Abraham

  **Research Interests**

I am beginning to form my research interests. As one who is actively engaged in teaching and public speaking, I would like to pursue aspects of leadership, communication, instructional design, curriculum development, and visual presentations. Obviously, I would need to narrow my focus as I progress in my thinking. Few of the questions I have asked in these areas are:

1. How does presentation technology influence the effectiveness of teaching and speaking to a bilingual audience?

David, I think this hits upon the issue of bilingual education as well. I know from teaching in a bilingual school, and then a school with a traditional ESOL program, there is a huge debate on whether or not immersion or bilingual instruction is best. Technology makes it easier for regular education teachers to to use the techniques that in the past have been restricted to teachers who could speak both languages. Rachel 

2. Does the visual medium augment or diminish the impact of verbal explanations in classroom of tech-savvy high school seniors?

David, I think this question opens venues for more subtopics such as using different formats or platforms to address multiple learning styles and motivating students by incorporating various types of technologies into the learning environment. This is very similar to the learning environment that has been established for this course, we have the option of using audio or visual, which may be helpful to students with disabilities. Sheila

3. Should online instructional curriculum differ from an face-to-face one if both environments cater to similar students and similar technology resources? Would the learning objectives be different?  David, have you considered how a hybrid learning environment might bring the best of both worlds to the learners? There is some really interesting research on the use of texting and chat interaction in learning environments. Jennifer

Jennifer, Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, I have looked at various technologies that are currently used. I am sure much more will become available.  4. What is the impact of untruthful statements in a social networking context made by tech-savvy high school students on their offline social relationships with peers?

Wired magazine did a piece about the new social interactions via the media now. Of course, some of their ideas seemed a little way out, but there was an underlying truth throughout the article. The ability for any student to remain anonymous seems to take inhibitions away to create a whole new problem for society. This might be an interesting research. Ginger

 5. How do the foundational roots of a culture influence the acceptance of communication technology for its growth and development?

6. Does an instructional designer’s attitude toward technology adoption affect the instructional competency?

Just thinking?

​ ​  (This is my initial entry. I will be returning frequently to update my entry) Since language and learning are connected, many techniques and tools for expression and sharing of language are fundamental aspects of thinking and learning. Furthermore, methods of communications influence learning outcomes, and, consequently, influence how one designs, deploys, and evaluates instructional systems. Spector’s (2008) discussion on communications theory and instructional design and development could form the basis of my research if I were to pursue questions # 1, 2, and 3. ** Fox (2008) highlighted the concepts of contextualization and instructional design giving me the foundation to delve into their theoretical foundations in keeping with my research interests of communication, cultural influences, and social behavioral principles. Fox referred to Pepper who advanced the notion that a root metaphor and a truth criterion characterize one’s philosophical worldview. Fox noted that root metaphors roughly correspond to ontological assumptions while truth criteria roughly correspond to epistemological assumptions. Keeping Pepper’s two points of caution, Fox surmised that one worldviews cannot legitimately determine each others adequacy and that worldview “eclecticism” at the level of philosophical assumptions is both perplexing and fruitless (p. 57). These principles lay the foundation with which Fox analyzes contextualism, the worldview with which I would need to become familiar if I were to develop Q #4 or Q #5 above for my dissertation research.
 * Theoretical Foundations**
 * The chapters in Part 1: Foundations that are most relevant to my research interests are “Theoretical Foundations” and “Contextualistic Perspectives.” **
 * Spector (2008) identified four theoretical foundations for research in educational and communication technology: the psychology of learning, communications theory, human-computer interaction, and instructional design and development. Since few of my interests include instruction, presentation, curriculum, and communication, his chapter is relevant. **

I have decided to pursue answering Q# 6 “ Does an instructional designer’s attitude toward technology adoption affect the instructional competency? ” Excellence in any field is the result of dedication and discipline. Regardless of the profession, a commitment to adequate preparation is a key element for practitioners’ success. Most instructional designers have minimal formal preparation because of inadequate facilities, lack of motivation, or poor attitude toward technology adoption in their respective institutions. This lack of preparation results in marginal instructional designer competencies. With the fast-paced growth of technology in education and training programs, determining how best to train instructional designers is central to the development of effective and efficient instruction. Consequently, this author believes that regardless of a school system’s economic status or technological facility, improving an instructional designer’s attitude toward technology adoption could enhance the practitioner’s competency. The five research areas for a literature review that will advance an investigation in this issue area are: a. Learning and instructional theory b. Technology use by high school students in urban and suburban areas; similarities and differences c. Motivational theory and personalities studies that highlight attitudes in the workplace d. Evaluation of instructional competency e. Instructional models and their relevance to instructional theory Each of these areas is broad enough to address the necessary studies to support the investigation into an instructional designer’s attitude toward technology adoption affect the instructional competency. a.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> In any educational institution, learning and teaching are central to its effective functioning. I need to determine the theoretical foundations upon which I can base my investigation. b.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> I need to identify how high school students use technology and how this capability influences their relationships. In addition, how does the lack of technological prowess affect students who relate to one another online? c.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> What motivates individuals to learn and to teach? How do specific personality theories explain attitudes in workplace situations? It is important that I understand how a researcher could measure attitudes and what principles determines their relationship to personality. d.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> I need to determine the types of evaluation tools available to observe and evaluate instruction. Furthermore, it is important to know how to define and determine what constitutes instructional competency. It calls for the delineation of gender roles and age of instructors in terms of their participation in teaching and learning. e.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> Understanding the various instructional models is central to determining how they explain performance and competence in a learning environment. I will be curious to investigate if motivation, personality, or attitudes have a bearing on the efficacy of the various models. As one progresses in the literature search, several more nuances and aspects of the above five areas will become known.
 * Literature Review**

Training in any discipline enhances performance (Fadde, 2009; Cheng & Yeh, 2009). Over time, well-defined and coordinated training results in observed gains in expertise and knowledge. Using specific systems and models, Sluijsmans, Straetmans, and van Merriënboer, (2008) designed an integrative framework for the design of computer-based learning and authentic assessment and showed that students’ competence increased. Furthermore, the removal of specific barriers such as lack of motivation, low self-esteem, and negative attitudes from teachers and students influenced how they responded to the integration of different technology (Lowther, Inan, Strahl, & Ross, 2008). Investigators observed similar results when they studied how participants enhanced their instructional design competencies in distance education (Dooley, K., Lindner, Telg, Irani, Moore, & Lundy, 2007). However, the literature that this author reviewed so far does not show any study that investigates the relationship between the attitudes toward technology adoption and instructional competencies. With the fast-paced growth of technology in education and training programs, determining how best to train instructional designers is central to the development of effective and efficient instruction. Consequently, this author believes that regardless of a school system’s economic status or technological facility, improving an instructional designer’s attitude toward technology adoption could enhance the practitioner’s competency.
 * Gap in the research**

The two research questions for this study are: 1.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> How does motivation theory explain the relationship between knowledge of instructional design and instructional competency? <span style="color: #ff00ff; font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">I am not familiar with motivation theory. Will you be using it to try and show that it leads to a greater degree of instructional competency? One issue you might encounter is how do we measure instructional competency?
 * Research Questions **

Instructional competency could be assessed on learning outcomes, familiarity with recurrent and non-recurrent tasks over time, and fluency of use of specified medium. Since motivation, is a key factor in attempting and accomplishing a well-defined task, perhaps by providing factors that augur motivation, an instructor would pursue repetitive excellence in instructional design. David

2.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> Does Merriënboer’s four-component instructional design (4C/ID) model explain the relationship between instructional design practitioners’ attitudes towards technology adoption and the development of their instructional competencies? With the increasing use of technology in education, society faces a growing need for competent and well-qualified instructional design practitioners (Rogers, Graham, & Mayes, 2007). The real-world situation is that instructor training—outside of teacher preparation programs—has received minimal emphasis (Klein, et al., 2004; Fadde, 2009). Since instructional design practitioners develop their skills while using specific instructional models, how they respond to the adoption of technology that facilitates their instruction could predict the degree to which they develop instructional competencies (Simms & Knowlton, 2008). Each of the studies used so far have the following in common: 1.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> implementation of training 2.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> observation of enhanced competency in the trainees 3.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> one factor that influenced training outcomes Investigators who implemented specific training observed enhanced recognition expertise (Fadde, 2009)), increased competence (Sluijsmans, Straetmans, & van Merriënboer, 2008; Dooley, K., Lindner, Telg, Irani, Moore, & Lundy, 2007), and improved attitudes (Lowther, Inan, Strahl, & Ross, 2008). Cheng and Yeh (2009) noted that motivation influences one’s attitude toward instructional design. Since this author reviewed only five studies for their similarities, significant discrepancies did not surface. However, the literature reviewed did not address the attitudinal factor and its influence on instructional competencies. The paucity of information on the attitudinal tendencies on technology adoption by instructional designers is regrettable because it is the evidence that the training industry and education require if they are to implement newer and more effective instructional designs. The theories addressed in the five studies are expertise theory, expectation value theory, 4C/ID instructional model (theory), and Fraenken and Wallen’s theory of phenomenon. The two theories that are relevant to this study are the expertise theory and the 4C/ID model (theory) because they overarch the study of instructional designer competency. However, one theory I would add is a selected personality theory that addresses the impact of attitudes on personality and, consequently, on learning/training outcomes. David, I am really interested in 4c/ID theory. What drew you to this theory? What is it about this lens that makes sense to your research? I am not really familiar with this theory, and would love your input. Additionally, I am a fan of personality theory. Do you find a correlation between different personality types and technology integration success? Jennifer Jennifer, Having a keen interest in instruction and instructional design, as you might imagine, I have been looking at a variety of theories. The 4C/ID theory and a few others have gained my attention because of the modular aspect to Instructional Design, and, consequently, to design competency. The fundamental question I keep asking is, "How do I train an instructor for instructional design competency?" (and a few related ones as well) The 4C/ID model addresses recurrent and non-recurrent tasks and their relationship to competency. I don't know where this taking me...I am not sure. I do, however, want to pursue an area of research in Instructional Design because it is one of four theoretical foundations of Ed Tech and an area of my passion (the other foundations are: psychology of learning, communcations theory, and human-computer interaction). I hope that helps. David
 * Problem Statement **
 * Theory **


 * ** Research Paradigm ** || ** Research Methodology ** || ** Strengths ** || ** Limitations ** || ** Authoritative Primary Source for This Methodology ** || ** Research Study ** || ** Decision to use Method ** ||
 * **// Quantitative //** || // Experimental // || By reducing sampling bias as a validity threat, experimental design have greater internal validity || Increased logistical demands of conducting experiments on meaningful interventions || Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. || Yen-Shou, L., Hung-Hsu, T., & Pao-Ta, Y. (2009). A Multimedia English Learning System Using HMMs to Improve Phonemic Awareness for English Learning. //Journal of Educational Technology & Society//, //12//(3), 266-281. || I will use if I justify the cost to precisely categorize, randomly, ethically, and legally select people, places, or things. Other wise, I will not use ||
 * ^  || // Delphi //  || Good method to add specificity to portfolio assessments that identify student performance that exceeds expectations || Is not effective for complex themes since it is useful for an assessment of new things to come and which can be explained relatively quickly || Dalkey, N. C.; Brown, B. and Cochran, S. (1969): The Delphi Method, III: Use of self-ratings to improve group estimates, Santa Monica. CA. || Rice, K. (2009). Priorities in K-12 Distance Education: A Delphi Study Examining Multiple Perspectives on Policy, Practice, and Research. //Journal of Educational Technology & Society//, //12//(3), 163-177. || I will use this method only if I need to utilize multiple surveys to develop a process of analyzing layered questionnaires ||
 * ^  || // Survey // || Efficiently adaptable and easily constructed to gather information on any topic; easy to score; customizable; excellent for precise description of mass populations || Analyzing surveys produce indirect evidence; they are indirect methods of data collection; degree of artificiality || Babbie, E. (1990). //Survey research methods// (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. || Tabata, L., & Johnsrud, L. (2008). The Impact of Faculty Attitudes Toward Technology, Distance Education, and Innovation. //Research in Higher Education//, //49//(7), 625-646. || I am tending to use surveys because large and varied data may be collected; ease of analysis ||
 * ^  || // Correlation Analysis // || Ideally used to analyze the departure of two random variables from independence; useful as a pointer for further, more detailed research || Cannot assume cause and effect, strong correlation between variables may be misleading; lack of correlation may not mean there is no relationship, it could be non-linear || Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. In N. L. Gage (ed.), //Handbook of research on teaching.// Chicago: Rand McNally. || Yi-Wen, H., & Ying-Shao, H. (2007). Examining Teachers' CBT Use in the Classroom: A Study in Secondary schools in Taiwan. //Journal of Educational Technology & Society//, //10//(3), 233-246. || I am unsure of using this method. I do not know the nature of the survey I will conduct. ||


 * **Research Paradigm** || **Research Methodology** || **Strengths** || **Limitations** || **Authoritative Primary Source for this Methodology** || **Research study** || **Decision to use Method** ||
 * // **Qualitative** // || // Phenomenological // || Helps identify the essence of human experiences about a phenomenon as described by participants situated and embedded in local contexts; useful for describing complex phenomena || Knowledge produced might not generalize to other people or settings; might have lower credibility || Moustakas, C. (1994). //Phenomenological research methods.// Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. || Veletsianos, G., & Miller, C. (2008). Conversing with pedagogical agents: A phenomenological exploration of interacting with digital entities. //British Journal of Educational Technology//, //39//(6), 969-986. || May not use these methods since I am unlikely to use the qualitative research paradigm ||
 * ^  || // Case study // || Provides individual case information; can conduct cross-case comparisons and analysis || Difficult to make quantitative predictions; limited by time and activity || Stake, R. E. (1995). //The art of case study research// . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. || King, S., & Robinson, C. (2009). ‘Pretty Lights’ and Maths! Increasing student engagement and enhancing learning through the use of electronic voting systems. //Computers & Education//, //53//(1), 189-199. ||^   ||
 * ^  || // Grounded theory // || Can determine how participants interpret constructs; determine idiographic causation; multiple stages of data collection and the refinement and interrelationship of categories of information; constant comparison of data and theoretical sampling of different groups || Results are more easily influenced by the researcher’s personal biases and idiosyncrasies; it is difficult to test hypotheses and theories with large numbers of participant || Strauss, A, & Corbin, J. (1998). //Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques// (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. || Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. (2008). Grounded design of web-enhanced case-based activity. //Educational Technology Research & Development//, //56//(2), 161-179. ||^   ||
 * ^  || // Ethnography // || Data collected in naturalistic settings; response to local situations, cultures, social settings; contextual response to lived realities || It generally takes more time to collect the data when compared to quantitative research; data analysis is often time-consuming || Creswell, J. W. (2007). //Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches// (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. || Tolbert, D. (2006). Minorities in Media. //TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning//, //50//(1), 18. ||^   ||
 * // **Mixed method** // || // Transformative // || Can study dynamic processes via the use of a theoretical lens as an overarching perspective; provides superior research findings and outcomes when the nexus of contingencies in a situation in relation to one’s research questions dictates mixed methods || Often criticized fro not having a sound theoretical foundation based on “incompatibility thesis” || Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). //Designing and conducting mixed methods research//. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage. || Lopez-Fernandez, O., & Rodriguez-Illera, J. (2009). Investigating university students’ adaptation to a digital learner course portfolio. //Computers & Education//, //52//(3), 608-616. ||^  ||


 * ** Research Question ** || ** Methodology ** || ** Sample ** || ** Data Collection ** || ** Statistical Analysis ** ||
 * 1. How does the Simon and Chase expertise theory explain the relationship between human knowledge (of instructional design) and competency (instructional)? || Survey || The study will be limited to instructional design practitioners with basic understanding and application of technology who design instruction to teach medical terminology (uncertain at this stage if the specificity of the subject area will make a difference to the study) to freshmen students in an inner-city community college. || Questionnaires || I do not have the requisite knowledge or experience to identify a statistical procedure that will best serve my research questions. ||
 * 2. Does Merriënboer’s four-component instructional design (4C/ID) model explain the relationship between instructional design practitioners’ skills in technology adoption and the development of their instructional competencies? || Survey, experimental design ||^  || Pre-test & Post-test; questionnaires ||^   ||

Fadde, P. (2009). Instructional design for advanced learners: training recognition skills to hasten expertise. //Educational Technology Research & Development//, //57//(3), 359-376. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org, doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9046-5 Fox, E.J. (2008). Contextualistic perspectives. In J.M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Merriënboer, M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), //Handbook of Research on Educational Communication Technology,// (3rd ed., pp. 21-28). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Cheng, Y., & Yeh, H. (2009). From concepts of motivation to its application in instructional design: Reconsidering motivation from an instructional design perspective. //British Journal of Educational Technology//, //40//(4), 597-605. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00857.x Dooley, K., Lindner, J., Telg, R., Irani, T., Moore, L., & Lundy, L. (2007). Roadmap to measuring distance education instructional design competencies. //Quarterly Review of Distance Education//, //8//(2), 151-159. [|http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org] Klein, J. D., Spector, J. M., Grabowski, B., & de la Teja, I. (2004). //Instructor competencies: Standards for face-to-face, online a nd blended settings.// Greenwich, CT: information Age Publishing. Lowther, D., Inan, F., Daniel Strahl, J., & Ross, S. (2008). Does technology integration “work” when key barriers are removed?. //Educational Media International//, //45//(3), 195-213. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org, doi:10.1080/09523980802284317 Rogers, P., Graham, C., & Mayes, C. (2007). Cultural competence and instructional design: Exploration research into the delivery of online instruction cross-culturally. //Educational Technology Research & Development//, //55//(2), 197-217. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org, doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9033-x Simms, J., & Knowlton, D. (2008). Ideas in Practice: Instructional Design and Delivery for Adult Learners. //Journal of Developmental Education//, //32//(1), 20-30. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org Sluijsmans, D., Straetmans, G., & van Merriënboer, J. (2008). Integrating authentic assessment with competence-based learning in vocational education: the Protocol Portfolio Scoring. //Journal of Vocational Education & Training//, //60//(2), 159-172. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org, doi:10.1080/13636820802042438 Spector, J. M. (2008). Theoretical foundations. In J.M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Merriënboer, M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), //Handbook of Research on Educational Communication Technology,// (3rd ed., pp. 21-28). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
 * References**

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">David, Your analysis of your investigation is strategic and logical. It shows a logical progression of your ideas as you progress in the development of your plan on what and how you will conduct your research. Everything seems to flow methodically. I especially like how you tied in your original research interests with the gap in the research to your final questions. Looking at your work and how you developed your ideas shows me the deficiencies in my strategy and what works and what does not. I think that the articles that I selected are not supportive enough to stabilize my plan and I need to develop a more logical flow. Sheila

<span style="color: #008080; font-family: Georgia,serif;">When you talk about " literature reviewed did not address the attitudinal factor and its influence on instructional competencies", what kind of effect do you think attitude might have on the outcome of the instruction? Ginger

Ginger, thanks for the question. Attitudinal outcomes affect an instructor's technology adoption, and, consequently, his or her instructional competency. I am interested to determine to what degree can one modify attitude so as to enhance instructional competency. David

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">David, I was wondering why you did not consider grounded theory tradition as one of your options as a methodology for your study? You mentioned using learning and instructional theory, the Simon and Chase expertise theory, and the Merriënboer’s four-component instructional design (4C/ID) model as components that you will use in your investigation; will you not be drawing on their experiences to make your point? Just curious Sheila 11/11/09 Sheila, Thank you for your question. I am not familiar with all aspects of the qualitative paradigm for me to use the grounded theory methodology. I am leaning toward a mixed-method sequential design. Obviously, that could change as well. Best regards, David

**Reminder of the social problem and the research problem for the study:** Excellence in any field is the result of dedication and discipline. Regardless of the profession, a commitment to adequate preparation is a key element for practitioners’ success. Most instructional designers have minimal formal preparation because of inadequate facilities, lack of motivation, or poor attitude toward technology adoption in their respective institutions. This lack of preparation results in marginal instructional designer competencies. With the fast-paced growth of technology in education and training programs, determining how best to train instructional designers is central to the development of effective and efficient instruction. Consequently, this author believes that regardless of a school system’s economic status or technological facility, improving an instructional designer’s skill in technology adoption could enhance the practitioner’s competency.
 * Significance of the Study **
 * Explanation of the significance of the research study for particular audiences and identifying the specific research purpose:** All instruction, regardless of the industry, has a design, and, consequently a designer. Furthermore, since instruction is a key element in the transmission and evaluation of knowledge and skills, one must assure the competency of those who design it. The paucity of information on the skill in technology adoption by instructional designers is regrettable because it is the evidence that the training industry and education require if they are to implement newer and more effective instructional designs. This study will enhance the understanding of specific skills required for technology adoption and their relationship to instructional designer competency while filling a gap in current educational technology literature

HI David, How is the management of technology addressed in this study? Management of technology in daily instructional practice seems to be missing from most training programs. Have you found this to be true? Jennifer

It is interesting that you are trying to look at the gap between instructional designers and instructors, as particular in online learning this is problematic. Are there any specific programs that you are interested in studying? I am not interested so much in studying a specific program as I am wanting to determine how skills in adopting technology affects instructional designer's competencies. In inner-city community colleges, the skill level of instructors in technology adoption affect how they use technology, their motivation to teach, and their attitude toward training. I am wondering if we can change their technology skill level then, perhaps, we could enhnace their instructional design competency since both depend on technology. Just thinking! David


 * Advancing the profession of educational technology.** This study will advance the profession by adding to current literature and by providing a better understanding as to how to train instructional designers in various aspects of technological application. Familiarity with technology tools in light of specific educational goals is central to improving instructional competencies. Additionally, the outcome of this study meets a foundational objective of educational technology in that it helps to “support and enhance human learning and performance” (Spector, 2008, p. 21).
 * Advancing positive social change:** The study proposed focuses on instructional designers in community colleges in inner city settings. Often the paucity of training infrastructure, lack of technology skills, and the nature of student population affect the scope of instructional designers’ attitudes, motivation, and skills. However, if instructional design practitioners receive appropriate training in skills to adopt technology for instruction, course development, and active student learning, one can address the social problems such as lowering student dropout rate, boosting student confidence in learning skills, increasing retention rates as function of superior instruction, enhancing quality of instruction, and developing instructional competency.

David, What type of training would you deem appropriate for instructional designers so that they can perform their jobs efficiently? Do you feel the need for some form of certification as in the K-12 envoronment? Sheila

Sheila, I think training in adopting technology for specific instructional design will be the most beneficial. Yes, some form of certification will be appropriate for the K-12 environment particularly if the instruction includes rrecurrent and non-recurrent tasks. Just thinking! David (11/15/09)

Dissemination of Research ** My choice of three Journals to which I would submit my research is: My choice of two Professional Conferences to attend and submit my research is: References Spector, J. M. (2008). Theoretical foundations. In J.M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Merriënboer, M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), //Handbook of Research on Educational Communication Technology,// (3rd ed.), (pp. 21-28). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
 * 1) Journal of Research on Technology in Education (JRTE) – The reason is that the International Society of Technology in Education (ISTE) is a premier association that supports research in many distinct areas of education and technology of which the JRTE is the flagship publication for original research and detailed system and project evaluation.
 * 2) Journal of Computing in Higher Education (JCHE) – This journal publishes peer-reviewed essays, reviews, reports, and research articles that contribute to our understanding of the issues, problems and research associated with instructional technology since I am keen to enhance instructional skills and better understand educational environments.
 * 3) Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal) – This journal is a peer-reviewed journal established and sponsored by five professional associations (AMTE, ASTE, NCSS-CUFA, CEE, and SITE). Being keenly interested in teacher training and education, this journal caters to my interests in the areas of video, audio, animation, virtual reality, and simulation. Furthermore, the online nature of this journal and the features such as reader commentary and interactive peer-to-peer dialog gives this journal a potential for development as no other.
 * 1) ISTE annual conference and exposition (formerly known as National Educational Computing Conference – NECC) ( [|www.iste.org] ) is my first choice since I am an active member, the wide variety of technology disciplines present, and the currency of research topics presented.
 * 2) International Technology Education Association (ITEA) ( [] ) this association sponsors an annual conference that focuses on technology innovation, design, and educators to promote technology literacy and professionalism of those engaged in the pursuit.