The best learning experiences for me as learner and teacher have been those that relied on a community of practice approach. For example, as a teacher the ethics course I wrote about in a previous post Capturing the Unicorn was my best reviewed and rewarding course. As a learner my most enduring learning has also come from communities of practice approaches with the caveat that as a learner I need some structure built in with deadlines and deliverables otherwise my attention goes bouncing off towards other communities.

In my design work I rely on a template that was developed by the Centre of Learning Transformation at our college to develop a course map, then build out the lessons and activities from that position. I have never considered the “model” behind the tool. I just adopted the tool my colleagues developed for our institutions when we pivoted to online learning quickly and our instructors needed a guide to move courses online. Since Covid 19 took hold I have been more involved with designing learning. I learned how to do this through a course offered by the Centre of Learning Transformation at Coast Mountain College called “WALA 3410 Distributed Learning : Navigating the Strange Lands of Pedagogy at a Distance” where instructors were gathered to learn how to create online learning in response to the pivot. In that course we were given a template to build out our course maps. It has worked well for me. I have now built multiple online courses and even a program with it as the base but with the readings in this course I need to ask myself what model is this tool grounded in? Why was it put forward as the one to use during April 2020? In this post I am going to deconstruct that mapping tool and try to understand the model that underpins its use and consider the developers point of view for creating this map template. Dr. Carrie Nolan and Dr. Nicki Rehn were the creators of this map and gave me permission to share it on my blog here. I have added links of interest about their work below this post.

Here is a link to a video I created looking at the map being used to develop a course in the very early stages.

Here is a link to the business ethics map I am currently working with.
Link to the Ethics Course Map

If we relate this tool designed for instructors at our institution as a starting point we can see it includes the elements of design and develop from the ADDIE model. The map itself lays out how to design for learning with the goals of learners meeting the outcomes and requires a listing of the content assets of the course. The ADDIE model is criticized for being time consuming and while we see parallels of ADDIE with the mapping tool I think the need for speed did not allow us to adopt it fully instead they adopted Understanding by Design model, a model by Wiggins and McTighe that emphasizes enduring learnings and looks at the goals of the learning first and then uses the content and learning activities to support those goals. This model is developed in practice through backwards design. Backwards design has three steps (Wiggins, McTighe) which I believe align with my course map template.

1. Identifying what students should know and be able to do. Represented by the question “at the end of this week what should students be able to do?”

2. Create an assessment to measure the learning. Represented by “How will they be kept accountable to the required tasks?”

3. Plan a sequence of activities, content and lessons to complete the assessment. Represented by the questions “How will participants acquire the content? and “What will the students do to make sense of, rehearse, and apply concepts, and practice skills?”

It’s interesting to me to now see where that template sits within a model and start to link up the values of backwards design for me as the designer and instructor but also within an online context. While this template saved me over the past year I am now in a position to create rather than react after three semesters of online learning. I am curious about how other models may support my approach to teaching in online and blended spaces and what tools are available to engage with them or what tools I might create to engage with them. Some of the questions I am still wrestling with are where can I let go of some control and build opportunity for community of practice learning? Where can I take some risks? How much does the learning need to be assessed by me and where can it simply be assessed by the students themselves because they are the ones who need to understand their own value in the learning? If I do move to a community of practice online does the semester system and the confines of a 45 hour course really work anymore? How can I negotiate different timing considerations with the institutional systems I teach within? I feel incredibly lucky to have the platform of the backwards design tool that allowed us to move to online learning quickly and well over the past year. I am also excited to consider different models that can perhaps help push forward some creative and innovative ways of teaching supported by technology.

Bowen, R. S. (2017). Understanding by Design. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching.https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/understanding-by-design/

Information about Dr. Carrie Nolan and Dr. Nicki Rehn and some of their work with the Centre of Learning and Technology with CMTN.

Dr. Nolan’s list of projects

An interview with BC Campus Connecting the North: Talking Teaching and Learning with NWCC’s Carrie Nolan

Praxis and Pedagogy Episode 37 Pints and Pedagogy – Adam Nash and Dr. Rehn talk about how the Centre of Learning Transformation engages with instructors in a Community of Practice.

Praxis and Pedagogy II The Hidden Curriculum Episode 45 Adam Nash and Dr. Rehn come back to talk about Hidden Curriculum.