Figure 1 Example of QR-code. |
Figure 2 Example of the map. |
Process
So how did we come to our final design? We used the ADDIE-model to guide our process: so we started with a context and learner analysis, formulated design principles based on this, used these principles as guidelines to design and develop the lesson, provided an implementation plan and an evaluation plan (which was mainly aimed at evaluating the TPACK-competencies of the teacher).
In my opinion the process went smooth. As a group we worked well together - even though a lack of sufficient communication skills with respect to the English language sometimes caused misunderstandings (but this also helped improving my English language skills) - and we devided the tasks equally. But, looking back, I think we could have made the link between the analysis and the design principles and the design itself more explicit in our report. To me it now looks as if the principles just fall from the sky - even though that is not true - and we did not explicitly write down how these principles were operationalized specifically in our design.
Using the TPACK-model
The TPACK-model was really helpful in designing this lesson. It shows the three main components of a lesson (content, pedagogy and technology). By looking at it, it reminded me of the interrelationship of these components. When thinking about the technology (smartphones) it forced me to take the other components into account too. This was really insightful. The model also helped to structure my thinking. During the first meetings with our group we started brainstorming on lesson ideas. Using the TPACK-model, we were forced to think of a content, a pedagogy and a technology. Before knowing the model I would probably only have thought about the content and then about filling in the steps of the Expanded Events of Instruction of Gagné (in Smith & Ragan, 2005).
Stimulating teachers
Fisser (2006) mentions the Concerns-Based Adoption Model by Hord, Rutherford, Huling-Austin and Hall. This model summarizes the stages of concern of teachers about an innovation (see Figure 3). Using technology can be seen as an innovation.
Figure 3 Concerns-Based Adoption Model, according to Fisser (2006). |
References
Fisser, P. (2006). Using ICT in higher education: From pilot to implementation, who is involved? In Whitelock, D. & Wheeler, S. (eds.), ALT-C 2006: The next generation. Research proceedings. Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University.
Smith, P., & Ragan, T. (2005). Instructional design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Smith, P., & Ragan, T. (2005). Instructional design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Hi Peter,
BeantwoordenVerwijderenThank you for your reflection and for particpating in my course! Very interesting that you mention CBAM here again. Looking at your final report and at what you write in this blogpost I wonder if you and your group could have elaborated a bit more on how to support the school or the specific teacher in implementing the QR codes. Are they concerned or already enthusiastic? Where in the model are they? And what could you have done if you already knew in which stage they are?