In my undergraduate degree I took an IT course for object-oriented design, which pertains to the C++ language and the coding used in computer programs. Although I was aware that this was one of the progressively difficult courses in my major, I felt confident in my ability to obtain a good grade. But it turned out to be the exact opposite. This was not a successful course for me. Even though I tried to stick with the course throughout the semester, I received a D grade. It was probably the hardest course that I have had in my academic career which included other programming and advanced math courses. It seemed that I had a mental block in understanding C++ language and how to transfer the coding on paper. I also had difficulty getting the programs to work. I tried to get help from the instructor and from Internet resources. But my understanding and performance on tests did not show much improvement. Therefore, by the final exam, I attempted questions to the best of my ability, but I really didn’t know many of the answers.
Especially in the light of my graduates studies about learning processes and instructional design, I can think of some reasons why I did not have a successful outcome in the course. As a learner I could have applied myself in a more structured and consistent way to the course content and instruction. Had I implemented some of these processes and activities I believe that I could have obtained a better grade. For instance, early in the course I could have devoted more time to reviewing the course outline, the available resources and the objectives. This would have given me a more realistic understanding about what the course entailed. I also could have invested more time reading the text, practicing coding and reviewing completed projects. Now from an instructional design perspective, in my estimation, the analysis, design, and development phases were not fully developed for this course. It was designed and presented at an advanced level aimed at learners who were experienced with coding and working in IT. The course should have been created to accommodate learners of different levels of experience. The beginning of the content should have covered the basics before moving on to more difficult concepts. Also, the equipment, materials, and support provided were insufficient (Greer, 2010). The textbook was not structured with learning aids such as worked examples and guided tutorials. It would have also been logical to provide extra resources such as video and audio especially with such a complex subject. With regards to the instructor, he was a good lecturer but he did not provide in class demonstrations of work, and was not receptive to communication outside of class.
References:
Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects! (Laureate custom ed.). Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.
Hi David,
ReplyDeleteFrom your project post mortem it is evident that be it a professional project like developing a sophisticated software program or a personal project like undertaking a graduate program every project’s success is based on planning and organizing the activities necessary to complete the project. According to Portny et al dividing the activities into smaller chunks and ensuring that the initial schedule for the overall activity is still valid (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton & Kramer, 2008). They affirm that be it small or big planning in detail, detailing the planned work in clusters, revising the initial plan, modifying future activities and revising the plan continuously throughout the project help in keeping the project on track (Portny et al, 2008).
Reference
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
David,
ReplyDeleteI can totally concur with your difficulty in a course that you just did not feel like you could understand. In my undergraduate studies I had to take MRI physics. What a nightmare this course turned out to be, I received a low C because like you early on I did not truly read the syllabus or review the necessary resources and objectives to start the course successfully.
We had an individual project to present during the MRI course that would represent the physics and machine parameters need to show certain pathology in a selected organ. Well long story I did not do well. I truly did not have a project plan established.
As stated in our textbook a project plan should include the following elements:
An overview of the reasons for the project
A detailed description of results to be produced
A listing of all work to be performed
Roles of all of the team members
A detailed project schedule
Budgets for required expenses (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, & Sutton, 2008)
This MRI course was geared toward different levels of learning, but there were no hands on clinical portion available to reiterate the learning objectives. If I could go back in time I would definitely take time to properly prepare myself for the course project.
Looks like it was a hard lesson learned for both of us.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B.E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.