We found 514 results that contain "instructional design"

Dr. Crystal Eustice (Department of Community Sustainability Studies Assistant Professor of Practice, Academic Advisor, Internship Coordinator) & Jackie Martin (MSU Extension Leadership & Civic Engagement Educator, 4-H Program Supervisor)
 
The Thank an Educator Initiative was born out of the #iteachmsu Commons project, an effort to recognize the great practices of individuals on campus who contribute to student success by supporting MSU’s teaching and learning mission. On such a large decentralized campus, it can be difficult to fully recognize and leverage the expertise of educators. The #iteachmsu Commons' current focus has been to develop and launch a web platform for educators across campus to share their expertise and experience, connect with others, and grow in their practice.
 
You’ll notice that we’ve specifically chosen to denote the audience of this platform as “educators” which the #iteachmsu Commons’ founding units (the Hub for Innovation in Learning and Technology, the Academic Advancement Network, and the Graduate School) define in the broadest sense – anyone who contributes to MSU’s teaching and learning mission. This includes but is not limited to faculty, academic advisors, librarians, coaches, graduate teaching assistants, undergraduate learning assistants, infrastructure planning and facilities, learning designers, IT, planning and budget, staff, etc.
 
We (the #iteachmsu Commons team) have had unwavering enthusiasm for the platform, which is now live at iteach.msu.edu, but we weren’t sure that the Spartan community would identify with the goals of the project (despite the platform’s for educators – by educators development). As a part of my 2018-19 Hub Graduate Student Fellowship, I was able to further observe and investigate how individuals on our campus qualified their work (as it related to the mission and vision) and how they identified with the role of educator. While I found overwhelming support for the type of platform we were building, many of the individuals I spoke with did not personally identify as an educator despite their work contributing to teaching and learning at State. Thus Thank an Educator was born.
 
I designed and launched the inaugural year of Thank and Educator as a part of my Hub fellowship last year as a way to celebrate all the individuals who contribute every day to helping MSU be the institution of higher learning that it is today. By intentionally launching the initiative across the MSU community and asking for individuals to share stories of the positive impacts made by MSU educators, we were able to not only recognize the great efforts of invaluable Spartan community members but also showcase the diverse roles and ways in which people take up being educators on our campus. 80 Educators were nominated by fellow Spartans and were recognized at the first annual #iteachmsu Educator Awards during last year’s Spring Conference on Student Learning and Success. This initiative wouldn’t be possible without the support of Dr. Jeff Grabill (Associate Provost for Teaching, Learning, and Technology) and the Provost’s office, and I am excited to say that it is continuing in this 2019-20 academic year.
 
I have been at Michigan State for the entirety of my postsecondary experience. I came here in 2008 for my B.S., finished a M.S., and plan to complete my doctoral degree by the end of this academic year. Throughout my time as a Spartan, I have encountered countless individuals who were invaluable to my experience but weren’t limited to those who stood at the front of my classes. Thank an Educator gives me the opportunity to recognize those people who made a difference in my MSU experience (as both a learner and a colleague), and for that I am thrilled. I have received correspondence from individuals directly, saw posts featuring educator awards on Twitter, and have even seen award certificates hanging in offices or by desks. I am deeply honored by the idea that I have played a small part in amplifying the work educators do at MSU, and reinforcing the value of that work through this initiative and community.
 
Anyone can recognize a Spartan educator who has made an impact in their lives by clicking “Thank an Educator” in the left panel of this site! You can also read about educators who have been recognized in our "Featured Educator" posts!
 

Vivek Vellanki (College of Education Doctoral Student) & Terry Edwards (Assistant to the Chair, Department of Teacher Education)
 
https://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2019/honoring-msus-educators/ 

Given the COVID-19 pandemic, educators from many fields have looked to representations of pandemics to help students study topics the pandemic has accentuated. In the history of science, educators have explored inequalities in medicine, trust in experts, and responses to uncertainty. To help make these issues digestible, some educators have turned to the cooperative board game, Pandemic Legacy. Small groups work together to avert a global health crisis by managing disease. Teams play the game multiple times, but actions in one game have consequences for the next and rules change and develop as the game progresses. The game's development introduces students to new concepts at a manageable pace while giving them new problems to solve. While the game effectively introduced students to topics in the history of science, this study sought to know whether it promoted cognitive and interpersonal skills. It focused on team adaptive performance, which is linked to problem-solving and communication skills. Data was collected using three surveys. Variation in teams' responses was analyzed using the Median test. The Friedman test was used to analyze each team's adaptive performance at each of the three timesteps. All teams were initially quite confident in their ability to creatively deal with unexpected events and reported that they adapted well to new tasks. As they encountered novel situations, some teams reported that their confidence decreased. They were newly aware that they did not have creative solutions to unexpected problems. Teams aware of their limitations performed better than those who maintained their initial confidence.To access a PDF of the "Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy" poster, click here.Description of the Poster
Studying Team Adaptive Performance using the Board Game Pandemic Legacy 
Research Goal 
This study examined how team adaptive performance evolves over time. Adaptative performance is understood as a process that more effectively moves a team towards its objectives. The team must recognize deviations from expected action and readjust actions to obtain the best outcome (Salas, Sims, Burke 2005; Priest et al. 2002; Marques-Quinteiro et al. 2015). 
While previous studies have examined team adaptive performance in singular events, this study aimed to measure the evolution of team adaptive performance over time. Using a cooperative boardgame that changes as teams play, the study measured how well teams performed in response to three major deviations in game play that necessitated adaptation. 
Research Hypothesis 
Teams with higher perceived levels of adaptability will have better outcomes (the success measure) over time than teams with lower levels of adaptability  
Research Methods 
A total of 16 participants were divided into four teams. Each team played the cooperative board game, Pandemic Legacy (Figure 1), nine times throughout the study. Each participant completed a team adaptive performance questionnaire three times during the study, once after each major disruption in the board game. The questionnaire was designed to assess perceptions of team performance, based on Marques Quinteiro et al. 2015. It consisted of control questions about participants’ demographics as well as a 10-item Likert scale team performance questions broken down into categories assessing satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, adaptability, and positivity.  
Questions to evaluate adaptability included: 
Q7:We update technical and interpersonal competences as a way to better perform the tasks in which we are enrolled. 
Q8: We search and develop new competences to deal with difficult situations. 
Reliability Analysis showed that Cronbach alpha for Q7 and Q8 is 0.938. 
Team outcomes were assessed by a success measure that evaluated each team’s number of wins (where > wins = better outcome) and number of outbreaks (where < outbreaks = better outcome) 
Research Results: Success Measure 
The success measure results of number of wins are displayed in a bar chart. 
The success measure results of number of outbreaks are displayed in a bar chart. 
Research Results: Adaptability Measure 
Differences in the median score of teams’ responses to each question was calculated using the Median Test. Team 3 responded differently than at least one of the other teams to Q8 after Survey 1. Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, revealing a statistically significant difference between Team 3 and Team 1 (p =.030), and Team 3 and Team 2 (p =.030). 
Using the above method revealed no significant results after Survey 2. After Survey 3, there was a significant difference between Team 4 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q7 and Team 1 and Team 2 (p=.049) for Q8. 
A Friedman Test was performed to determine if responses to the questions changed over time. There was a statistically significant difference in Team 3’s response to Q8 (X2(2)= 6.500, p= .039). Post-hoc analysis with pairwise comparison tests was conducted with a Bonferroni correction applied, resulting in a significance difference between Team 3’s first and third survey for Q8. 
Research Findings 
The initial analysis suggests that teams, such as Team 3, that develop higher perceptions of their adaptability will have better outcomes once the higher perceptions are achieved. Teams, such as Team 1, that begin with high perceived levels of adaptability but did not alter their approach when the success measures indicate adaptation is needed will have poorer outcomes. Teams, such as Team 2, that report high perceptions of adaptability throughout and that correspond with the success measure, will maintain good outcomes. 
Analysis of the satisfaction, creativity, adjustability, and positivity data is needed to determine if these affect the success measure or adaptability over time. 
Acknowledgments 
Funding provided by the MSU SUTL Fellows program, a collaboration between the Lyman Briggs College and the MSU Graduate School. 
References 
Marques-Quinteiro, P. et al. 2015. “Measuring adaptive performance in individuals and teams.” Team Performance Management 21, 7/8: 339-60. 
Priest, H.A. et al. 2002. “Understanding team adaptability: Initial theoretical and practical considerations.” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46: 561-65. 
Salas, E. D.E. Sims, C.S. Burke. 2005. “Is there a ‘Big Five’ in Teamwork?” Small Group Research 36, 5: 555-99.