Supporting the development of collaboration and feedback skills in instructional designers
Instructional designers (IDs) frequently collaborate with subject matter experts, peer IDs, and other professionals (Intentional Futures 2016). Such collaboration often requires an exchange of feedback on design plans and work completed with and for others, as well as self-assessment of one’s own skills and work during the design process (Falchikov 1996; Topping 1998). While there is significant research on peer feedback and its benefits, few research studies focus on scaffolds to help IDs develop these professional competencies. Novice IDs may not have innate collaboration and feedback skills. Therefore instructors may need to scaffold student ID’s collaboration and feedback skill development through the purposeful integration of scaffolds into a course curriculum. Integrating peer feedback skill development opportunities can be particularly challenging in online courses as students may need various types of scaffolding. This mixed methods study focuses on considerations and supports implemented to assist with the development of ID collaboration and peer feedback skills. In this paper, we examine the role of feedback and feedback activities on their professional growth through three areas: (1) student perceptions of peer feedback prior to peer feedback activities for course assignments and after completing the peer feedback activities for course assignments; (2) the relationship between student use of peer feedback scaffolds and student’s perceptions of giving and receiving feedback; and (3) the relationship between student perceptions of feedback received and perception of benefit of feedback received. Study results indicate that while initially students found it difficult to provide and accept in-depth peer feedback, they appreciated its value for improving their designs, learning, and overall professional growth. Many students responded to course activities by putting more effort into providing quality feedback and they explored feedback provided to their peers to continue learning and improve their own work. Students shared that the regular opportunities for feedback from the onset of the course and the feedback resources provided were conducive to improvement of their peer feedback skills. Recommendations for faculty and instructors on structuring peer feedback opportunities in an online environment are provided.
KeywordsCollaboration skills Peer feedback skills Instructional designers Professional competencies
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Brown, A. H., & Green, T. G. (2015). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and practice (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Corgan, R., Hammer, V., Margoliese, M., & Crossley, C. (2004). Making your online course successful. Business Education Forum, 58(3), 51–53.Google Scholar
- Dillenbourg, P., & Schneider, D. (1995). Collaborative learning and the Internet. http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/research/CMC/colla/iccai95_1.html.
- Doan, L. (2013). Is feedback a waste of time? The students’ perspective. Journal of Perspective in Applied Academic Practice, 1(2), 3–10.Google Scholar
- Dooley, K., Lindner, J., Telg, R., Irani, T., Moore, L., & Lundy, L. (2007). Roadman to measuring distance education instructional design competencies. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(2), 151–159.Google Scholar
- Falchikov, N. (1996). Improving learning through critical peer feedback and reflection. Paper presented at HERDSA Conference: Different approaches: Theory and practice in Higher Education, Perth, Australia.Google Scholar
- Fulton, K., & Riel, M. (1999). Professional development through learning communities. Edutopia, 6(2), 8–10.Google Scholar
- Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.Google Scholar
- Harris, M. J. (2006). Three steps to teaching abstract and critique writing. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 136–146.Google Scholar
- Hartley, R., Kinshuk, K. R., Okamoto, T., & Spector, J. M. (2010). The education and training of learning technologists: A competences approach. Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 206–216.Google Scholar
- Intentional Futures. (2016). Instructional design in higher education: A report on the role, workflow, and experience of instructional designers. Retrieved from: http://intentionalfutures.com/reports/instructional_design/.
- International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction. (2012). Instructional designer competencies. Retrieved from http://www.ibstpi.org/.
- International Society for Performance Improvement. (2016). Certified technologist performance standards. Retrieved from http://www.ispi.org/ISPI/Credentials/CRT_Cert/CPT_Standards.aspx.
- Ioannou, A., & Artino, A. (2008). Incorporating Wikis in an educational technology course: Ideas, reflections and lessons learned. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
- Jonassen, D., & Land, S. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Kahiigi, E., Vesisenaho, M., Hansson, H., Danielson, M., & Tusubira, F. (2012). Modelling a peer assignment review process for collaborative e-learning. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(2), 67–79.Google Scholar
- Law, V., Ge, X., & Eseryel, D. (2011). An investigation of the development of a reflective virtual learning community in an ill-structured domain of instructional design. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 3(4), 513–533.Google Scholar
- Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Lowenthal, P., Wilson, B. G., & Dunlap, J. C. (2010). An analysis of what instructional designers need to know and be able to do to get a job. Presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Anaheim, CA, October, 2010.Google Scholar
- Nicol, D. (2012). Resituating feedback from the reactive to the proactive. In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well (pp. 34–49). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Nicol, D. (2014). Guiding principles of peer review: Unlocking learners’ evaluative skills. In C. Kreber, C. Anderson, N. Entwistle, & J. McArthur (Eds.), Advances and innovations in university assessment and feedback (pp. 195–258). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
- Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Reiser, R., & Dempsey, J. (2006). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
- Richardson, J. C., Ertmer, P. A., Lehman, J. D., & Newby, T. J. (2007, October). Using peer feedback in online discussions to improve critical thinking. In Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for educational communications and technology: Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
- Rothwell, W., Benscooter, B., King, M., & King, S. (2016). Mastering the instructional design process: A systematic approach (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Rothwell, W. J., & Kazanas, H. C. (2008). Mastering the instructional design process: A systematic approach (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Rowland, G. A., Fixl, A., & Yung, K. (1992). Educating the reflective designers. Educational Technology, 32(12), 36–44.Google Scholar
- Russ-Eft, D., Bober, M. J., de la Teja, I., Foxon, M. J., & Koszalka, T. A. (2008). Evaluator competencies standards for the practice of evaluation in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Sahin, S. (2008). An application of peer assessment in higher education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(2), 5–10.Google Scholar
- Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- So, H. J., & Bonk, C. (2010). Examining the roles of blended learning approaches in computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments: A Delphi study. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 189–200.Google Scholar
- Wakefield, J., Warren, S. & Mills, L. (2012). Traits, skills, & competencies aligned with workplace demands: What today’s instructional designers need to master. In P. Resta (Ed.), Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference, pp. 3126–3132.Google Scholar
- Wang, H., Gould, L. V., & King, D. (2009). Positioning faculty support as a strategy in assuring quality online education. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(6), 5.Google Scholar
- Zhu, C., Valcke, M., Schellens, T., & Li, Y. (2009). Chinese students’ perceptions of a collaborative e-learning environment and factors affecting their performance: Implementing a Flemish e-learning course in a Chinese educational context. Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(2), 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar