FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2301575461> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2301575461 abstract "This paper explores and documents a learning partnership that has developed between two instructional designers employed at two different universities in Perth, Western Australia. The value of this crossinstitutional partnership is initially investigated in terms of the benefits involved for the professional careers of each instructional designer. The context of the university faculty in which the instructional designers operate is appraised. Also, the wider consequences of this partnership are considered in terms of the influence it has on other Australian tertiary education providers. The analysis of the partnership will be built upon an appropriate constructivist theoretical framework. The instructional designers involved have different yet overlapping research interests. The first author is employed in a faculty school which prepares and delivers university courses for Indigenous adult learners. Her key research interests include online course development, online assessment and staff support for online course development and teaching. She is currently studying a Doctor of Philosophy degree, specialising in multimedia technologies. The second author works within the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry and is principally concerned with assessment of the students in this area. Her main research interests include online assessment, and innovations in medical education, particularly using online courses. She is studying her Doctorate of Education in instructional design with a focus on online assessment. Four case studies that illustrate the outcomes of this learning partnership are investigated. The first case is related to the two instructional designers’ interest in assessment, specifically in the area of online assessment. In 2000 we devised a set of ten criteria used to evaluate and guide the construction of online assessment tasks. This development process was primarily driven by our belief in the value of including both qualitative and quantitative features in online assessment tasks. This set of criteria has been utilised in both of our university environments and has recently been further modified after a trial period. The second case study involves a project motivated by our identification of a need for tertiary students to improve their online communication skills. We worked together to complete a needs analysis of the situation which was followed up with the design and production of an online module or website. The third case that demonstrates the value of this learning partnership involves the authoring and production of a series of booklets that provide advice to academic staff to enhance their teaching. In this case, the partnership extended to include two additional instructional designers. Lastly, our contribution to our local instructional design interest group (IDIG) is described. The members of this group deliver presentations on various instructional design related issues at higher education campuses throughout Western Australia. Our contribution to this partnership included the facilitation of activities and discussion on the issue of appropriate instructional design paradigms. Although based locally, the group extends membership to instructional designers in other Australian states, a practice which enriches the experience and interest base of the group. In each of these cases, the paper examines this cross-institutional partnership in terms of its initial motivation, the method adopted and the measures adopted to evaluate the partnership’s outcomes. The main issues and overall outcomes of this learning partnership fall into three main categories, at a personal level, as well as intra-university faculty outcomes and inter-university outcomes at local and national levels. As members of this partnership, we recognised that we have gained a range of advantages in terms of intentional learning outcomes which have been quite specific. Additionally, we have both encountered much incidental learning in a more peripheral manner, such as our growing awareness of the various policies relating to online education adopted and followed by our two universities. At a Faculty level, our respective universities have benefited from our partnership which has resulted in the development of specific printed and online resources, staff and curriculum development, and useful research outcomes. For example, a series of booklets have been published on such topics as assessment, learning activities and discussion boards to provide academic staff with advice on how to enhance their oncampus and online teaching strategies. At a wider level, the outcomes of this learning partnership have extended to other universities and to statewide and nationwide networks of instructional designers through the exchange of ideas, supply of research data and sharing of models. In conclusion, this learning partnership is beneficial in terms of intended and non-intended outcomes. It has enabled us to learn from each other, our students, our colleagues, the courses in which we are enrolled and our different institutions. We realise that many future opportunities exist for this partnership to continue in areas such as research grant applications, authoring of conference papers and a sustained support network for instructional designers within Western Australia and across other states and territories. Introduction This paper explores a learning partnership that we have developed as two instructional designers employed at two different universities in Perth, Western Australia. Our partnership is documented primarily for the purposes of analysis and description. As Baldwin and Austin (cited in Clark & Watson, 1998, p. 63) acknowledge, academic collaboration is a topic which has existed for a long time but one which not yet been extensively researched. Being crossinstitutional in nature, our partnership is initially investigated in terms of the benefits involved for our professional careers as two individual instructional designers. Next, the context of the university faculty in which we operate is appraised. Lastly, the consequences of our partnership are considered in terms of the wider influence it has had on other Australian tertiary education providers. The analysis of the partnership is built upon an appropriate constructivist theoretical framework. The perspective of both of us as instructional designers is acknowledged in terms of our own educational beliefs and the varied pedagogies represented by the university faculties in which we operate. Outcomes and processes associated with this unique partnership represent social constructivism (Vygotsky, cited in Tam, 2000 ) at work in that both of our knowledge bases as instructional designers have been challenged, changed and shared throughout the development of our partnership. Our own academic progress has developed within the confines of this partnership through “cooperative analysis, interaction, collaboration and communication with others” (Thompson, 2000, p. 97). In the case studies presented in this paper, our work as instructional designers has fortunately been situated within the context for which the projects were intended to be used (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989). Additional case studies described in this paper demonstrate some central tenets of constructivism in that the outcome of each case study is a product that represents a personal construction of knowledge which also recognised the prior learning of each participant. Each of the instructional designers within this partnership have clearly been the active drivers of their own learning processes: ... a self-activated maker of meaning, an active agent in his own learning process. He is not one to whom things merely happen; he is the one who, by his own volition, causes things to happen. Learning is seen as the result of his own self-initiated interaction with the world (Rathborne, in Candy, 1991, p. 271). Furthermore, through our awareness of our own and each other’s metacognitive strengths, the processes associated with project and time management have often been adopted in this partnership, increasing the skills of each of us. Such metacognition “means that we reflect, critically and realistically, on what we are doing; it helps us cope with new and complex situations of all kinds” (Biggs & Moore, 1993, p. 317). The partnership As instructional designers we have different yet overlapping research interests. Maria is employed in a faculty school which prepares and delivers university courses for Indigenous adult learners. Her key research interests include online unit and course development, online assessment and the supplementary staff support for online unit development and teaching. She has recently completed a Master of Education degree, specialising in multimedia technologies, and is currently studying a Doctor of Philosophy in online learning. Amanda works within the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry and is principally concerned with assessment of the students in this area. Her main research interests include online assessment, with a focus on assessment tasks which contains both qualitative and quantitative elements. She is also involved and interested in various innovations in medical education, particularly using online courses and learning portfolios. She is studying her Doctorate of Education in instructional design with a focus on" @default.
• W2301575461 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2301575461 creator A5010315301 @default.
• W2301575461 creator A5044939109 @default.
• W2301575461 date "2001-01-01" @default.
• W2301575461 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2301575461 title "Instructional Design Partnerships Across Universities: Motivations, Methods and Measures" @default.
• W2301575461 cites W1576098422 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W19453093 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W1964560776 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W1969457250 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W1969604691 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2071693400 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2074211622 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2129890361 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2164599981 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2519067325 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2806639017 @default.
• W2301575461 cites W2964309370 @default.
• W2301575461 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W2301575461 type Work @default.
• W2301575461 sameAs 2301575461 @default.
• W2301575461 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2301575461 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2301575461 hasAuthorship W2301575461A5010315301 @default.
• W2301575461 hasAuthorship W2301575461A5044939109 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C159456220 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConcept C56739046 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C120912362 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C144133560 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C145420912 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C15744967 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C159456220 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C17744445 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C19417346 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C199539241 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C39549134 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C41008148 @default.
• W2301575461 hasConceptScore W2301575461C56739046 @default.
• W2301575461 hasLocation W23015754611 @default.
• W2301575461 hasOpenAccess W2301575461 @default.
• W2301575461 hasPrimaryLocation W23015754611 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W1522832811 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W1850486285 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W1965751678 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2030427360 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2031433573 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2069990689 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2103825702 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2124007373 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2127390553 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2150222564 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2151711647 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2183066012 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2215543246 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2272868178 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2602819197 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2751278459 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W279679083 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W3171061269 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W344351191 @default.
• W2301575461 hasRelatedWork W2181696981 @default.
• W2301575461 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2301575461 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2301575461 magId "2301575461" @default.
• W2301575461 workType "article" @default.