EDCI 67200-003 Alicia Pearlman Professor Watson December 1, 2013
Reflection on my Developing Expertise 2
Reflection on my Developing Expertise What is the primary role of an instructional designer? Is it to design training or to do something else? The primary role of an instructional designer is to solve problems and designing training is solving a problem for an organization. Solving problems is made up of two major tasks problem finding and problem solving. Problem finding and problem solving are very different from each other. Problem Finding articulating a clear and concise representation of the problem(s) in a particular situation" whereas Problem Solving - developing a clear and relevant solution plan that explicitly describes how the proposed solutions address the found problem(s) (Ertmer, 2009). Problem finding addresses the situation and problems solving finds a solution to the problem. The first step is problem finding in the problem-solving process. Problem finding involves being able to articulate a clear and concise representation of the problem(s) in a particular situation (Bridges & Hallinger, 1995; Jonassen, 2004). Experts and Novices approach the problem finding step in different ways. Experts use their own knowledge and experience to present the problem either in their own words or in the words taken from another source such as a textbook. Novices simply recount the given information, with little apparent synthesis, using words form the initial description of the situation (Peggy A. Ertmer D. A., 2005). In the Michael Bishop case, my approach was that of a novice. I gave a brief summary of the problem and did not use any synthesis. I took details from the case itself with a little translation into my own words. For example, the following information Reflection on my Developing Expertise 3
was taken right from the ID CaseBook: One purposes of the game was to hone an innovative model to use technology to increase the engagement of all students in scientific inquiry in their science classes (Peggy A. Ertmer J. A., 2014, p. 33). For the principles vs. features approach to the Michael Bishop case I took the information at face value and described the issues in concrete terms. I did not articulate any principles relevant to understanding the situation. For the relationships among issues, I took a novice approach as well. I presented a list of issues with no information on how they are related to each other. For the Reflective vs. Reflective approach, I focused on what I did not know which was a novice approach. I treated the lack of information as the primary problem. I used to broad a range of information about this case and did not focus on the details of the case. Problem Solving Michael Bishop Case Problem solving involves developing a clear and relevant solution plan that explicitly describes how the proposed solutions address the issues that have been identified (Peggy A. Ertmer D. A., 2005). Relationship among Solutions I took the novice approach for the Michael Bishop case and basically listed the potential solutions. The potential solutions were listed as separate items and were not connected to one another or to the main issue in this case. Consideration of Implication Reflection on my Developing Expertise 4
I took the novice approach to this. I listed a few alternatives. However, there was no information included on how these alternatives will be put into practice or the effects that the alternatives may have. The solutions were not thought through with any complexity. Flexible vs. Rigid The solutions that I presented for the Michael Bishop case were not flexible and were rigid. My proposed solution left no room for flexibility if everything did not go as planned. Craig Gregersen Case After completing the Michael Bishop case, I believed that I had more of a grasp on the case analysis process. I thought that the Michael Bishop case was where I got my feet wet. It was a good starting point. Problem Finding Synthesize vs. Summarize To synthesize something is different from summarizing it. Summarizing the case involves identifying the main points and condensing important information into your own words. Synthesizing the case takes the process of summarizing one step further. Instead of just restating the important points from text, synthesizing involves combining ideas and allowing an evolving understanding of text (Summarizing and Synthesizing: Reflection on my Developing Expertise 5
What's the Difference?). Synthesizing uses higher order thinking. In the Craig Gregersen case, I was a novice in my approach. I included a brief summary of the situation and did not include any synthesis. I just listed the problem with very little translation into my own words. I did not use any higher order thinking. Principles vs. Features In my review of the Craig Gregersen case, I listed the issues and did not discuss the principles related to understanding the issues and I did not bring any learning theories into my review of the issues. I took the novice approach here. Relationships among Issues In the Craig Gregersen case, I took the novice approach to looking at the issues and how they are related. I presented a laundry list of issues with no consideration of how the issues may be related. Reflective vs. Reflexive Being reflective is characterized by deep thought. When you reflect on something you review and evaluate it. Reflexive is when you review something and take into consideration the facts by using critical thinking. For the Craig Gregersen case, I took the novice approach and gathered a broad range of information about the case. I used very little critical thinking and focused on too much information. A narrower range of information would have been more useful to solve this case. Reflection on my Developing Expertise 6
Problem Solving In my approach to solving the problems of the Craig Gregersen case, I took a novice approach. For the relationships among issues, I presented a list of possible solutions and did not connect them to each other. Each issue had its own possible solution with the solutions to the issues not connected to each other. Consideration of Implications My approach to the solution for the Craig Gregersen case was that of a novice. I provided very little detail in my solutions. I presented a list of possible solutions with no information on how to put these solutions into effect. I did not put much depth into the solutions. Flexible vs. Rigid My solution to the Craig Gregersen case was very rigid. My solution was as follows: My final recommendation would be for Mr. Gregersen to hold a joint meeting with the stakeholders and the top person at Electron. There was no flexibility with my solution. I assumed that everything would go as planned and this rarely occurs as this is not a perfect world. My whole approach to problem solving for the Craig Gregersen case was that of a novice. Lynn Dixon Case Reflection on my Developing Expertise 7
The Lynn Dixon case was the third case that was analyzed. I still believed that I was a novice with the case analysis process, but felt I was moving more towards understanding the whole process and what needs to be done. For the problem finding area, I would still classify myself as a novice. I summarized the problems in the case in my own words and used a little synthesizing. I took a narrower approach to defining the issues. Principles vs. Features In the Lynn Dixon case, I presented the issues, but did not articulate principles that are relevant to understanding the situation (Peggy A. Ertmer D. A., 2005). I did bring one learning theory into my analysis. I presented information on the analysis step: The Analysis is the most important step in the process. It helps you to determine the basis for all future decisions (The ADDIE Model). I was still a novice here, but starting to grasp how the principles underlie the situation. Relationship among Issues In the Lynn Dixon case, I did not connect the issues to one another, which is taking a novice approach. I listed all of the issues as separate items and did not relate them to each other. I did not look for any type of relationship between the issues. Reflective vs. Reflexive For the Lynn Dixon case, I took the novice approach to gathering information about the case. I gathered a broad range of information about the case. I focused too Reflection on my Developing Expertise 8
much on what I did not know in this case and looked for information based on what I thought should be done. I did not look at the value of the information. Problem Solving Lynn Dixon Case For the Lynn Dixon case my problem solving skills were that of a novice. I developed a plan for addressing the issues in this case. However, my plan was developed as a novice and not as an expert. Relationship among Solutions My plan was not that of an expert. It was that of a novice. Expert plans have their solutions interlaced together. Expert plans also have links between the solutions and the issues. My solutions were not linked to each other or to the central issue of this case. The solutions were basically listed and were not interlaced together. Consideration of Implications My suggestions for the solution did not provide much detail. I did not include any information about how the solution could be put to practice or any of the effects of the solution. There was no discussion about the implications of using my solution. There was no complexity to my solution. Flexible vs. Rigid Reflection on my Developing Expertise 9
The solution that I recommended was not at all flexible. There was no room for modification of my solution or for the unanticipated. I did not make any room for a second plan in case my original plan did not go as intended. Scott Hunter Case The Scott Hunter case was the second peer-facilitated case that I analyzed. With this case I felt more confident in my case analysis abilities even though this case had much information to absorb. I feel that I was again acting as a novice with this case. Problem Finding To become an expert in problem finding an individual must synthesize the problem versus summarize the problem. In the Scott Hunter case I presented a short summary of the problem with little synthesis. I synthesized the information about the project management issue: Project Management is an issue in that the environment of TCM has been through much turmoil with abusive clients (Kat), job turnover (Kat), job restructuring (Bob Kelly), and job rotations (Antoinne) on the side of the client. I also used my own words to identify other challenges in this case. Principles vs. Features In the Scott Hunter case, I presented the issues in the manner of a novice; at face value. To become an expert I need to express principles relative to understanding the situation. I am not there yet with this case. Relationship among Issues Reflection on my Developing Expertise 10
A novice looks at each of the issues in the case as a singular issue and does not connect them together. My approach to the Scott Hunter case was that of a novice. I did not connect the issues to each other. I did not create a link between the issues. Reflective vs. Reflexive In the Scott Hunter case, my approach was that of a novice. I focused on what I thought should have been done and based this on a broad range of information. To become an expert I need to focus on a narrower amount of information. My focus was too broad and I needed to be more refined. Problem Solving Scott Hunter case Problem solving involves developing a clear and relevant solution plan that explicitly describes how the proposed solutions address the issues that have been identified (Peggy A. Ertmer D. A., 2005). Relationships among Solutions In the Scott Hunter case, I presented the solutions as a list with each item being separate and not connected to another item. There was no relationship among my solutions and that makes my approach a novice approach. Consideration of Implications Reflection on my Developing Expertise 11
The solutions that I presented in this case had no consideration for the effects of the solutions. There was no information included on how the solutions may be implemented or the effects of implementation. This approach was a novice approach. Flexible vs. Rigid The solutions that I presented were not at all trial solutions or solutions that could be modified. They were very rigid solutions. There was no flexibility in my solutions. This approach was a novice approach. Action Plan for Moving Forward In the four cases that we analyzed my thinking was that of a novice. I want to gain more experience with case analysis and become an expert. Becoming an expert is not something that will happen overnight. I believe that I have a long way to go. I need to take my book knowledge and turn into real-world knowledge and expertise. My action plan for moving forward to becoming an expert is to analyze many more cases to gain more experience with the case analysis process. I also need to work on my critical thinking skills so that case interpretation is something that I can excel at. Furthermore, I need to hone up on my theoretical knowledge that will help me with case analysis. Finally, the last area that I need to work on is action plans for problem solutions. To become an expert I need to look at cases at a much deeper level than I currently am. I do not believe that I will become an expert in a short amount of time. It may take years for this to occur. In the meantime I will be somewhere between a novice and an expert. The journey to becoming an expert will take time. Reflection on my Developing Expertise 12
References Ertmer, D. A. (2009). Teaching Instructional Design Expertise: Strategies to Support Students' Problem Finding Skills. Tech., Inst., Cognition and Learning, 147-170. Peggy A. Ertmer, D. A. (2005). Instructional Design Expertise: How Will We Know It When We See It? Educational Technology, 38-43. Peggy A. Ertmer, J. A. (2014). The ID CaseBook. Boston: Pearson. Summarizing and Synthesizing: What's the Difference? (n.d.). Retrieved from OSU.EDU: http://beyondpenguins.ehe.osu.edu/issue/climate-change-and-the- polar-regions/summarizing-and-synthesizing-whats-the-difference The ADDIE Model. (n.d.). Retrieved from Instructional Design Expert.com: http://www.instructionaldesignexpert.com/addie.html