Blog Post #1: 

Based on the course outline and the reading for Week 2, the following assessment strategies are being used in the course:

Strategies Being Used:

1. Assessing Learning:
   • The course includes various learning outcomes and objectives that will be evaluated, such as identifying prominent learning theories, comparing learning design approaches, understanding learning design components, and developing an interactive learning resource.
   • These objectives suggest that the course will have assessments to gauge the student’s understanding and application of the material.
2. Feedback:
   • While specific methods of providing feedback are not explicitly detailed in the outline, it is reasonable to infer that feedback will be a part of the course, especially given the focus on developing and refining interactive learning environments. Constructive feedback is essential in such a process to guide students in improving their designs.
3. Reliability and Validity:
   • The course explicitly includes an outcome related to examining the reliability and validity of assessments. This indicates that students will engage in activities that ensure the assessments they design are both reliable and valid.

Strategies Not Explicitly Detailed:

1. Measuring Learning:
   • The outline does not explicitly describe how the measurement of learning will be conducted. While it can be inferred that learning will be measured through assignments and projects, the specific methods and tools for measuring learning are not detailed.
2. Alignment and the Assessment Triangle:
   • There is no explicit mention of the assessment triangle (alignment between learning objectives, instructional activities, and assessments) in the course outline. Although the course covers components of learning design, including assessment, and aims to help students construct well-aligned learning design strategies, the direct use of the assessment triangle as a framework is not specified.

The Week 2 assessment-related questions connect to several learning theories from Week 1. Here’s how they align:

Learning Theories and Week 2 Assessment Strategies

1. Behaviorism:
   • Assessment of/for/as Learning: Behaviorism focuses on observable behaviors and the responses to stimuli. In assessment, this can translate to evaluating specific, measurable outcomes through clear criteria. The concept of “assessment of learning” aligns with behaviorist principles, where learning is assessed through observable changes in behavior or performance.
   • Formative and Summative Assessment: Behaviorism supports the use of both formative (ongoing, during learning) and summative (final, after learning) assessments to reinforce desired behaviors and skills through repetition and reinforcement.
2. Constructivism:
   • Assessment of/for/as Learning: Constructivism emphasizes the learner’s active role in constructing knowledge based on their experiences. “Assessment for learning” aligns well with this theory as it focuses on using assessment as a tool to guide and improve the learning process, encouraging reflection and deeper understanding.
   • Formative and Summative Assessment: Formative assessments are particularly important in constructivist learning environments, as they provide continuous feedback and opportunities for learners to reflect, adapt, and build upon their understanding.
3. Connectivism:
   • Feedback: Connectivism highlights the importance of networks and connections in the learning process. Feedback within a networked environment can help learners understand how their knowledge and skills are connected and how they can apply them in different contexts.
   • Reliability and Validity: In a connective approach, ensuring that assessments are reliable and valid is crucial, as learners often gather and synthesize information from diverse sources. This helps maintain the integrity of the learning process and the accuracy of assessments.

As an undergraduate computer science student, this learning design course presents both similarities and differences when compared to typical computer science courses. Here’s a detailed comparison, emphasizing specific examples and the relevant learning theories and strategies:

Similarities:

1. Structured Learning Outcomes:
   • Both courses provide clear learning outcomes. In computer science courses, they might include specific programming skills, understanding algorithms, or mastering data structures. Similarly, this learning design course outlines objectives such as identifying learning theories and developing interactive learning environments.
   • Theoretical Connection: The clear learning outcomes in both courses align with behaviorist principles, which emphasize setting specific, measurable goals and assessing learning through observable outcomes.
2. Project-Based Learning:
   • In computer science courses, I often engaged in project-based learning, such as developing software or working on group projects. This learning design course also involves planning, designing, and developing an interactive learning environment.
   • Theoretical Connection: Project-based learning is grounded in constructivist theory, which posits that learners construct knowledge through active engagement and practical application.

Differences:

1. Focus on Learning Theories:
   • Computer science courses typically emphasize technical skills and theoretical knowledge specific to computing, such as algorithmic thinking and software engineering principles. In contrast, this learning design course places significant emphasis on understanding learning theories (behaviorism, constructivism, connectivism) and applying them to educational contexts.
   • Strategy: While computer science focuses on problem-solving and analytical thinking, the learning design course emphasizes metacognitive strategies—reflecting on how learning happens and how it can be facilitated.
2. Assessment Types and Feedback:
   • In computer science, assessments often include coding assignments, exams, and practical projects, with feedback focused on correctness, efficiency, and coding practices. The learning design course, however, includes a broader range of assessment strategies like formative assessments (ongoing feedback), summative assessments (final evaluations), and reflective assessments.
   • Theoretical Connection: The comprehensive approach to assessment in the learning design course aligns with constructivist and connectivist principles, which advocate for ongoing feedback and reflection to deepen understanding and adapt learning processes.
3. Technology Integration:
   • Both courses incorporate technology, but in different ways. Computer science courses use technology primarily as a subject of study (e.g., learning programming languages, software tools). In the learning design course, technology is a medium to enhance teaching and learning (e.g., using digital tools to create interactive learning environments).
   • Strategy: This aligns with connectivism, which emphasizes the role of technology and networks in learning, highlighting how digital tools can facilitate connections and access to information.

Specific Examples:

• Algorithms and Data Structures vs. Learning Theories:
  • In a typical computer science course on algorithms, I might learn about sorting algorithms, their efficiency, and their implementation in various programming languages. This involves understanding theoretical concepts and applying them to solve specific problems.
  • In the learning design course, I might study behaviorism, constructivism, and connectivism, understanding how each theory informs different teaching strategies and designing learning activities that reflect these theories.
• Software Development Projects vs. Interactive Learning Environments:
  • In a software development course, I might work on a project to develop a web application, focusing on user requirements, system design, coding, testing, and deployment.
  • In the learning design course, I would develop an interactive learning environment, focusing on learning objectives, engagement strategies, assessment methods, and the use of educational technology tools.

Comments: