Reading Reflection Week 10

                After reading about instructional design/technology in these three contexts, I found a few different recurring themes.  Obviously, I felt instructional design/technology in P-12 education and higher education had the most in common, however, I did find some similarities between them and a business context.

                One recurring theme I found between all three contexts was how the instructional designers do not work on their own.  They typically work in teams.  The teams could, obviously, be made up differently depending on the context.  For example, in a business context, there may be a leader, a consultant, a client, maybe an expert.  All of these people make up the instructional design team.  In P-12 education, the team may be a trainer, a teacher, and the learner.  This team could also consist of administrators in the school system.  In higher education, the team consists of experts, an instructional designer, and even a whole committee of people.  In each context, it wasn’t just an instructional designer doing all of the work.  Each person that makes up the team comes together to create a “product” of some sort.  This product could be a great employee, a great learning program, efficient teaching and learning in the classroom or even a great training program.

                Another recurring theme I found across all three contexts was assessment or evaluation.  In each context, they used some sort of assessment or evaluation to see if their instructional design worked.  Whether it be a certain training they conducted or how students learned after a concept was taught.  Assessment is extremely important for instructional designers because these professionals are training and creating a “product”.  Without assessment, they do not know if what they are creating works.

                The last recurring theme I found across all three contexts was quite obvious.  The use of technology was evident for instructional designers in all three contexts.  Instructional designers in the context of business used technology for training purposes.  In the context of P-12 education, the instructional designers helped teachers implement lessons that involved technology.  In the context of high education, most of the instructional designers discussed using technology for distance learning or for training purposes.

                When I read the first chapter, the chapter on instructional design in the context of business, I had a hard time seeing how it was relevant to the context of instructional design in education.  After reading all three chapters, it is now easy to see the similarities.  I have enjoyed learning more about instructional design after seeing how it is directly used in education.