ETEC 561 Section 4: Human Performance Technology

Human Performance Improvement

The idea of HPI gets me in nerdy-giddy mode for several reasons starting with I feel like my MBA might be worth the two years I invested in it, two it reaffirms my LOVE for centralized processes, and three I steadies my belief that bringing together brilliant minds, money and four walls is not enough. Professionals endure years of education preaching the best in business management, human resources, learning systems and human development theories however the emergence and melding of these is often without the "bottom's" input. For example, in the workplace the current gap is a lack of motivation, innovation and general will to exceed expectations. In other words everyone is just brushing their teeth without flossing and mouthwash. 

The possible solutions can range from evaluating staff for possible dismissal to re-organizational design to team building and incentives. My recommendation for this specific gap is to focus on the individuals and have the intervention effect each individual on a macro level. The bottom line is that people like to feel special and acknowledged. (I find this particularly true with Millennials, ask Facebook.) As a result time should be spent by supervisors to have "life chats" with employees creating an informal environment where the employee is less guarded to reveal their position's challenges, offer criticisms, discuss career goals and how the supervisor can support or coach the specific employee. I find with student employees they value this time and later reflect/act on the conversations. This action addresses more than just a "we listen, we care" mission but the time can be used to develop an evolving "safe space" for employees to communicate the next bug fix for software XYZ that may normally be out of their job scope, receive professional development or talk about the direction of the company. In the end it's not just investing the time but developing the time into something meaningful for the individual. 


If you have time (about 10 minutes) the following is a video discussing what motivates us!

Electronic Performance Support Systems

This term was coined by Gloria Gery who also provides the most comprehensive definition of EPSS, in my opinion: "an integrated electronic environment that is available to and easily accessible by each employee and is structured to provide immediate, individualized on-line access to the full range of information, software, guidance, advice and assistance, data, images, tools, and assessment and monitoring systems to permit job performance with minimal support and intervention by others." 

In comparison with other definitions Gery's creates an EPSS that offers a range or collection of solutions and troubleshooting abilities. To me this is the difference between a software package and a management system. The ability to merge the applications and streamline tasks is the big ticket. I feel as if other definitions would qualify Microsoft Office as an EPSS. 

I think the potential of EPSS and their success are minimal today but are poised to be the bread and butter in the future. I am inclined to agree with the text in terms of why EPSS is not as prevalent in business today. The first being that people are not informed of the existence of EPSS and the second that potential buyers believe it is too expensive or an unnecessary cost. In addition to these issues, as a technology buyer and consultant I often run into EPSS designers who have not studied their potential buyers, do not have content experts or cannot keep up with initial client demands. This goes for those who are 3rd party or have a homegrown EPSS. Just like email vs. postal mail a culture change takes time. I believe as the younger workforce emerges into decision making roles you will see EPSS become more prominent because it will be a basic expectation of operations. The idea of doing business with 4+ software/management systems or having to wait for Paul to "fix" something is not only inconvenient but downright silly. (Especially if YouTube can show me in less than 5 minutes.

Knowledge Management

At my current workplace we have a great, by design, public knowledge repository. Some challenges we face are a lack of contributors, editors and users. Possible blended learning solutions include having each area/department designate a contributor and editor to manage their portion of the knowledge database with a regular update schedule. To train the designee in the classroom with the basics on how to use the system (add, delete, edit and navigate). Additionally, posing the designee to be an advocate of the system to use it regularly and reference it in their work outside of training. This could potentially encourage other area/department members to utilize the source as well leading the designee in a teaching role. The designee's role is ever changing with their knowledge of the system and familiarity expanding without extensive classes or training.  

Informal Learning GOLD= #SAchat

One of my biggest sources of informal learning is #SAchat. This community is very important to me as I continue my journey working in higher education and student affairs. The purpose of #SAchat started as a structured weekly chat over a voted on topic via Twitter. You can visit the webpage to learn about the idea behind #SAchat and the week's topic. During the other hours and days of the week there are on going discussions using the hashtag to contribute to the body of knowledge within the profession or ask the community a question. This experience was very unique to me and has become my online home. It is a highly active community where I just lurked at first but as I learned the social etiquette I became more engaged and involved. #SAchat and one of it's spin-offs, #SAtech, offer in-real-life social opportunities at conferences by hosting Tweetups. My current role is both contributor and listener. There is a moderator for the structured chat however there is no designated "leader" or "instructor" for the premise of #SAchat. The idea is to decentralize learning and allow the community to guide the community (how occupy of us!). Though, by observing #SAchat you can quickly identify heavy hitters easily. 

For a chuckle...blending learning at its finest!

ETEC561: Section 3- Evaluating, implementing, and managing instructional program and projects

Evaluation using the Logic Model

The logic model allows program planners to categorize the technology into situation, input, output, outcomes and evaluation study sections which specific goals. The noted advantage of the logic model is to measure the impact on large scale issues such as decreasing teenage pregnancy rates, increasing retention, etc.

The situation is determined by identifying the overall "problem", which the tool intends to reveal, so programmers are able to identify research, relevance and a starting point for the end of the evaluation process. Inputs are identified as the resources which were invested to complete the program, tangible or intangible. Outcomes are identified through the program resources that are provided to the learner, previously determined learning outcomes and quantitative/qualitative data regarding the participants. Outcomes can be divided into short-, medium- and long-term for a comprehensive assessment of the program. The last component, evaluation plan, assesses all of the planning phases by looking for indicators to confirm the input and output goals and to measure the learning outcomes indicated. 

As an instructor I would use this model because it has a comprehensive evaluation model to look at each phase of planning versus just outcomes. It puts more accountability on the programming team. This would be a great tool to use with media production students to evaluate their message, the invested resources, the product, and what the intention of the program is and was that message received. Often times students are focused on the creation of the product and lose sight of the message and its impact.

Source: Paul F. McCawley, Associate Director, University of Idaho Extension

Google+ Hangout = Love at first sight

I've recently starting using Hangout to conduct committee meetings, mentor/mentee life chats, social hangouts and for academic purposes. The relative advantage is that I get to see people face-to-face in real time. The ability to make "physical" personal connections is wildly underestimated in a world of Facebook, Twitter and blogs. The compatibility of Hangout comes from meeting my need to physically see people since I'm deaf and read lips. With the click of a button Hangout detects if a computer has a microphone and web cam attached or built in and then allows you to enter the room. Up to nine people can join one Hangout session so it's a great collaborative tool for small groups, committees and meetings. Last but not least Hangout is FREE and if you're not sure whether its for you Google has made some videos to show off. Enjoy!

Introducing new technology via situational leadership

According to Reiser & Dempsey (2007) developing a situational leadership style should be unique to one's personal character, style, and adaptive over time and with various audiences. Theoretically, I have several professional development sessions lined up to explore technology use. As a part my preparation and to assess the educator's prior knowledge I would either send out a pre-test prior to the first session or spend time at the beginning of the first session giving a pre-test. This would allow me to tailor my leadership style to the participants needs. For example, if the attendees had little background knowledge of the planned topics I would make my instructions very brief, specific and allow for breaks to prevent the feeling of being overwhelmed. However, if the pre-test assessment indicated a higher level of technology literacy I may be able to introduce technology concepts that build upon basic skills, break the attendees up into small group and assign a task involving integration, or allow group and individuals to present on technology integration. Ideally the first scenario would also experience the collaborative instruction experience before the end of the series however, it may not be as in depth.

For chuckles...

ETEC 561: Section 2- Theories & Models of Learning and Instruction

When reviewing the learning theories explained by Reiser & Dempsey there are several ways to introduce new learning concepts to learners. Two of these theories are Behavioral Learning Theory, introduced by B.F. Skinner, and Cognitive Load Theory. With a learning goal of identifying and reciting the English alphabet one could reference CLT some techniques to be used could include: teaching individual letters apart from the entire alphabet, leave some letters out of the alphabet for the learner to identify, associating letters with images (i.e. A is for apple) and verbal cues. By utilizing BLT the instruction of the alphabet may include a pre-examination to determine prior knowledge which may direct the focus on specific letters, an emphasis of observation on the learner (i.e. one-on-one instruction), immediate positive reinforcement when an answer or objective is achieved (i.e. "Way to go!", "That's correct!") and post-instruction exam. It is important to note that the instructional techniques from CLT could be integrated into the style of BLT to 1) teach the material and 2) reinforce and assess the progress of the learner after instruction. 

sources: "Gagne's 9 Events of Instruction" and Reiser & Dempsey, 2002

Above is an overview of the First Principles instructional method and Gagne's Nine Points of Instruction along with descriptions of the elements or competencies located in the First Principles as a guide. See the video below for a brief example of Gagne's model in action.

Reverting back to the example of alphabet learning goal mentioned earlier we will now look at the application of the First Principles to this same goal. The problem centered principle would call for introducing the alphabet as a whole, it's future significance to writing and reading and to tackle the alphabet at once not as individual letters to keep context of the subject. The activation principle reinforces the core of the goal to recall and identify the alphabet along with examining the prior knowledge of the learner regarding the topic in order to build upon this goal for reading, writing and spelling purposes. The demonstration principle allows instructors to relate the goal to visuals or media to increase comprehension. For example, relating a bear to the letter "B" and a narration for pronunciations and applications of the letter "B". The application principle  allows the learner to demonstrate their knowledge of the alphabet via writing of the alphabet or verbally in preparation for the "test" or final observation used for assessment. The integration principle for the alphabet goal allows learners to share their new knowledge regarding the alphabet by reciting the alphabet, create a visual of a specific letter to be displayed and progress toward the spelling of the learner's name or other words. 

To meet the alphabet goals using the whole-task approach would require learners to focus on the letters, reinforce memorization techniques and the tracing/writing of letters. The alphabet goals lay the foundation for holistic approaches such as scaffolding where the achievement of the goals would lay the foundation to complete "higher level" skills through the teaching of each letter one by one (i.e. teaching A then teaching AB, then ABC, etc.). This would then refocus to place emphasis on the "whole-task" of the alphabet as a set of 26 letters and their collaborative efforts for reading and writing. 

If designing a course on typography I would capture the student's interest by displaying rich and colorful visuals and maintain their attention by integrating student image searches for unique typography to share with the class. Allowing the students to choose their own examples for examination in the course would allow them to have a personal investment and directly link pop culture with the relevance of typography and the identification of font characteristics and types. A grading rubric would set the expectation and show the student how they can attain the highest scores reinforcing their ability to succeed when XYZ are met. Students can apply their new knowledge by creating their own fonts, posters and other visuals for demonstration, competition and real world application. 

Engaging in design research allows instructors to understand the levels of effectiveness of the various theories discussed here. Without this body of knowledge there is no way to assess the work done with real learners in their various environments. Assessment is essential to the progression of these various theories and modifying education for the success of our learners.

ETEC 561: Section 1- Defining the Field

Defining instructional design (ID) has become an evolving process much like the subjects and mediums it strives to encompass. As a result definitions for ID began by describing the mediums which were used to deliver educational content. As time progressed the other side of the spectrum was a focus of definition, the subject learners and the learning pro0cess which took place during instruction. As a result in the late 1970s the Association for Educational Communication Technology (AECT) began to define ID as a process and the use of technology mediums for instruction (Resier & Dempsey, 2007). Leading in to the 1990s and millennium the ID definition included a combination of the learning process, the mediums/resources used, evaluation, measure of learning improvement and the evolution of the creation process.

When I discuss ID and educational technology with my university colleagues they are initially perplexed by what I am referring to. As I continue in my explanation I find that I lean towards defining ID as part creative development process, part expansion of learning to initiate a higher level of learning application and demonstration, part evaluation and assessment and part the utilization of tools to execute learning instruction and tasks. 

This applies to me and my position because I am not a "classroom" instructor. I work in student affairs and enrollment management. Often times it is my responsibility to educate our students prior to their arrival on campus, during the enrollment process and while students are enrolled. I love working in co-curricular education which allows me to engage with students in a passive manner while ensuring their success at the university. My position is fairly new and is evolving in itself so one day I may be studying marketing strategies for recruiting prospective students while the next day I may be working with health and counseling services to develop an educational module regarding alcohol and drugs or the orientation office to develop online modules. The definition I have provided helps me stay focused when beginning project management and working with content experts. 

The model is centered around four main ideas of identifying the learner and the environment they will be completing the task in (i.e. classroom, online, etc.), the criteria for assessment (goals & objectives), the development of the actual ID component (i.e. module) and the performance of the assessment measures. The fifth component, revisions, is to ensure that the ID does not become static in nature but dynamic to adjust as needed for the learner and instructor. To tie in with my ID definition this revised model emphasizes a learner centered approach focused on development and assessment. 

When analyzing the six characteristics of ID the revised model easily identifies these concepts. The learner is the center of the audience, goals/objectives and assessment ideas which help develop an appropriate ID for a user centered experience while incorporating the units for measure (characteristics 1-4). With a dynamic revision process built in the design allows itself to be self-correcting, flexible and adaptable to the learner's needs (characteristic 5). Additionally, the easy break-out and clear partitions of the revised model allow individuals or small teams to take on a component to allow for intense collaboration and cohesiveness (characteristic 6).  For example, the development component would likely require a graphic designer, content expert and media expert at a minimum.

The internet is the ultimate vehicle for information dissemination. The ability to communicate synchronously across cities, states and countries is amazing. With this in mind we can now combine all of the media types (tv, radio, etc.) into web based content. This allows learners and educators to capture content anywhere online and contribute content as well. 

My favorite example of educational technology in higher education at the moment is The Open University.  The focus is on open "source" education, sharing and collaboration of learning tools. In K-12 students are diving into multiple web 2.0 tools such as Glogster and completely online public schools such as Florida Virtual School. In the future I see students completing more "core" or basic materials at home for homework including tests and reviews using Moodle or another LMS. Class time would be used for group work, presentations and "workshop" style learning. Continuing/adult education is already being dramatically impacted by the internet and software to complete online courses. In the future I see online courses evolving into more interactive tasks that employ a learner centered experience versus a syllabus and lists of tasks.  Regardless of the age of the learner I believe strongly that technology will help instructors complete core education standards online and use classroom time to explore those "higher level of thinking" areas. For online education I would like to see it evolve into a more interactive experience with face-to-face time (Google+ Hangout, Skype, Voicethread).