5 Star Instructional Design Rating

This particular rating system is used to determine how effective instruction is when compared to Merrill’s 5 Principles.  There are 5 main topics with 3 subtopics each. Each of the main topics is work 1 star, while the subtopics determine the type of start (Gold, Silver or Bronze). This ratings system does not work on lectures, nor does it work for information with a simple pop quiz at the end. The whole point of this rating, for an instruction to correctly incorporate the 5 principles.  Therefore, the more interactive and task oriented the instruction is, the higher it will score.  

I chose to evaluate the “Learning Spanish” example listed in the course schedule. As with any rating system, I felt it is somewhat subjective, because not all (in fact, most) instruction will not follow Merill’s format.  Therfore some subtopics may be only paritallly covered, making the lines fuzzy as to which typ of start to rate that topic. However, the follow is how I intrepreted this rating system in regards to the example instruction.

5 start rating of “Learning Spanish”

Preface: Let me start by saying that much of this instruction is incomplete.  Many of the modules lead to broken links or unfinished information.  Other modules simply lead to a list of resource sites.  The only module which an truly be evaluated, in my opinion, is the “Vocabulary” module, because this is the only one which seems to include both information and practice. Therefore this rating will be based on that module alone.

1. Is the courseware presented in the context of real world problems? - BRONZE

1. Does the courseware show learners the task they will be able to do or the problem they will be able to solve as a result of completing a module or course? No.  Simply showing a list of words and traslations doesn’t support realworld problem solving.  
2. Are students engaged at the problem or task level not just the operation or action levels? No.  There are simply word lists to study, and then games to play to practice memorization.  I would consider this more action than task or problem solving.
3. Does the courseware involve a progression of problems rather than a single problem? Yes.  This on is a bit of a judgement call. If the practice games were for this instance considered problem solving, they do seem to get harder as the learner goes down the line. 

2. Does the courseware attempt to activate relevant prior knowledge or experience? - SILVER

1. Does the courseware direct learners to recall, relate, describe, or apply knowledge from relevant past experience that can be used as a foundation for new knowledge? Yes - This is another fuzzy line. Although it does not directly address prior knowledge.  The student has the personal option to skip words in the study list that they already know.  Any prior knowledge to listed words would help in the practice sections.
2. Does the courseware provide relevant experience that can be used as a foundation for the new knowledge? No.  I don’t believe that the study list counts as relevant experience. 
3. If learners already know some of the content are they given an opportunity to demonstrate their previously acquired knowledge or skill. Yes. They will ultimately be better at the practice games.

3. Does the courseware demonstrate (show examples) of what is to be learned rather than merely tell information about what is to be learned? - SILVER

1. Are the demonstrations (examples) consistent with the content being taught? No.  Only examples are provided.  There are no non-examples or any other qualifying criteria supplied.
2. Are at least some of the following learner guidance techniques employed? Yes.  Learners are directed to relevant information in the vocabulary lists. 
3. Is media relevant to the content and used to enhance learning? Yes.  This is hard to tell without objectives, but if the objective is for the learner to memorize the translation of certain words, then yes it is relevant, and does somewhat enhance learning.

4. Do learners have an opportunity to practice and apply their newly acquired knowledge or skill? - SILVER

1. Are the application (practice) and the posttest consistent with the stated or implied objectives Yes. The Information in the practice requires learners to recall or recognize information.
2. Does the courseware require learners to use new knowledge or skill to solve a varied sequence of problems and do learners receive corrective feedback on their performance? Yes. Thee are different kinds of games for the word lists, that in most cases provide corrective feedback.
3. In most application or practice activities, are learners able to access context sensitive help or guidance when having difficulty with the instructional materials? Is this coaching gradually diminished as the instruction progresses? No. Students only have access to the listed guides in the vocabulary section, but nothing within the game.

5. Does the courseware provide techniques that encourage learners to integrate (transfer) the new knowledge or skill into their everyday life? - NONE

1. Does the courseware provide an opportunity for learners to publicly demonstrate their new knowledge or skill? No.
2. Does the courseware provide an opportunity for learners to reflect-on, discuss, and defend their new knowledge or skill? No. These types of games do not allow for discussion or reflection.
3. Does the courseware provide an opportunity for learners to create, invent, or explore new and personal ways to use their new knowledge or skill? No.

Overall rating: 4 stars, including 3 silver and 1 bronze

I feel this rating system is lacking in many areas.  Although this particular instruction does (sometimes barely) meet the qualification for the subtopics, I do not think it is good, real world instruction.  There are no real objective, real-world practice, or assessment.  So while the Merrill system might rate it as mediocre, a rating system by someone like Mager would not be so kind.