To get a word copy of Tom's paper and his powerpoint click here
One of the discussions at PIDT was regarding the professional identity of instructional designers. I posted this to my main weblog on March 18, 2005. Seems to have some relevance here considering Tom Schwen's comments about owning the media and the technology. "This is the first time in history where the technology is unlikely to be owned by professionals in our field."
a figure rose from the crowd and said a few words. The voice was eerily reminiscent of the Master, as was the rhetoric. It was Eric McLuhan. "The new media won't fit into the classroom", he told the audience. "It already surrounds it. Perhaps that is the challenge of the counterculture. The problem is to know what questions to ask."
For the first time that afternoon there was silence, and it spoke volumes.
All of the action is outside the classroom - blogs, wikis, IM, podcasting - you name it. Soon, the only place to get away from media will be inside the classroom. Hey, they don't even have a telephone (c. 1876) in every classroom yet.
A version of this paper has appeared in AECT convention papers and has been accepted for Performance Improvement Quarterly
Toward a reconceptualization of Human
Thomas M. Schwen
An allegory: A young student I know is also a mother of two sons. She is a good student and mother. Recently, her sons came home singing a song they had learned at summer camp. “This is my land, this is not your land, I am going to blow your head off.” Another child at camp had taught modified lyrics of a popular folk song, to the children at camp. The new lyrics reflected attitudes that would be considered harmful to most adults. It is likely my student’s children or the child who taught the new lyrics did not understand the harmful lyrics. My student communicated the problem to the camp leader. The camp leader found the child who had taught the camp the new lyrics and that child’s mother. The camp leader and the mother of the song leader asked her child to apologize to my student’s children. My student was uncomfortable with the solution.
And so am I.
My argument in this paper is that we in Instructional Technology often facilitate learning in the manner of the camp leader. In IT we have an intellectual ‘tropism.’[i] We invariably seek individual solutions to problems that could better be defined as problems of collective understanding. In this case I believe a better solution would have been to sit down with all the children and ask them to repeat the song and lead them to an understanding of the words. We could ask the children if they feel the words are what they really mean and if they feel some of the children at camp could be hurt by such words. A collective understanding could be achieved that would quite probably eliminate repetition of the innocent mistake and more importantly, not embarrass a child by seeking an apology for a hurtful act that was not intended.
It is my belief that the theories supporting Instructional Technology have been in need of reconsideration, for some time. (Schwen, Evans & Kalman 2001). The history of the field is replete with new conceptions borrowed from other disciplines and practice. Perhaps the most important event in the last half of the 20th century was the introduction of neo-behaviorist instructional theory by Robert M. Gagne. (1965) The adaptation of behavioral learning theory to instructional theory was certainly central to the Instructional Design movement in the 1970’s, 80’s and 90’s. That application of theory was instrumental in a very large proportion of the studies of computer assisted instruction, distance education and WEB learning applications. In my view the theories of Gagne, Merrill (1999) and Reigeluth (1999) [ii] are quite similar structurally, neo behaviorist in origin, and have moved to cognitive structural aspects consistent with changes in Educational Psychology. Further I argue these changes, while understandable, and even laudable, have not been adequate to deal with the complexities of the digital age. The central argument of this paper is that they reflect a general weakness in the modeling of social cultural learning that was peculiar to the Western tradition of Psychology generally and more specifically the neo-behaviorist theories of the 1960’s and 70’s. A further argument of this paper is that the field has not differentiated very well between the levels of theory that are in general use in the organizational sciences. Authors such as Klein and Kozlowski (2000) routinely differentiate between micro, meso (middle) and macro theories in the study of organizational/cultural psychology. Using those distinctions the greatest proportion of IT theories are micro theories modeling individual learning acts. The dilemma in the digital age is that we in IT must conceive of our interventions across select groups and in some cases whole populations. We must understand, harness and utilize the social learning forces the digital age has made available to us. I believe there are serious dilemmas in making such extrapolations from theory modeling individual acts to the distribution of knowledge and knowing in organizations or populations. (Schwen, Kalman, Hara, & Kisling 1998) In my view the application of systems theory and knowledge management have serious conceptual flaws in that they assume the ‘truth’ or objectivity of the individual mental model and attempt to force that perspective on to system issues in an awkward and ungainly manner. [iii]
A Brief Historical Note The history of
modern psychology is often traced to Wundt (as cited in Jahoda 1993 pgs130-34).
In his early work, in Germany Western
Europe America Western Europe North America
In Figure 1 below I am attempting to create a strategic or broad view of theoretical possibilities in IT. This framework selective and is intended to promote dialogue rather than be a definitive statement of what is or should be possible. It seems to this author we don’t often engage in theoretical comparisons looking for similarities and differences that may enrich competing perspectives. This author is concerned with what seems to be myopia in theory development. It is left to the reader to decide whether it is the myopia of the author or the field.
Pe r s p e c t i v e Atheoretical KM (object) Competency M Systems (ic) Elaboration Th. EPSS Simplify C. M. Classroom CBT Job Aids Drill/practice Coaching OJT GE Workout Action Learning Simul. Games Organizational Interventions Strat. Planning Apprenticing KM (Process) Org Learning Communities of Practice Problem B. L. Figure 1 Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Learning
Level of Supporting Theory
Micro Meso Macro
Simplify C. M.
Communities of Practice
Problem B. L.
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Learning Designs
Micro Theory In ISD literature the long tradition of behaviorist and neo-behaviorist theory about feed back sequencing, specific forms of learning, etc. are, quite properly, seen as micro theories. The unit of analysis is quite discrete: a prototype learning structure, (e.g. a single concept) and associated sequencing or feedback appropriate to that learning structure. Most recently learning objects have been added to the formal concepts. (Wiley 2002) The point is when the unit of analysis is quite small in scope there are important advantages and disadvantages to consider. On the one hand control can be increased because the unit can be so well defined and precisely manipulated; on the other hand there are substantial disadvantages in analyzing complex performance that subsumes hundreds if not thousands of discrete units of analysis. In my mind the recent attacks about IT being slow (Gordon and Zemke 2000) are a kind of tacit recognition of this problem. For example, CBT design is often explicitly or tacitly linked to a micro instructional theory (e.g. Gagne or Merrill) in the individual perspective. Learners treated singly are supported in acquiring knowledge or skill with the conditions ordered in such a manner as to reduce error and maximize individual performance. A concept lesson carefully sequenced in a math lesson would break the learning steps into a carefully controlled sequence in which the concept would be demonstrated and the learner would practice identification with examples and non-examples until mastery had been achieved. In contrast the collective perspective Rogoff (1995) speaks about apprenticeship in thinking by young ‘girl scouts’ as they are socially mediated (informally instructed) by adults and older girls as they carry out the routines of selling American Girl Scout Cookies to finance their yearly activities. The ‘instruction’ is a process of engaging in actual or real preparation and selling activities. It is not declarative knowledge bundled in a manual or computer lesson. It is a kind of learning by doing, by imitating, by trial and error with a mentor.
Meso (Middle) Theory Middle level theories usually consider more complex social units of analysis, both independent and dependent variables. Reigeluth (1999) attempted to overcome the tedious repetitive nature of individual micro theory by creating the simplifying conditions method. He was attempting simultaneously consider the burden of analysis in individual micro theory and deal with more complex behaviors of individuals in groups. He aggregates complex behaviors into larger ‘bundles’ so as to complete the analysis in a timely fashion and consider a wider set of variables that may influence performance such as small group dynamics. The emphasis is still on the individual performance the conditions of influence have expanded. In contrast a recent example from the collective perspective would be the concern about apprenticeship and communities of practice. Lave and Wenger (1991), Barab and Duffy (2000) and many others (Collision et al 2000) (Cochran-Smith et al 1999) also consider a more complex unit of analysis. Both the dependent variables such as inquiring teacher behavior and the enabling circumstances e.g. coaching and mentoring, are much broader and consequently somewhat less precisely described. The advantage is that the scope of the behavior under analysis permits a wider scope of strategic interventions. An important disadvantage of meso theory relative to micro theory is precision. For example while Lave and Wenger’s Community of Practice theory or Reigeluth’s simplifying conditions theory considers a broader scope of learning issues it can be quite complex and uncertain when developing a coherent intervention.
More specifically focusing on the individual perspective meso level, Gloria Gery (1995) has imagined EPSS systems that would support professionals or students in the performance of complex activities such as salesmen or students in elementary mathematics. She imagines complex multiple individualized learning events supported flexibly by integrated computer databases and relevant tools. (Hundreds if not thousands of individual learning acts could be indexed in computer databases.) In contrast, a community of practice could be placed in the meso level oriented to the collective perspective as issues of elementary education practice are considered in a web based electronic community design for teachers (Barab & Duffy 2000). Wenger’s theory (1998) could be used to support complex, social, teacher behaviors and the interventions could flow from ‘community’ dialogue, mentoring and collective problem solving in the online environment. Perhaps Cook and Yanow’s (1993) famous discussion of the ‘collective’ influencing flute making behavior is the most important demonstration of collective meso behavior modeling in recent literature. World class flute makers apprentice in a fluid environment where they interact as novices and experts testing and revising instruments until they meet the collective standards of the firm. Any single instrument is the product of several conversations between and among the masters and novice flute makers. Also, the interested reader would also be well advised to consider Nonaka’s (1995) example of the bread making design group when looking for powerful examples of collective understanding and related performance.
Macro Theory We have a limited tradition of macro theory in IT. As some theorists and practitioners began to see the power of replicable technological interventions they moved the unit of analysis moved from individual to systems of individual treatment. . As in organizational science whole educational structures and related change processes became the central construct of concern. Hoban (1970) summarized his early advocacy of systems thinking in an important little read document. Heinich’s (1985) developed an, as yet, unfulfilled vision of complex well-designed systems replacing whole cadres of teachers. Also, Reigeluth’s (2000) school reform is largely based on an individual mental model extrapolated to systemic proportions. In contrast Knowledge Management applications designs that emphasize knowledge as a social construction process could be seen as macro to support the development of collective. (Schwen et al 1998) Wang (1997) studied a group of engineers using a case based socio-technical design approach. He embedded General Motors problem-solving method in collaborative software so groups of engineers stationed worldwide could attack new design problems without traveling. It is a meso level intervention if the impact is defined and studied at the team level (Productivity or quality of local designs). It is a macro level intervention if one considers the corporate wide implications of using such an approach. (e.g. Improvement in communication, reduction in travel costs, improvement in design cycle time, etc). In these designs an active process of knowledge construction and related performance is supported. The design is flexible allowing the constituents to take the process in specific directions of their choosing. The collective system becomes, potentially, more intelligent with use, because other engineers could examine the processes of their colleagues learning from their practice. There has been a good deal more advocacy than empiricism in the professional and academic literature. HPT authors will speak about Organizational Development and process interventions; IT authors consider replicable flexible educational systems through the use (and reuse) of learning objects (Wiley 2002), EPSS systems school reform and the like (Reigeluth 1997, 1999). The advantage is in hypothetically multiplying the impact of interventions the disadvantage is in further loss of precision in prediction and quite probably the ethical dilemma of doing more harm than good. Karl Popper (1963), [v] the eminent philosopher, spoke quite elegantly about the dilemma of systems theory. In essence his argument is: while the logic of systems theory can be expanded infinitely (from sub atomic particles to the universe) the competence of the investigators cannot be expanded so easily. The dilemma in expanding across (theoretical) levels is the investigators recognizing their level of competence. At some level of expansion of theoretical reach the investigators will certainly be incompetent. The ethical and conceptual issue becomes, “Will the IT systems analyst be humble enough about their expertise; in time to avoid harm?” Our point is that since our tradition in macro empiricism is so scant and since the dilemma of aggregating across levels is unrecognized we have quite serious substantive and ethical problems in the kinds of advocacy we see about systems applications in large-scale endeavors. Just the lost opportunities associated with a quixotic pursuit of large systems in and of itself holds great risks.
Atheoretical examples The atheoretical examples in the matrix, constitute anomalous problems for most practitioners of IT. Thiagarajin, (1996) has been illustrating the practice of educational games and simulations for years. In our view academics haven’t been able to find a theoretical niche for this effective practice; almost universally research focuses on individual outcomes following the Western psychological model. Most studies of educational simulations result in non-significant differences. (Wolfe1994, Reiber 1996) We see potential in a simulation that addresses collective understanding at a meso or macro level for the unit under consideration. The common experience of the simulation could bring a unique understanding of a destructive social dynamic, organizational process dysfunction or the understanding of common purpose. This theoretical shift would move theoreticians and researchers to consider collective rather than individual effects from such interventions. IT research about games and simulations has focused on individual effects, no doubt overly influenced by the myopia of the individual perspective.
Action learning developed as a kind of pragmatic (atheoretical) collective intervention. Revens (1983) was concerned about the quality of problem solving and the residual learning that occurred from problem solving in large organizations. He developed a kind of double loop learning protocol (Argyris 1996) that was extremely beneficial. Groups of professionals would: 1) identify difficult unsolved problems, 2) agree to full participation in a cross functional problem solving effort, 3) solve the problem, 4) record the solution and the solution process and 5) disseminate both kinds of knowledge (problem and process) to the organization they served. Practitioners in IT used the techniques long before academics began to theorize or research with it the conceptual tool. In my mind there is still theoretical confusion about action learning protocols’ collective influence on an organization.
Strategic conceptual issues At a strategic conceptual level the framework leads to several observations about instructional systems theory and research. Ninety nine percent of ISD research has emphasized the individual micro theoretical perspective. When the disadvantages of micro theory have been considered the accommodation has traditionally been within the individual perspective. For example Reigeluth (2000) basing much of his school reform on extensions of micro learning theory or Merrill (1999) using routine computer algorithms to do the analysis so as to overcome the costly repetitive aspects of analysis and design. The advocates are attempting to leverage that basic conception of learning to a broader framework. One of the dangers of that approach is not widely recognized. Dubin (1978) notes that results at one level of theory cannot be automatically aggregated to the next level. This is one of the problems associated with the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation in the Human Performance Technology literature. Kirkpatrick (1998) is assuming that micro perceptual data (and theory) about training may be aggregated to a macro impact on the financial outcomes of the corporation. This is a case of theoretical aggregation across two levels of theory. While it is possibly a separate empirical question it hasn’t been well tested or demonstrated. When one examines the prediction more closely it is problematic to imagine that two-week classes in leadership are going to improve the financial performance of a large corporation. It is just as difficult for this author to imagine immense web site(s) that contains all the task analyses and related lessons (knowledge objects) for an elementary curriculum (Merrill 1999). While it is a fascinating dream it seems well beyond relevant data or adequate theory to support such an extrapolation.
Another fascinating trend that can be seen in Figure 1 is that the movement from the individual mental model to the collective mental model has usually come with atheoretical applications from outside the field and often appears in sophisticated practice well before there is theory to predict or examine such interventions. As a field we seem to have a tropism repeatedly drawing us to the individual mental model when faced with anomalous findings. We believe this accounts for some of the pique in the ‘ISD Under Attack’ article. (Gordon and Zemke 2000) The advocacy for: action learning, and Rummler and Brache’s (1995) process analysis are useful examples of moving form an individual to a collective perspective. The GE workout procedure is by all accounts (Schon 1996) a very effective intervention for creating group understanding as well as individual advancements in organizational problem solving. While these practices are widely used their theoretical implications are lightly understood. Rummler and Brache (1995) certainly advanced practice by consolidating different levels of interventions practiced by organizational consultants into a single framework. In contrast the theoretical and research implications that flow from a well-formed collective understanding of an organizational process are not well-articulated or integrated into conventional ISD perspectives.
My tentative antidote to myopia has been to examine epistemological discussions in Organizational Learning and related Knowledge Management literature. Taking Figure 2 as a conceptual extension of Figure 1 we imagine that it is possible to consider these four Knowledge forms (individual explicit, collective explicit, individual tacit & collective tacit) at each of the levels of theoretical design.[vi] So Baumard (1999) would have us consider the four forms as a macro or strategic matter. His provocative analysis leads to strategic understanding of how knowledge ‘moves’ of mediates organizational problem solving. Using the same distinctions Wenger (1998) or Engestrom (1987) give us perspective on how social cultural variables mediate performance of small groups at the meso level. Cognitive apprenticeship by authors such as Rogoff (1995) gives us a more micro view of four different forms of knowledge influencing individual behavior.
Meso Wenger, Engestrom Micro
Figure 2 Four forms of Knowledge by Levels
Another rather recent insight (Baumard, 1999; Cook and Brown, 1999) has been to cross the individual collective dimension with a tacit -explicit dimension. Polanyi (1966) is most often given credit for articulating this distinction. Polanyi examined the role of tacit knowledge in everyday human transactions. One of his famous examples (p. 12) is of an individual stumbling in a cave without a light source. The individual initially uses a walking stick to probe the darkness and eventually the walking stick becomes an extension of the individual where that person can ‘feel’ the environment directly, processing the data as if the stick is attached to the individual. Another common example is the case of riding a bicycle. Most riders, even novices, automatically make adjustments when the bicycle becomes unbalanced throwing their weight in the opposite direction of their tilt. This skill is not explicit and cognitive, it is tacit, it is a kind of skill that operates automatically and distinct from a cognitive skill or rule based mental activity. Also medical diagnosis has a large tacit dimension. A skilled physician intuits or tacitly processes a number of scientific and subjective symptoms developing a hunch about the nature of the medical dilemma often confirming the diagnosis well after the decision to act. We must turn to anthropology to find good examples of collective tacit knowledge. Edward T. Hall’s (1973) famous book on silent language eloquently describes how cultural genres mediate individual and collective behavior. He describes cultural norms across and within cultures where business meeting behavior, expectations of the proper forms of address, and dress, expectations for social considerations of women etc. are collective tacit norms. (I have been fascinated with the Chinese cultural practice of the business banquet since my first trip to China in 1994.) The interesting point that Cook and Brown make is that each form of knowledge individual explicit, collective explicit, individual tacit and collective tacit are distinct forms with their own processes. If this assertion is taken as a basis or IT practice the need is to create a design or affordance[vii] (Gaver 1996) that facilitates (or maximizes) each form of knowledge relevant to an important performance.
I am arguing (in Figure 3), consistent with Cook and Brown (1999), that the knowledge of possession, e.g. training class, college classroom learning, is distinct from knowing in process, e.g. flute makers constructing flutes collectively or engineers doing collaborative design work in an information environment The dynamic ‘knowing’ is a situational dynamic where the knowledge and the situation co influence the creation of new knowledge. In other words professionals or laborers in working contexts are actively applying their knowledge (of possession) so as to create a knowing process. The context for this application influences the knowledge application the dynamic in turn influences the individual and collective knowledge. Cook and Brown call this a generative dance. This argument further raises issues of commingling individual and collective concepts of knowledge so that IT designers move in the direction constructing or influencing affordances that increase the acquisition of knowledge and or the production of knowledge in naturally occurring performance environments.
Examples that illustrate this notion of the four forms of knowledge in action may help to clarify this argument. In a study conducted by my student, Evans (2001) offers an illustration of the revised design theory. Evans was examining individual and collective behavior of public librarians and collegiate tutors in a community-based literacy program for elementary-age students. The investigation was undertaken at the request of the library management to develop appropriate interventions to improve the service to literacy students by both librarians and tutors.
At first conventional IT analysis
from the individual, explicit perspective was conducted. In a central location
library staff and tutors were positioned so as to be at the center of service. As is typical in
work-study programs, the tutors were naïve making several elementary procedural
errors. Although the librarians
In this case Evans utilized collective-explicit
and individual tacit knowledge constructs to collect data and consider
design alternatives. He capitalized on the tutors’ practice of telling stories
to one another while waiting for one-on-one reading sessions. (Such sessions
could occur in e-mail or in chat rooms. Barab and Duffy (2000), Wang (1999), Chen (1999) While waiting for their next student to arrive,
or staffing a Homework Center
Also, Cook and Brown suggest knowing may involve two to four forms of knowledge. In this case individual-tacit knowledge of the experienced tutors was shared as they described their more mature insights and reactions to tutoring problems. This sharing of expertise resembles the kind of sharing of knowledge one often sees in everyday professional work e.g. Brown and Duguid (2000) Conventional IT analysis seems quite limited in taking advantage of this naturally occurring forms of knowledge production and exchange. The argument here is that knowing in practice is equally important to understand performance, the inference Evans made was collective-explicit knowledge was being created while in the individual-tacit (i.e., skills) of a tutor were being exercise in story telling. Rogoff’s (1995) notion of cognitive apprenticeship also could be used to improve tutor behavior. Identifying the more experienced tutors having them lead or facilitate chat rooms or small group discussions could raise both the individual or collective understandings.
The form of knowledge that may be most absent from conventional IT analysis is that of collective-tacit. Whereas Cook and Brown (1999) speak of ‘genres’ Evans saw it as the implicit repertoire of practice that is inherent in sustained work. Thus, the librarians and staff at the library, from years of professional training and socialization in the department, have constructed a collective, tacit understanding of how librarians’ work is to be properly and effectively conducted. It is interesting to note these understandings are often shared when ‘newcomers’ arrive. In this study Evans discovered a clear, unrecognized ‘divide’ between librarians, library staff, and reading program tutors. This divide was described by a librarian when she noted that although the program had been in existence for four years, she was still uncertain as to how the program and tutors ‘fit in’ with the mission and practices of the Children’s Department. Evans suggested that management could eliminate technical errors of librarians by attending to their cultural understandings of proper librarianship rather than subject them to training on procedures they could perform if they were properly motivated. They needed to understand their reluctance in terms of modern conceptions of librarianship. Thus, both theoretically and practically, it was valuable to analyze the unstated norms, values, and practices of the librarians’ culture. These socially mediated understandings were interfering with the conduct of their work, rather than a lack of competence or skill.
Conclusion The primary assertion in this paper is: it is myopic to exclusively define educational or performance problems as individual explicit issues of understanding, learning or performance. To the reader of HPT literature this discussion and concern for the collective understanding could certainly resemble recent emphasis on performance, the concern for (non-training) environmental influences on behavior and group (collective) as well as individual interventions. It is as if IT advocates only solve performance problems through improvements in individual knowledge (training). HPT practice is a theoretical for the most part so the field does not offer alternative theory. (Foshay, et al 1999) We must look to other sources to enlarge our theoretical reach. I am not arguing IT theoreticians should abandon the individual model. Rather I am suggesting the collective perspective added to the individual perspective has great potential for dealing with a wider set of problems and contexts digital technology has made available to us. It is now possible to extend our designs to groups and large social systems with unprecedented ease. Digital technology has made it possible, if not necessary to consider a wider set of social contexts. It is no longer reasonable to extrapolate from individual mental acts to large social systems. It may be much more reasonable to simultaneously explore social (collective) mediation as determinants of individual behavior.
Argyris, C. Schon, D.
(1996) On Organizational Learning II. New York
Barab, S. A. & Duffy,
T. (2000) From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen S.M.
Land (Eds.) Theoretical foundations of learning environments Pgs 26-56 Mahwah N.J. Lawrence
Baumard, P. (1999) Tacit knowledge in organizations. London
Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (2000) The Social Life of
Information. Boston Harvard Business School
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (1999) Relationships of
knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In A. Iran Washington D.C.
Cole, M. (1995) Socio-cultural-historical psychology: some
general remarks and a proposal for a new kind of cultural-genetic methodology,
In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez. Sociocultural Studies of Mind. New York Cambridge University
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S. & Tinker, R.
(2000) Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison , WI
Cook, S. & Brown, J.S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organizational Science, 10(4) 381-400.
Cook, S. N. & Yanow, D. (1993) Culture and Organizational Learning. Journal of Management Inquiry. 2(4)
Dubin, R. (1978) Theory Building New York
Easterby-Smith, M., Snell, R., & Gherwidi. S. (1998) Organizational Learning: diverging Communities of Practice? Mangement learning 29(30: 258-72
Engestrom, Y. (1987) Learning by expanding. Helsinki
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6 (4), 50-72.
Evans, M. A. (2001). Refining the HPT perspective for the changing workplace: The proposal for a social constructivistic perspective to inform analysis. Unpublished manuscript.
Foshay, W.R., Moller, L., Schwen, T.M., Kalman, H. & Haney, D. (1999) Research in Human Performance Technology. In: Handbook of Human Performance Technology 2nd edition. Stolovich, H. d. & Keeps, E.J. eds. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer
Gaver, W.W. (1996) Affordances for interaction: The social is material for design. Ecological Psychology. 8(2):111-129.
Gagne, R. (1965) The conditions of learning. New York
Glaser, R, (1990) The reemergence of learning theory within instructional research. American Psychologist, 45(1), 29-39.
Gordon, J., & Zemke, R. (2000). ISD under attack. Training, 37(4), 42-53.
Gery, G.(1991) Electronic Performance Support System: How and why to Remake the
Workplace through the Strategic Application of Technology. Gery Institute: Tolland. MA
Hall, E. T., (1973) The silent language. New York
Heinich, R. (1984). The proper study of instructional technology.
Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 33(1), 9-15.
Henricksson, K. (2000) When communities of practice came to
town: On culture and contradiction in emerging theories of organizational
learning. Institute of Economic Research Working Paper Series. Lund University Lund Sweden
Hoban, C. F. (1970) Instruction as a Systematic Approach to
Instructional Technology. In “To Improve Learning: a Report to the President
and congress of the United
Hung, Wei-Chen (1998) An analysis of the developmental process in an electronic
performance support system for behavior management in the
classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University
Jahoda, G. (1993) Crossroads between culture and mind:
Communities and change in theories of human nature. Harvard University Cambridge , MA
Jonassen, David H. & Susan M. Land (eds.) (2000).
Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. Mahwah N.J. Lawrence
Kirkpartick, D. (1998) Evaluation training problems: the
four levels. 2nd ed. San
Klein, K.J. & Kozlowski, W.J. Eds. (2000) Multilevel
theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new
directions. San Francisco
Lave, J. (1997) The culture of acquisition and the practice
of understanding. In D. Kirshner & J. A. Situated Cognition: Social
semiotic, and psychological perspectives. pgs. 37-56 Mahwah NJ Lawrence
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning:
Legitimate peripheral participation. New York Cambridge University
Leont’ev, A.N. (1981) Problems of the development of mind. Moscow
Merrill, M. (1999) Instructional Transaction Theory (ITT):
Instructional Design Based on Knowledge Objects. In: Instructional Design
Theories and Models Volume II. C.M. Reigeluth Ed. Lawrence Earlbaum Assoicates,
Mahwah , New
Nardi, B. (1996) (Ed) context on consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer
interaction. Cambridge , MA
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge creating
company. New York Oxford University
Orr, J.E. (1990) Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity:
community memory in a service culture.
In D.S. Middleton 7 D. Edwards (Eds.) Collective remembering: memory in
society. Pgs169-189 Beverly Hills ,
Polanyi, M. (1966) The tacit dimension. New
Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The
Growth of Scientific Knowledge. New
Reigeluth, C. & Nelson, L. (1997) A new paradigm of ISD. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook. V22. p24-35
Reigeluth, C. (1999) The Elaboration Theory: Guidance for
Scope and Sequence Decisions. In: Instructional Design Theories and Models
Volume II. C.M. Reigeluth Ed. Lawrence Earlbaum Assoicates, Mahwah , New Jersey
Reigeluth, C.M. & Squire, K.D. (2000) The many faces of educational change. Educational Horizons v78 n3 p143-52
Rieber, L. P. (1996) Seriously Considering Play: Designing Interactive Learning Environments Based on the Blending of Microworlds, Simulations, and Games. Educational Technology Research and Development v44 n2 p43-58 1996
Reich, R ed. .(1988) The Power of Public Ideas, Harvard University Cambridge , MA
Revans, R. W. (1983) The ABC of Action Learning. Bromley : Chartwell-Bratt Studentlitteratur
Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive
development in social context. New York Oxford University
Rogoff, B. (1995) Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory
appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship, In J. V. Wertsch, P.
del Rio, & A. Alvarez. Sociocultural Studies of Mind. New
York Cambridge University
Rubinstein, D. (1982). Individual minds and the social order. Qualitative Sociology, 5(2), 121-139.
Rummler, G.A. & Brache, A.P. (1995)
Improving Performance : How to Manage the White Space on the Organizational
Chart. San Francisco
Schwen, T., Evans, M. & Kalman, H. (2001) More ISD
Attacks: Moving Forward, AECT Convention paper, November, Atlanta Georgia
Schwen, T., Kalman, H., Hara, N., Kisling, E., (1998) Potential Knowledge Management Contributions to Human Performance Technology Research and Practice. Educational Technology Research and Development (4)6 p73-89
Thiagarajin, S. (1996).
Instructional games, simulations, and role-plays. In R.L. Craig (ed.). The ASTD
Training and Development Handbook, 4th ed., (517-533). New York
Vygotsky, L.S. 1962
(1934) Thought and language. Cambridge
Wang, Fengkwei, (1997) Using groupware technology to
construct a learning organization: A case study of a groupware-based enriched
learning a information environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University
Wiley, D.A. (2002) The
Instructional Use of Learning Objects. Agency for Instructional Technology and
the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Bloomingtion , IN.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning,
meaning, and identity. Cambridge MA Cambridge University
Wertsch, J.V, (1991) Voices of the mind: A socio-cultural
approach to mediated action. Cambridge Harvard University
Wertsch, J.V. (1995) The need for action in socio-cultural
research. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio New York Cambridge University
Wertsch, J.V., del
Rio del Rio New York Cambridge University
Wolfe, J (1994) Recollections on 25 years of Simulation & Gaming, Jun94, Vol. 25 Issue 2, p274, 5p.
[i] A tropism is a behavior of an insect, a moth. The moth cannot seem to control its behavior once it is in the presence of light. This accounts for the large number of moths that may be found circling outdoor lights.
[ii] Certainly recent efforts of Merrill and Reigeluth and for that matter the latter work of Gagne has strong cognitive elements. The point is the theories have an intellectual legacy of behaviorism that is still evident in the current constructions.
[iii] Modeling a school reform effort or constructing a computer algorithm that performs task analyses compensate for the tedium of micro theory analyses but do not seem to be pragmatic solutions. There are not any practical demonstrations of the theoretical extrapolations that are convincing in this authors view.
[iv] A theoretical elements of our practice are instances of advanced practice that do not seem to have well articulated theoretical foundations. They are anomalous and seen as excellent practice without reference to integrating theory. They are the elements of new theoretical development in the sense they challenge theoreticians to account for their apparent success.
[v] I interpret Popper as suggesting the logic of systems theory is almost too seductive. Once one has the logic of systems theory then it is tempting to widen the perspective to a broader framework. The logic of systems analysis is so compelling as to overcome normal academic caution about overreaching ones competence. Obviously a microbiologist can model an atom under consideration that same scientist moves to larger and larger systems representations he/she will find one self modeling the universe the province of astrophysicists.
[vi] The implications of an integrating theory that cuts across all three levels of theory is to complex to consider in this paper. So far as I know no theorist in IT has considered this possibility. Klein et al (2000) certainly offer some possibilities for constructing such a theory in another field. The point of this figure is that the elements of knowledge have been analyzed at each level but not yet integrated. An IT theorist/researcher could consider such a perspective when considering interventions that are offered to large populations.
[vii] An affordance is set of circumstances or intervention that activates the knowledge form. So a graduate student in IT would find working on a WEB site with an expert an affordance that permits individual explicit and the individual tacit knowledge of the expert to be modeled. The same could be said about a chat room that supported WEB construction across geographic sites. The point is the practice of applying the knowledge affords the novice an opportunity to practice complex behaviors in a coaching environment.
As a system, Typepad works fairly well.
However, there is one thing it does not do well. When you post, please sign your post - either in the title or the body so that others may know who composed it.
Otherwise I (Scott) will be the only person who knows who composed the witty and enlightening comments posted here.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled program.
For those who don't recognize the title, this bit of bad translation was one of the more enduring meme's on the internet over the last few years. It comes from a game that was translated from Japanese into English -- sorta -- and the results amused the heck out of a lot of people.
Looking over Scott's notes from PIDT, one theme that jumps out at me is the idea of ownership and identity as indicated by this group of bullets from PIDT: Tom Schwen
My initial response to this is "YAY!! FINALLY!!"
For 50 years or more EdTech/ID/MOUSE has been trying to get traction in classrooms. Cuban points out that every new tool was going to change the world and none of them did. And if you look back on it, everyone of those tools was something "we (whoever we are) owned" and expected somebody ELSE to use.
For the first time, THEY own the tools. The critical question for us now is "Do we have the traction to help everybody adopt, adapt, and implement these tools?"
- Nathan Lowell