The Golden Triangle of Development

Shapiro, Brian

ET

Fox, B. E., & Doherty, J. J. (2012). Design to learn, learn to design: Using backward design for information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 5(2), 144-155. Retrieved from http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=v5i2p144

The focus of this article is to document and assess the process and product of a group creation: instructional podcasts to teach graduate students information literacy. The group used an assessment first/backwards by design approach (formalized by Wiggins) and a collaborative process, using a team of people with a variety of expertise and experience. The article initially explores the ideological change from instructors choosing what is important to teach to deciding what the students need to be able to do, and then thoughtfully designing an assessment that would show successful acquisition of target skills and knowledge, and only then creating engaging and scaffolded lessons that support the students as they progress in the unit.

After examining the history and reasons for choosing a “backwards by design approach,” authors describe how they worked using “greater intentionality” to design the podcasts, using five key elements. The highlights of these elements are learning outcomes, and the need for true collaboration among people of different disciplines. The learning modules (podcasts) needed, “to provide students with an area of knowledge, information literacy, as well as a particular skill, effective approaches to find and evaluate professional literature” (Fox, Doherty 2012).

The collaborative design team consisted of a librarian team, an instructional designer, a faculty member, and a graphic designer. The workshop’s goal was to familiarize new faculty with a variety of library resources, and highlight how to access and use high quality academic literature. The team allowed student circumstances to guide and restrict the process. For example, many students had full-time jobs, families, etc. and therefore the podcast delivery method is key to allowing people to access the lessons when and where they could.

The authors divided the discussion into three levels of analysis of the process/outcome: things that were done well, things they now better understand, and things that should be done differently in the future. The greatest success was what the authors describe as the “golden triangle” of development—that by intentionally collaborating with a group of experts they were able to accomplish well beyond what any of them would have been able to do alone; the podcasts were well-developed, effective, and aligned to the information literacy standards.

The team reported that they “better understand” the complex process and the huge time commitment necessary to do design and implement a high-quality product/course; they had initially thought it would take three months and it took over nine.

The team learned that for the most effective and high-quality collaborative process, they should have developed a more formal plan and perhaps even have used a project manager to help with deadlines, etc. They also concluded that the people who actually created the podcasts should have been more involved in the design process. Finally, they should have spent more time on the assessment that drove the design; they did not feel that it was as intentionally designed and fleshed out as they would want, ideally.