At this point, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed when we read about the ADDIE model for team-based instructional design or the large teams typically needed for a successful online course to be developed. It’s important to remember that we are attempting this process on a much smaller scale and tighter timetable than what is described in our reading. We’ve had one initial class meeting, mostly to discuss the course overview and the Givercraft/Survivorcraft internship that we will experience.
While we have not exactly called out a process for our approach, I believe the ADDIE model will help us to stay on track and keep us accountable to each other. This is an excerpt from a previous blog I wrote during the last Givercraft experience:
The ADDIE Model is a linear process that essentially has asks your team to:
(A)nalyze the content you want to gamify, identify what type of content is to be learned, and to consider the skills and knowledge that learners bring into the game and what technology will be used.
(D)esign the game’s instructional objectives, strategies, and assessment; create a shared document that outlines your game design, including a storyboard of how these elements will play out.
(D)evelop the game by using the technology you selected; include instructions and supplemental materials; have learners test your game and incorporate feedback into your design as needed.
(I)mplement the game only after trying it out as you intend to use it and after training instructors to become familiar with the game and its implementation.
(E)valuate throughout the game implementation using formative (during the planning process, incorporating feedback and making changes) and summative (reflection on implementation and instruction) assessments.
Applying this model for our team approach can help us to design important elements of our teacher training course design – creating a “study guide” for teachers to use throughout the Givercraft experience, lessons and units, web-based materials, planning for teacher participation, and designing how we will monitor progress and evaluate outcomes (Moore & Kearsley, 2012).
- A Study Guide – I think we can create a study guide for the training and for use throughout the Givercraft experience. This is an element that was missing from our last experience that I think could be a valuable addition. We have a website and unit plan that provide some of what could be in the study guide, but we need a “voice” to frame the experience and explain some of the understandings needed to implement the teacher responsibilities.
- Training Modules (lessons and units) – we took a major step in our analyzing stage to create a needs assessment survey to help us understand what skills training teachers will need. This information will inform our lessons and units on the training topics because we focused on the outcomes we expect from teachers. We still have to create the training lessons and/or units but with our resources from last semester, I believe each team member will be able to rework the materials to use again.
- Web-based materials – we briefly discussed learning managements systems in our first meeting, but this coming week we need to create the documents that go along with our lessons and we need a learning management system or platform to make them accessible for teachers. We are already using the Google platform for the (networking tool) discussion group and client download (and supporting materials); it may be more efficient if we add on to this with a Google Classroom hub, but I’m open to other tools once we find out the training needs and topics. The multimedia tools that can supplement our training will need to be easily hosted on whatever platform we choose.
- Student Participation – last time we had the Givercraft experience, Dr. Lee hosted a WebEx meeting and that seemed to work very well; it was recorded so teachers could watch it again for reference or if they missed the meeting. There were all the necessary tools for participation (video, asking questions, applause, chatting, etc.) and it was a great way to meet everyone and get acquainted. The reading this week challenges us to be intentional in planning for participation. I was thinking about it in terms of the twitter session hosting in our other courses. It’s important to guide the discussion with questions that are thought provoking and relevant; the questions needs to spur dialogue and collaboration and the host (trainer in our case) needs to keep the discussion pace active and relevant so that participants stay motivated and engaged.
- Monitoring & Evaluation – We tossed around an idea of having teachers who successfully completed the Givercraft experience (training, implementation, assessment) to receive a certificate of mastery or proficiency in teaching a unit in MinecraftEdu. At minimum, we will need to incorporate tools and strategies for monitoring and assisting teachers but assessing their proficiency is important in our course design process if we plan on revising and improving our training course for the next Survivorcraft experience.
I think we have a great opportunity to try new tools that we learned about in our reading this week; I plan to review as many as I can by our next meeting and we can decide the tools we want to use for our course design (and process).