Trends and Issues in Instructional Design Technology

Instructional Design differs greatly depending on the context. Looking at instructional design in business and industry, health care, and P-12 education, we can see similarities and differences. 

One of the main similarities I noticed in these three contexts was the delicate balance between cost and effectiveness. In the business and industry context, designers are typically hired to lead an instructional design project. The designer is at the mercy of the client and must balance his or her own theories and philosophies with those of the hiring party. This can be difficult when a designers name is attached to a product, but the designer is not allowed to do everything he or she feels is necessary to make the product most efficient. In health care education is a cost center, not a profit center, yet it is also of the utmost importance that those in the industry be current in the rapidly advancing knowledge base of the industry. Obviously, the cost technology integration in the education sector is high, not only when it comes to purchasing hardware and software for the school, but with the training that teachers need to receive and the research and evaluation of how effective technology is in the classroom. 

Rules and regulations play a role in each of the contexts, though not in the same way. In the private business sector, designers are held to the expectations of the hiring client. This regulates the designer, but leaves room for negotiation. In the health care system, there are numerous regulations, standards of care, and licensing procedures that must be followed. In education, we see the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 as a major influence on technology integration. NCLB sets benchmarks in place to ensure that each school in the country is involved in technology integration. There are, of course, state standards to meet as well. However, the regulation of technology integration seems vague. There are several goals, but how to reach those goals is not outlines. The expectations set by The Partnership for 21st Century Skills are wonderful, but without an outlined, research-supported plan on how to reach those goals, they begin to look lofty. By looking at the classroom-level technology integration models, it almost seems as though there is a lot of trial and error involved in technology integration.

The context in which the designer work is a major difference between the three industries. In the private business sector, designer must concern themselves with matching the culture of the business client. This includes working with subject matter experts and learning representatives to ensure that societal cultural and cross-cultural factors have been considered and respected. The health care system is so broad containing five different areas, yet most of the health education models center around the education of doctors. These models of problem-based and evidence-based learning must be considered when designing any health education instructional technology. In the classroom, there seems to be a gap between systems and product development and the development that happens at the classroom level. It seems that products and systems are created to be stand-alone products even though teachers rarely use curriculum that way. Teachers tend to pull from several sources what they believe will work with their students to accomplish their goals. 

As a teacher, I identify with several aspects of all three instructional design contexts. Lack of time and support is an obvious contextual constraint for teachers as well as private sector instructional designers. Perceived necessity can also be a problem when a teacher sees a need in the classroom, but is unable to convince the administration of this perceived necessity. Convergence in the health care field is a factor that faces health care systems, and it is an important factor in teaching as well. To fully integrate technology appropriately into our lessons, teachers strive to present information in a variety of formats and modalities to reach diverse learners and extend thinking.

I do not think that current education system is preparing learners foster the complex  problem-solving skills necessary to tackle the issues of living in an overpopulated world. I believe this is directly related to the lack of encouragement for creative thinking. In a formal learning environment, creative thinking has not always been praised. Children are constantly told to finish their work rather than applauding a student's interest in further research that was sparked by the work done in the classroom. Instead of praising children for drawing connections to the world around them, they are often told to stay on topic. It is a delicate balancing act that a teacher must perform to balance the creative thinking of the students with proper classroom management. This is where teacher-led instruction fails in the 21st century skills context. When students are involved in more project-based learning, each individual's project is unique, taking its own creative turns. This type of creative thinking and problem solving will aid the world later as it faces the problems of its environment. I think there are many countries that the US could learn from involving public education, but I think the influence should be on our educational system organization, rather than problems in instructional. Countries that value education, like Finland, have the strictest standards for teachers and compensate them accordingly. Finnish children are only required to attend school year round from age 7-16, but the schools focus on the quality of learning over the quantity allowing for the children to play outside for 90 minutes a day. Teachers use this time for curriculum planning and assessing their students' progress. Each school has equal resources and each student receives free meals and healthcare, giving each student as much of an equal chance as the school system can offer.