systems, two basic influential factors (functional and human) operating in instructional system, the influence of decision-making characteristics in functional relationships and lastly the problem of “control” in the system. A lot of these terms and concepts would make more sense if more specific examples are provided.

Another reading, Identifying Instructional Goals using Front-End Analysis by Dick and Carey, discusses three important planning processes in front-end analysis before instructional design. Those include performance analysis, needs assessment and job analysis. Performance analysis is important in verifying the problem, identifying the real causes of the problem and determining whether or not the instruction is necessary. The text mentions a couple times that instruction is not always the solution to the problem, and alternatives should be considered. Needs assessment, which is also used in performance analysis, will only occur when the solution to the problem is training. (It is called training needs assessment). Needs assessment is the identification of need(s) through the comparison of the desired status and actual status. Needs assessment is very important in identifying instructional goals and the whole design process, and careful descriptions of desired status and actual status which lead to a precise need/gap must be emphasized. Job analysis is the process of collecting and analyzing the tasks that people do in their jobs. The importance of job analysis is to identify the tasks that are crucial in the job performance and to help prepare necessary training to assure the productivity and satisfaction in the performance in such tasks, which also leads to the satisfaction of the job performance. In the later part of the reading, the author introduces the criteria in establishing clear and complete instructional goals, and these are much more understandable through examples and case study. The processes in front-end analysis in this reading, particularly performance analysis, reminded me of a training workshop I attended in my previous workplace which failed to solve the problem it intended to. The workshop was conducted to help improve the teaching performance of the lecturing staff who had received a below-standard evaluation from the students. The desired status was 85% of students’ satisfaction, and the actual status of about 25% of the lecturing staff was in average 65% of students’ satisfaction. This means the gap is 20% of students’ satisfaction. The program coordinator decided to put together the workshop in which a high performing lecturing staff shared the successful tools and techniques he used in his classes. The workshop failed to solve the problem because the cause of the problem didn’t lie in the knowledge of using the teaching tools and techniques, but the motivation in using such tools and techniques. Secondly, the workshop was attended by only those who were already performing well in their job, and it failed to capture the attention/participation of those who performed worse and who were the target audience in the workshop.

In the same text, Identifying Instructional Goals Using Front-End Analysis, Dick and Carey often introduced and gave examples of instructional design as a way to solve existing problems such as customer service problems, teacher’s performance problems, etc. Can instructional design be used in different situations where problems don’t really exist? For example, the Master’s program in the English Department would like to develop and include a new course for the students in their program. Is the process of developing such a course called instructional design? Can the concepts of front-end analysis be applicable in this case? What can be the ways to assess the needs, which leads to identifying the instructional goals?