This is a post about time management and in particular fritter finder. In this post I will explain the strategy I used during ECO 298 and MAT 204. 

Latest version

I find each time I read about other types of models and listen to my classmates describe their own models, I want to add more to my model. This time I have added a reusable learning objective. The id consultants creating the instruction will be able to create an RLO and simply modify and the content to fit the RLO. Take a look at the latest model and see if it makes sense to you. Take a look at some of the links I have found describing RLOs.

Intro, audience, new adjustments to model

Here is a quick intro and inteded audience. I tried to attach it as a pdf file, but was unsuccessful. Does anyone know if this feature is possible in Blogger?

Introduction

This model should be used as a guide for the Department of Defense, D.O.D., contractors when creating the required annual security briefings. It is intended that this model is a generalizable model that can be applied to all D.O.D. contractors to direct the design and development of instruction. It will aid in determining the contractors current level of security and what necessary instructional improvements are needed to reach the optimal level of security. The model was created with the idea that the current situation of the D.O.D. contractor(s) is that there is a lack of knowledge or skills needed to reach the optimal goal of a obtaining a 100 percent secure facility indefinitely. An instructional intervention will aid in closing the performance gap, which is not properly securing materials, information, and the facility. Some inputs of this model will vary with the different contractors such as, current level of security, new employees needing extra security training, resources, >

Intended Audience

The intended audience for this model are all Department of Defense contractors and in particular the facility security officers, FSOs) responsible for overseeing the security of each individual facility. Each year the D.O.D. requires its contractors to provide all employees with a security briefing. The D.O.D. evaluates each contractor’s level of security to determine how well the employees safeguard information and the facility. Each contractor provides the annual security briefings in different formats, but all have the same objectives and goals. The D.O.D. initiates the security standards by which the contractors must abide.

Here is an update of my model. I revised the Analysis, Design, Adoption, and revision phases. You will notice at the top the D.O.D. provides input by allocating annual security briefing standards. I am looking for feedback of any sort. Thanks

Romi's Visit -Post 7-

This week our class was fortunate enough to have Dr. Alexader Romiszowski (Romi), who played a critical role in creating the foundations for educational technology along with Dr. Robert Gagne, as a guest speaker.Romi was full time faculty member here at Syracuse University from 1986-1996, at which point he realized he missed being out in "the field". He decided to become part-time and continue as an educational technology consultant. He described educational technology as "solving real educational problems by using a scientific approach".

The two main points of Romi's lecture that I found very interesting was that media is more of a vehicle and does not effect one's learning and that it does not matter how well instruction is designed if the implementer does not deliver the instruction in a means that the learner can relate. Romi also mentioned that practice does not make perfect until some sort of self reflection is incorporated into the practice.

His lecture was very insightful and reinforced what many of our current professors preach to us class after class: reflection is one of the most powerful self evaluation methods, design effective instruction and then find the necessary media.

Thanks to Romi for taking time out of his busy schedule to speak with us.
Posting on my model update will be coming soon.

Module 6- Evaluation

Evaluation

After taking IDE 641, which taught me the methodology behind evaluation, I decided I would like my concentration area in IDD&E to be evaluation. I found it fascinating! Next I took IDE 741 and learned about evaluation theory and that there is not one correct way to create and execute an evaluation, but many factors that should guide the evaluation . Eager to find a career in the evaluation I began to research different positions. Unfortunately, I have been told that there are not many career opportunities available in the field of evaluation unless one has a doctoral degree. Any thoughts?



The Model

I think that the evaluation component of my model is going to be very important. It is crucial to know if the instruction increased security awareness and to what degree. If the learners did not gain awareness of security procedures the instruction needs to be revised.

Here are question I have created to guide me in adding evaluation to the model:

1. How much formative and summative evaluation is necessary?


2. Where does the formative evaluation fit into the model?


3. What is the cost of creating the security briefing instruction?


4. What is the cost of not creating the security briefing instruction?


5. When creating the instruction what stakeholders should be involved and how much should they be involved?


6. Who should evaluate?


7. Depending on who the evaluator is could there are social threat to internal validity?


8. How will we determine if the training has transferred to the learners' daily routines?


9. Which levels of evaluation fit into this model and where? (Kirkpatrick's levels)

Take a look above at the model and see if you agree with what type of evaluation I have included and where it is in the model? Should I take anything out or put anything in? All feedback is helpful! Thanks.

Module 5

Model goal: This model will demonstrate the process of how to create instruction of annual security briefings for multiple Department of Defense contractors.

• 
  

Model Objective 1: Learners will be able to describe the process and apply the process to guide him or her in creating individual instruction focused on annual security briefings that is suited for his or her facility.

Model Objective 1: By using the model the learners will demonstrate awareness of safeguarding documents and their facility and apply these skills in daily activities.

The supra-system is the Department of Defense (D.O.D). The D.O.D. is responsible for creating security requirements for each D.O.D .contractor to meet and assess at what level the contractors have met these requirements. It is mandatory for D.O.D. contractors, the subsystem, to have an annual security briefing. These briefings will enhance employee security awareness and therefore allow each contractor to achieve the highest level of security during their annual assessment.

Delivery of instruction:
The delivery of instruction will vary depending on the resources of each individual contractor. The instruction can be developed to be delivered in a planned group setting or for individuals to take when time is available.

After class discussion and viewing a presentation on the Gentry model, I have decided to add a larger change component to the model. Because the annual security briefings will be altered I would like to add an “Adoption” component. It is going to be crucial that the learners “buy in” to the new form of instruction and do not reject it. This can be done a number of ways depending on the contractor. In class Jerry gave us an example of the Post-it note and how it was adopted by the company. The “gatekeeper” will play an important role in the success of the instruction to show how it is simply and helpful. It will also be important to target a “group leader” this could be an engineer that most employees trust and listen to on regular bases.

The new form of the model looks something like this:

Click on the picture to enlarge the view