I noticed this post sitting in my drafts when I was reminded to complete my assignment from Week 11. Oops! I will share it in its incomplete form, as the completed form will be part of my final assignment 🙂
In Science Literacy, Gagne’s 9 events of instruction seem to be utilized in the course design, to varying degrees of success. Each module consists of pre-tests, touch-points and end assessments which is one of the goals Arshavskiy outlines (2016). The feedback provided in the course is almost exclusively confirmative feedback “acknowledging that the learning has completed required tasks” (Arshavskiy, 2016). The feedback given during quizzes when a learner provides an incorrect answer is “this should not be selected”. If one were to take the quizzes without reviewing the material, one could continue guessing until the right answers were provided. This Behaviourist approach doesn’t seem to be used as thoughtful evaluation of the learning or where the course might provide more guidance for the learning.
From a cursory glance through the course, the ADDIE Model also seems to stop short of the evaluation phase. This is evidenced through the large amount of discussion topics that have not been replied to that address frustration with the course design itself. I think this model was chosen because of the lack of interaction between learners and instructors, to fit the varying needs of the learners. Ultimately I think this creates more barriers to learning the materials and would contribute to attrition in this course and others like it.
To improve the lack of interaction I might consider using a mentor system which allows learners to help facilitate the learning and provide additional connections to the course material that is more individualized and personal.
Arshavskiy, M. (2016). Leveraging Gagné’s nine events of instruction . Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/leveraging-gagnes-nine-events-of-instruction