From my original post:Learning with design and technology appears to have almost limitless possibilities in 2024 because of the number of online tools available from YouTube videos to personalized AI tutors that can be fed datasets to help teach on a specific topic. I would summarize by saying that LDT is the process by which learners build their skills using any means beyond oral tradition. Perhaps the first instructional designers (IDers) were drawing petroglyphs on stone walls a thousand years ago to instruct their tribe about what large predators to look out for and the evasive maneuvers one needed to take to survive.
My initial understanding of Learning Design and Technology (LDT) was simple, akin to a child offering a single daisy to a friend. Now, my knowledge has grown and evolved, much like a tulip farmer tending to vast fields of vibrant colors stretching as far as the eye can see in full bloom. My current definition of LDT not only includes learners building their skills, as I initially thought, but also recognizes the many “possibilities” for different areas of expertise within the field of Instructional Design (ID) that must be considered when defining it.
Leigh & Tracey (2010) point to the description of ID work as “a purposeful activity to facilitate learning through a combination of strategies, activities, and resources” (Sims & Koszalka, 2008, as cited in Leigh & Tracey, 2010, p.33). More succinctly, ID work is “the application of theories of learning and instruction to the creation of learning material and… online learning experiences” (Maclean & Scott, 2011, p. 557). I never fully considered the wide range of competencies needed to become a skilled instructional designer, but now it is much more clear to me that ID professionals are much more than just “PowerPoint jockeys” relying solely on curriculum design skills.
Through the Investigating the Profession group assignment, I learned how varied the work of instructional design can be, depending on the environment. From the early mornings and fast pace of a K-12 Instruction and Engagement Coach to the pressures of being part of a small corporate team conducting client support for a Learning Management System (LMS), the variety of ID work showcased throughout this course has opened my eyes to the possibilities within this field. The knowledge gained throughout this course has truly provided me with a foundation upon which to build a career.
The role of ethics in ID work is paramount to making long-lasting organizational change. By examining ethics through the design paradigms found in Leigh & Tracey’s (2010) review of ID practice, we can articulate the nuances of ethical considerations in the instrumental, communicative, pragmatic, and artistic approaches to the role of an instructional designer. ID professionals need codes of ethics when designing objectives to ensure that the courses created are inclusive, particularly for those with disabilities. When an ID professional’s duty involves consensus-building, the methods used to collect and distribute data must be mindful of learner privacy. From a pragmatic perspective, there needs to be a code of ethics for tasks associated with revising content to consider the diversity of learners. Lastly, from an artistic approach, ID professionals who produce creative content must understand copyright laws to ensure compliance across time and borders. Above all, ID professionals who adhere to a code of ethics are skilled at maintaining professionalism.
In my own practice of designing courses at a small sailing school, I need to be vigilant in citing any materials garnered from the American Sailing Association’s website or curriculum in my learning modules to help avoid any legal implications for the school owner.
I am particularly impressed by how Lin (2007) examines ethics within the realm of instructional technologists and identifies strategies most commonly used by his research participants, including “team communication, laws and policies, management consultation, professional integrity, and technical solutions” (p.433) to help maintain an ethical code in their work. Instructional designers are seen as “change agents” with a responsibility to society as a whole, not just to the law or to the almighty dollar. Of course, we need to work within the confines and interests of our employers, but if it were up to me, I would only choose projects that align with my values and ethics to improve the learner’s experiences and empower them. To carve out a career in this field, I may need to compromise my interests, but never my values.
Leigh, H. N., & Tracey, M. W. (2010). A review and new framework for instructional design practice variation research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 23(2), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.20080
Lin, H. (2007). The ethics of instructional technology: Issues and coping strategies experienced by professional technologists in design and training situations in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 411–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9029-y
MacLean, P., & Scott, B. (2011). Competencies for learning design: A review of the literature and a proposed framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01090.x
Leave a Reply