Design Innovative Learning
By Evan Houghton
My understanding of innovative learning design throughout this learning module has blossomed like a Japanese cherry tree in spring.
To begin this final wrap up, Gherardi's (2012) opening statement, “innovation and learning should have a practical application as neither separate or separable (Gherardi 2012, p. 218)” resonates well with me. When innovation and learning are both viewed through the lens of design, each take into account critical and analytical evidence collected from researched science's, theories, frameworks, social, organisational, economic and political opinions for change. Frameworks like Harris’s both way’s model and Cervero and Wilson’s three stage design models discussed, are now seen very beneficial in the initial stage of catergorising design thinking and learning. Creating stronger networks, pathways and opportunities to communicate ideas for possible directions towards success.
The next topic, deciding on theories and frameworks to begin mapping or structuring an innovative learning design, has also contributed to growing my understanding of innovative learning and design. After reading, Kirschner & van Merriënboer (2013) article, “Do learners really know best?” they regrettably mention, individual and organisational beliefs and myths is the common claim to what is wrong with education, rather than science. Which expresses the importance of using and selecting science based research when planning my own practice and approach, in hope to invite engagement, especially when dealing with complex organisations Sork (2020).
The third topic, “Planning your design”, gave us the opportunity to explore and articulate in more detail, learning outcomes for our scenario, theory of change and design brief assessments. To do this, we took a universal designers approach which supported by Ron Mace’s quote, highlights the importance of better understanding your user and learning environment. By creating learner persona’s and documenting learning outcomes and design principles, more discussions and content is created, providing valuable opportunities to evaluate and analyse your decisions whilst planning your innovative learning design.
The fourth topic, “Workplace Learning”, has educated and supported me to critically think about the importance and considerations of learning in a complex adaptive organisation, especially in my professional context of high school education and VET training. The nature and structure of complex organisations like my current employment requires staff members to adapt quickly (Noe et al., 2014). Encouraging a blended learning framework which recognises formal and informal learning through work and complex social networks.
In addition to this fourth topic, Biggs, J & Tang, C.(2011) “Constructively aligned teaching and assessment” article provides a useful, constructivism theorist approach to structuring components in regards to intended learning outcomes, teacher learning activities and assessment tasks. Enveloping the student in learning within a supportive environment (Biggs and Tang, 2011) .
After studying the fifth topic, “Integrating technology”, I have felt more acutely aware and enthused to experiment with more common software and technologies in the learning environment, and especially within my innovative learning design experience. For an example, connecting learning lessons with industry networks via Microsoft Teams, aligns with Siemens view, we no longer personally experience learning, rather we derive our competence or learning from forming connection (Siemens, 2004). Only this is completed in a virtual space simultaneously.
Finally, the meaningful learning experiences this module provided, has proven its ability to enhance and improve learning experiences overall. Speaking from my personal perspective, students, staff members and other stakeholders who took part within my innovative learning design, witnessed directions of change, flexibility and inclusiveness. Theories were tested and trialled, alternative technologies and media introduced, road mapping, group discussions and collaborations made, evaluating and analysing new arising opportunities and changes. Benefiting overall engagement, learning and fun, for all.
Image taken from Biggs, J & Tang, C.(2011) Constructive alignment as a holistic interactive system
References:
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Constructively aligned teaching and assessment (Ch. 6). In J. Biggs & C. Tang, Teaching to quality learning at university. ProQuest Ebook Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uts/reader.action?docID=798265&ppg=126Links to an external site.
Gherardi, S. (2012) Why do practices change and why do they persist? Models of explanations. In Hager, P., Lee, A., Reich, A. (eds) Practice, Learning and Change. Professional and Practice-based Learning, vol.8, Springer: Dortrecht, pp. 217-231
Sork, T. (2020). Program planning in an era of "wicked problems"Links to an external site.. In T.S. Rocco, M.C. Smith, R.C. Mizzi, L.R. Merriweather & L.R. Hawley (Eds) The Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. Stylus Publishing.
Kirschner, P.A., & van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), pp. 169-183.
Noe, Raymond A., Alena D.M. Clarke, and Howard J. Klein. 2014. “Learning in the Twenty-First-Century Workplace.” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 1 (1): 245–275. doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091321.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital ageLinks to an external site.. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.