ETEC 578

Reading Discussion 1: Dimensions of the Instructional Design...

Chapters 1 & 2 present the dimensions of the instructional design knowledge base, along
with general systems theory and how it has been incorporated into instructional design
models. The beliefs and assumptions about knowledge and learning presented in these
chapters are those that prevailed in the instructional design & technology (IDT) field as
it evolved over time. However, as an instructional designer, its important for you to be
aware of your own beliefs (and assumptions) about the nature knowledge and
capabilities of the knower. These beliefs are referred to as your epistemological or
epistemic stance. Ones epistemic stance has a profound impact on how she or he
approaches the design and delivery of instruction.

For your initial post, reflect on whether your stance is primarily positivist, relativist, or
contextualist (often called hermeneutical). Positivists believe that the only truth or
knowledge is objective truth. Relativists dont believe that objective truth is possible and
that all knowledge is subjective to perception or relative to a particular frame of
reference. Contextualists believe that truth or knowledge is relative to context rather
than individual, subjective understanding. (By all means take a look at more
information on each stance as you think through this.)
Next, identify an instance when your perspective as a learner conflicted with that of your
instructor (perhaps a grade assigned or difference in understanding over a concept).
Describe the conflict that you experienced and analyze whether opposing epistemic
stances may have been at the heart of the conflict. Then consider whether your analysis
gives you any new insight on who (or what) was right or wrong in that situation. Be sure
to give reasons why

Reading Discussion 1: Dimensions of the Instructional Design Knowledge Base

The three epistemics are all intriguing and I found it very challenging to place myself in
just one category. After deep thought and much contemplation I found myself leaning
more towards being a contextualist. Contextualist are thought to look into the context
when examining work or situations and find solutions based by that particular context
alone. Throughout my education journey I have encountered instructors that I felt did
not feel or think the same way I tend to. Like most of my students today I found myself
asking the million dollar question "why do I need to know/learn this?" I felt as if a lot of
the material being presented to me wasn't for me. When I was being presented with
material that wasn't "for" me I would find myself not taking the subject seriously and
just do enough to get through the requirements. However, when the material was "for"
me I put my all towards the subject because I knew in the long run it would only be
beneficial.

Now a days I find myself as a teacher telling students that they should always put their
best foot forward towards any subject because in the long run you never know what life
will present so you must always be prepared. But, I myself still don't live true to this
statement. In staff development meetings I find myself zoning out when we discuss
topics that relate to core teachers. Why??? Because I'm not a core teacher and that
information doesn't apply to me. I desire to learn as much as I can from as many people
as I can for the same statement I relay to my students, "in the long run you never know
what life will present so you must always be prepared."