As we dive into a conversation about what it means to design for education (and what a critical approach to instructional design might look like), let’s first pause for a moment and consider the landscape of traditional instructional design. You’ll have an opportunity in this module to explore and think about some of those traditional frameworks and practices, but right now we want to take a more holistic view of the field.
One thing we need to acknowledge is the origin story of instructional design — where this field started and what forces influenced its initial shape. ID’s history in both military and corporate settings continues to reverberate in the some of the ID practices that continue today. It’s always worth considering what values and assumptions are baked into the history of any practice, and we should do this with ID, as well.
One of those values would be that of efficiency. Traditional ID often operates from an assumption that efficiency (both efficient teaching and efficient learning) is a unassailable goal for us to work towards. Consider your own relationship with the notion of efficiency? When does a commitment to efficiency rule your choices, and when are you willing to leave it by the wayside.
Traditional ID is also often interested in tidiness — design that clearly connects dots (say from objective to activity to assessment) or that makes it impossible for a learner to “lose their way.” Again, consider your own relationship with this idea. When is tidiness a value you embrace — when would you reject it?
For those of us who are interested in fostering emergence in our classrooms, allowing space for students to explore in ways that might redirect the path of course, traditional ID may feel like a square peg in a round whole. “Designing for emergence” can seem like an oxymoron though. “Design” suggests forethought, planning, and a sense of predictability. How, then, do we create educational experiences that still leave space for emergence?
In this module, we hope that you have an opportunity to unpack these ideas and explore what a different approach to instructional design might look like. If, ultimately, your design practices should engage with and compliment your pedagogical practices (and values!), then we should also be open to the idea that there is no “one size fits all” ID approach. We hope your work in this module leads you down a path toward discovering your own approach.