MIT 510: Design and Development of Instructional Technology
MIT 510. Design and Development of Instructional Technology (3). Prerequisite: Instructional Systems Design: Theory and Research. Emphasizes skills and understanding necessary to create effective, efficient, and appealing instruction in any content area and with any medium, including live instruction. Addresses both "process" and "product." Process is concerned with activities and media required to create and deliver the instruction. Product is concerned with what the instruction should accomplish. Students will lead a team that designs, produces, implements and evaluates an instructional system developed for a field site. Team leaders ensure the quality and integrity of the design and report.
Product
Context and Conditions
'The Office of International Programs: a commitment to customer service' was completed in the spring of 2007 in partial fulfillment of a course entitled: MIT 510: Design and Development of Instructional Technology. This course was taught by Dr Mahnaz Moallem. My partner for this semester-long project was AiXia Zhang. The analysis was conducted to identify what might have caused the customer service performance problems identified on a recent survey. As international students and faculty increased, the demand for the OIP's services was strained and customer service faltered. Jenn Fernandez-Villa, Director of International Student and Scholar Services, responded to a mass email sent to possible clients at the beginning of our project.
Scope
This project entailed two reports: a front end analysis and a training plan.
By analyzing the organization of the OIP (the operating system and training system), and conducting data gathering activities, the instructional design team created a front end analysis report. This report identified in detail all facets of the problem, listed possible causes and solutions. After careful analysis, instructor-led training was the recommended solution.
To facilitate the implementation of this recommendation, a training plan was designed and documented. This training plan served as a blueprint on which to build the training. It included descriptions of several deliverables or training materials (i.e., instructor guidebooks, student handouts and awareness materials). It also included possible development team staffing, budget and instructional design process phases.
Role
I worked with one other classmate to conduct all project activities. We also worked with several of the OIP staff in order to conduct our instructional design process.
We were required by necessity to perform all of the different roles of the instructional design team ourselves. We needed to be analysts, designers, developers and managers. Although we planned for implementation and evaluation, we did not actually deliver the proposed training. The plan was the final product. We surveyed the customers of the office, and interviewed the staff using Rossett (1987) as a guide. Both data collection instruments required careful development and analysis in order to draw valid and reliable conclusions. We designed not only the method of our analysis and reporting, but also the phases of instruction and evaluation.
Reflection
This report was written in the spring following MIT 500, my first introduction to the systematic design of instruction. Because of the mistakes I made in that class, I ensured commitment and 'buy in' from the client for this project. I asked for a one hour meeting with the client per week which allowed for open communication and ultimately a more useful end product. Although the recommended solution as we designed it was not implemented, I am proud that the process initiated positive changes in the Office of International Programs.
Another area of focus was working as a part of a team. My classmate and I made clear distinctions as to our roles and responsibilities, unlike in the earlier class. I met with the client and conducted staff interviews, while she managed the report writing. This cooperation made our efforts much more time-effective.
At the time I was concentrating on instructional interventions, but if I had to do the project again, I would allow myself to also recommend non-instructional solutions. For instance, the office layout was changed after our project which I feel was an indirect result of our analysis.