Curt and Ke, I wonder if there's anything we can offer you. Do you have any questions for us? And readers, if we were to see a second edition of the book, what suggestions would you have for the authors?
I just finished reading the book, and now feel I can finally begin contributing a bit (though we are nearing the end of our time!). I find this book very interesting and am considering adopting it for a course I just decided to teach in the fall - Principles and Practices of Online Course Creation and Instructional Design. I really like the concrete activities that can be appropriated by instructors and facilitators on a variety of educational levels. Often many of the other more theoretical books do not do the step-by-step that instructors often need when they want to try something new and need some reassurance.
One suggestion that I would find particularly useful would be to expand the section on the R2D2 Model, especially with the sort of framework that a potential online instructor would have. For example, if I were to hand this to some colleagues and invite them to think about it, I could imagine them wanting a clearer introduction to it (how should I characterize it, what sort of model is this anyway, how should I think about it for this class (should I have at least one activity from each part, etc.), how is this the same or different from what I am already doing, etc.).
I believe the real benefit of this book is to concretely demonstrate using the activities, but I am thinking of readers who know something about ADDIE and have taught in lecture courses but are now have to prepare for an online course. How should they approach the model and framework itself in order to maximize all the wonderful examples?
3 things Jeffrey.
1. We have a journal article on the model:
Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education , 27(2), 249-264.
2. We had a chapter explaining the model more and it was deleted as were 5 other theory or intro chapters (not my decision). The chapter on instructional design models and R2D2 compared R2D2 to a few other such models. Another chapter deleted was on training instructors for all this. I can send you both if you write to me at firstname.lastname@example.org
3. The model is not a learning style model but a problem solving wheel of activities. Glad you read the whole book! And enjoyed it.
R2D2 is more about overall course planning and specific course daily events. It is actually not an instructional design model like ADDIE (though it sorta is). It is more a framework for thinking about how to make sense of the 1000's of online tools and resources one has at his or her fingertips today. It is not a step-by-step model for designing or delivering a course. That is boring stuff (though important; just like accounting was for me decades ago). We let other ID people do that stuff. R2D2 can help your hesitant instructors say, hey, I can do some of this. Here are 6 activities I like. One is in the phase of reading; 2 are in reflecting; 1 in displaying, and 2 are doing. Cool!
Curt, thank you for your responses and offering to send me those two pieces.
In thinking about your framework a little more, I wonder if it is possible to use it as a starting point for developing a model to help make sense of all the technology possibilities out there. No, it is not ADDIE, but then again ADDIE does not take into account some of the new ways of working and learning that technology can expose us to.
How else can we make sense out of all of it without beginning to organize it as a way to approach the learning and teaching event in a new way? Perhaps creating a model for instruction that will meet the learning styles of online learners based on this is a next step?
Great points, Curt. I suppose I am intrigued by the pedagogical possibilities, as you mentioned, and see this as being situated within something else. Certainly within the analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation of course, yet technology can add something else, it seems, that just cannot be fully accounted for within the current instructional design models that I have seen.