Instructional Design and Professional Informal Learning: Practices, Tensions, and Ironies
Year: 2015
Type: article
Abstract: Introduction How do instructional designers learn their trade? A number of studies in recent years have addressed this question, offering insight into what might be generally thought of as the process of becoming a designer in the field (e.g., Ertmer et al., 2008; Hardre, Ge, & Thomas, 2006). In some ways, it seems clear that instructional designers learn their trade the same way as practitioners in other fields--through formal training as a novice and a variety of experiences afterward. As professionals dedicated to the effective instruction of others, instructional designers must surely recognize their own need for continued professional development. In this sense, it seems reasonable to assume that instructional designers would be dedicated to learning in two broad senses--the learning of others as well as their own. A good deal of literature on becoming an instructional designer has focused on efforts to improve formal training. A common trend in this regard concerns the inculcation of design skills and an accompanying shift beyond process models assumed to guide designers through the process of creating learning experiences (e.g., Rowland, Fixl, & Yung, 1992; Visscher-Voerman, Kuiper, & Verhagen, 2007). Work by Rowland and colleagues offers a good example of this perspective. As Rowland, et al. (1992) suggested, adequate training should result in skills that facilitate what instructional designers do in workplace settings. In particular, they advocated an apprentice model that entails three elements: learning in context, modeling of expertise, and reflection. In a related commentary, Rowland, Parra, and Basnet (1994) advocated a creative view of design and enumerated a series of methods for training instructional designers based on educational practices in other design fields such as engineering and architecture. Their recommendations included training methods such as case studies, competitions, internships, design studios, and expert demonstrations. Other literature related to becoming a designer concerns expert performance (e.g., Ertmer et al., 2008; Hardre, Ge, & Thomas, 2006; Kirschner, Carr, van Merrienboer, & Sloep, 2002; Rowland et al., 1992), demonstrating the importance of prior design experience, an ability to analyze complex design problems, and systematic strategies for dealing with that complexity. Others suggest that training should be enhanced by coverage of applied knowledge and skills, as in design studio approaches (e.g., Clinton & Reiber, 2010). Thus, practical aspects of instructional design work appear to be increasingly emphasized in discussions of professional training. Given this emphasis on practical aspects of work in the field, it is noteworthy that little attention has been paid to instructional designers' efforts to expand their capabilities while on the job. For example, discussions of expertnovice differences, theoretical vs. practical knowledge, and improved training methods all focus on formalized educational experiences that typically occur in structured settings and, for the most part, away from fields of actual practice. There is in the literature no substantive examination of workplace experiences through which practicing designers become increasingly skilled at their craft. Practical experiences that occur during training, such as those had in internships, are surely interesting in this regard; but the related question of how instructional designers continue to learn and develop professionally, long after formal training and internships have been completed, stands as a unique and under-researched area of scholarship in the field. In conducting this study, we focused on what scholars in the adult education literature have termed informal learning in the workplace. Such learning is primarily concerned with professional development that occurs outside of formalized curricular structures. Following the conventions typical within the adult education literature (e. …
Source: Educational Technology & Society
Authors: Stephen C. Yanchar, M. Hawkley
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: diamond
OpenAlex ID: W2204694094