Instructional Design of Task Using Cognitive Information Processing Techniques - Assignment Example

Running Header: THE BENEFITS OF HANDS-ON TRAINING The Benefits of Hands-on Training: Learning Proper Methods of OH&S Inspections Your University Introduction For decades, cognitive psychologists have sought to unlock the mysteries of the workings of the human mind. Piaget developed a series of steps of cognitive development that served as the initial paradigm for measuring growth of the mind, and his work was later augmented and, in many minds, supplanted by the tenets of information-processing. This way of thinking sees the mind as an organ that develops according to a relatively predictable, relatively stable timetable, where growth is measured by the amount and the complexity of information that can be processed in a certain amount of time. However, even after decades of research and analysis, questions remain as to the optimal educational processes, particularly as they relate to comprehension and mastery of vocational tasks. For the purposes of this paper, an OH&S inspection tour of a meat-processing plant has been established (more details of this tour can be found in Appendix A). The discussion of this tour answers four main questions: How have I personally engaged in problem solving, critical and reflective thinking in planning the task? How will the participants be encouraged to engage in problem solving, and to use capacities for critical and reflective thinking? How will the participants be encouraged to actively learn and construct their own mindsets as a result of this sample task? How did my personal opinions and beliefs about learners and learning affect the design of the task itself? Task Analysis: Question One Regarding my own involvement in the conceptualization and development of this task, it would be instructive to use Gick’s model (1986) of the problem solving process, as follows: The broken line indicates the personal path of analysis, as indicated in Appendix A. I outlined the problem at hand: how to design a training tool that would meet the needs of trainees. I made an outline that represented the challenges and requirements, and focused on the key tenets that I wanted trainees to bring away from their time at the meat-processing plant. These key tenets are contained in Appendix A. My prior experience in taking and conducting inspection tours helped me in compiling a list of requirements for participants to follow, educational activities, pre-trip instruction for my trainees, and a list of procedures for the training day itself. This movement from prior memory to existing project was the result of schema activation. The actual task of conducting the inspection, as outlined in Appendix A, shows how I took the problem and broke it down into such parts as the site and time of the inspection, the particular trainees, my goals and objectives, the specific training activities, and ways to evaluate the quality of the training. As far as personal involvement goes, the development of the training procedure originated in my own personal experiences and memories, and the schema formation showed considerable time and reflection. Additionally, the process of choosing specific training activities and eliminating other potential activities demonstrates a level of critical thinking (Bruning, Schraw, Ronning 1999). Another way to describe this process of critical examination, combined with preparation of a specific task, is metacognition, which connects knowledge and regulation of cognition (Schraw, 1998). Task Analysis: Question Two Before entering the training environment, the participants will receive a set of problems to solve while they are engaged in the exercise. Another of Gick’s diagrams (1986) can be used to show the mental processes involved: Here, the dotted line represents the mental process used by the participants to move from problem to solution. Because the process of inspecting a meat-processing plant will be new to most, if not all, of the trainees, there will be no schema based on prior experience (Tovey, 1999). Several strategies are used to encourage the participants to creatively engage the problems presented. One of these involves preparing the trainees for the inspection task. Before the training session takes place, such whole-class activities as brainstorming about the nature of OH&S inspections and teaching the trainees about terminology specific to the industry, as well as going through simulated problems similar to those faced in the actual inspection. Another strategy involves ensuring that participants are given enough time to generate solutions for problems that are, at least in the field, new to them. This is why the whole-group tour of the plant, which may plant seeds of various ideas in the minds of the trainees as to potential problems and solutions, is followed by visits in smaller groups that set their own pace. Additionally, participants are encouraged to develop more than one answer for a particular problem, as many issues that arise in the meat-processing industry have multiple answers. Asking for multiple solutions leads to higher levels of critical thinking and reflection. The ability to communicate with on-site workers and other experts familiar with the meat-processing industry leads to questioning on a variety of levels, which also stimulates critical thinking. After the inspection is over, participants are also encouraged to reflect on their activities before developing a list of recommended solutions – this leads to the development of a CORE model (Calfee, Chambliss & Beretz, 1994). Using the rest of the class as an evaluative committee for these recommendations brings the task to the highest level of critical thinking. Task Analysis: Question Three According to Bruning, Schraw and Ronning (1999), dialectical constructivism refers to the “learners contribution to meaning and learning through both individual and social activity… In the constructivist view, learners arrive at meaning by selecting information and constructing what they know” (p. 215). One crucial part of training employees is helping them develop ways to make their own personal constructs for processing and assimilating information in order to develop individual approaches to their work. As mentioned before, brainstorming and whole-group discussion are used as springboards for critical thinking. At the inspection site, participants are given the chance to set their own pace of learning in small groups, and to use their interactions with site workers to develop their own set of knowledge. This communication recognizes the importance of Vygotsky’s concept of the zone of proximal development, or ZPD. This refers to the difference in difficulty level between a problem that a new employee could solve independently, and a problem that a new employee could only solve with the assistance of an expert (Bruning, Schraw, Ronning, 1999). As communication between workers and participants increases, this zone should shrink. Another educational concept that comes into play here is the concept of instructional scaffolding – a pedagogical strategy giving the learner the assistance needed to solve a problem that falls somewhere within the ZPD (Bonk & Kim, 1998). This is carried out by the trainer in the pre-inspection whole-group activities, as well as including the trainer in the inspection, but only as a support role, and in the post-inspection reflection, but only providing support and clarification to the evaluative committee. This mock committee, made up of training participants, gives the trainees an opportunity to view their inspection from all sides. Task Analysis: Question Four I subscribe to the incremental theory of cognitive development, as outlined by Bruning, Schraw, and Ronning (1999). In other words, intelligence changes over time, and increases in measurable, predictable amounts. This paradigm has been called a learning-oriented system, because it is centered on the individual learner, not the pedagogical process. When the training process is developed, the first focus is on creating a successful learning process, rather than setting a laundry list of goals. The objectives that are eventually set serve as the floor, or minimum, expectations of the learning that will take place through the task (Alderman, 1999), as opposed to setting maximum expectations that will most likely remain unmet. Because individuals and groups are responsible for establishing their own pace of learning, and their own areas of focus, there is no correct way to go through the training. While there is an evaluation phase, this is intended to spur critical thinking, rather than to decide who has solved the problems “correctly.” This task design permits the expression of multiple intelligences, or strengths in some areas, balanced by weaknesses in others (Gardner & Hatch, 1989). These multiple intelligences can be strengthened when complementary members work together in groups to arrive at solutions. The establishment of an evaluative committee gives members the opportunity to choose a role on that committee that plays to their specific areas of strength. Motivation then comes from a combination of sources, both cognitive and social: the individual desires to succeed, and to be perceived as a success. This social aspect to learning is one of the crucial reasons that whole-group and small-group training contexts are used. I have also found that trainee attitudes can either create opportunities or hindrances for learning. Depending on how the trainee perceives his or her need for training, that task may either succeed or fail. One characteristic of a superior trainer is the ability to maximize the number of participants who perceive that their training time will be valuable and useful. Conclusion Clearly, there are many factors that influence the ways that people learn, and the effectiveness of that learning. Studies will continue to abound that seek to find the perfect mix of teaching methods to develop the most efficient pedagogical methods for any circumstance. It seems clear that permitting critical analysis and thought allow trainees sufficient access to higher levels of thinking to create a sense of ownership, and therefore interest. Works Cited Alderman, M.K., (1999) Motivation and achievement possibilities for teaching and learning: Lawrence Eribaum. Malwah, New Jersey. Bandura, A, (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control: Freeman, New York City. Bonk, C. J. & Kim, K.Y., (1998) “Extending sociocultural theory to adult learning. In Smith, M.C. & Pourchot T, Adult learning and development: perspectives from educational psychology: Lawrence Eribaum. Mahwah, New Jersey. Bruning, R.H., Schraw, G.J., & Ronning, R.R., (1999) Cognitive psychology and instruction: Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Calfee, R., Chambliss, M., & Beretz, M, (1991) “Organising for comprehension and composition. In Bowler, R, & Ellis, W, All language and the creation of literacy: Orton Dyslexia, Baltimore. Gardner, H., & Hatch, T (1989) Multiple intelligences go to school: Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Gick, M.L., (1986) Problem0solving strategies, Educational Psychologist. McCombs, B.L., (1991) Motivation and lifelong learning, Educational Psychologist. Schraw, G, (1998) “On the development of adult metacognition.” In Smith, M.C. & Pourchot, T, Adult learning and development: perspectives from educational psychology: Lawrence Erlbaum. Mahwah, New Jersey. Tovey, M, (1999) Mentoring in the workplace: Prentice Hall. Sydney. Appendix A The task at hand: Planning an inspection trip inside a meat-processing plant. The trip is designed as one part of a multi-component OH&S training process. Twenty trainees already somewhat familiar with safety inspections and employed somewhere in the food processing industry are in the large group. Goal: To emerge with a greater familiarity of OH&S issues that apply to industrial facilities, particularly in the meat-processing industry. This takes places as the result of brainstorming to identify potential hazards and of whole-group instruction as to industry-specific terminology. Before the inspection: Brainstorming Demonstration of an inspection system, and of report generation. Splitting into smaller groups During the inspection: Whole-group tour Smaller group tours Communication with site workers and others familiar with the meat-processing industry Generation of reports After the inspection: Finalization of reports Development of evaluative committee Presentation of relevant issues and recommendations Analysis of results Post-activity evaluation: Individual participant surveys Trainer surveys Read More