You are on page 1of 5

Greg Kersley, PhD. Instructional Design Theorist Extraordinaire Biography Dr.

Greg Kearsley is an academician who is devoted to the development of technology in education and the instructional design field using the engagement theory as his basis. Marital Status: Unmarried, no children Hobbies: Sailing, kayaking, skiing, hiking and biking. Favourite Vacation spot: San Diego, California Sports that he likes to play: Tennis Favourite Book: Science Fiction Favourite Author: Robert Heinlen Greatest Achievement: The Distance education text, coauthored with Michael Moore Greg Kearsley is currently an independent Contents consultant Biography specializing in online education. He has designed online courses for NCREL, Walden Institute and the Education MEPP program at the University of Wisconsin. He Professional Experience has taught at many universities including the Teaching Experience University of Maryland, Nova Southeastern Major Publication University and the George Washington University; Insight on Engagement was the Chief Executive Officer of Park Row Inc., a Theory software publishing company in San Diego; chief scientist of Courseware Incorporated, a training Reference development firm based in San Diego; and a senior scientist at the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) in Alexandria, VA.

Education
Ph.D. - Educational Psychology, University of Alberta, 1978 M.S. - Theoretical Psychology, University of Alberta, 1976 B.S. - Experimental Psychology, University of Toronto, 1973 He has written many books and articles about technology and education. His most recent book is Online Learning: Personal Reflections on the Transformation of Education.

Professional Experience
Online Learning Consultant, U.S. < Merchant Marine Academy, 2006-present. Developed instructional model for online graduate program in marine engineering and worked with faculty to prepare online courses. Online Learning Consultant, North Central Regional Education Laboratory, 2002-2005. Created online professional development courses for K-12 teachers and administrators. eLearning Course Developer, Walden Institute, 1999-2002. Created web-based courses and programs for professional training. Technology Consultant, the Economic Development Institute of the World Bank, 1994-95. Created strategic plan for technology-based training and assisted staff with use of instructional technology. Senior Research Associate, Army Research Institute, 1991-1992. Developed a hypertext database of instructional theories relevant to adult learning [National Research Council Fellowship]. Chief Executive Officer of Park Row Inc., a software publishing company, 1985-1990. In addition to daily management responsibilities, he was responsible for all product development and support activities. Provided consulting in software design and instructional technology.

Chief scientist of Courseware Incorporated, 1984-1985. In this position he guided the technical direction of the company and managed R&D activities. Areas of special interest were artificial intelligence and automated instructional systems. Senior scientist at the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO), 1980-1983. At HumRRO, he was involved in a wide range of human factors projects for corporate and government clients. Instructional Designer at Courseware Incorporated, 1978-1980. Developed and managed computer-based training courses for corporate and government clients.

Teaching Experience
University of Maryland, College Park< - Adjunct Professor, Distance Education Program. 20012003. University of Wisconsin<, Madison - Adjunct/Visiting Professor, Engineering Professional Development Dept. 1983-2004. Nova Southeastern University - Program Professor, Fischler Center for the Advancement of Education, Instructional Technology & Distance Education program. 1997 - 1998. George Washington University - Adjunct Professor, Graduate School of Education & Human Development, HRD and Ed Leadership depts, 1989 - 1997. National University< - Lecturer, Telecommunications Management, Information Systems, Instructional Technology programs, 1985-89. University of San Francisco< - Lecturer, School of Education, 1983-86. San Diego State - Adjunct Instructor, Educational Technology Dept., 1984 Catholic University, Washington, D.C. - Lecturer, School of Education, 1983. University of California<, San Diego< - Lecturer, Extension, 1978-79.

Major Publications
Dr. Kearsley had numerous publication including software which speak to how very important his work in pioneering instructional design has been. o Online Learning: Personal Reflections on the Transformation of Education. Technology Publications, Englewood< Cliffs, NJ. 2005. o Distance Education: A Systems Perspective, 2nd Ed. Wadsworth, Belmont<, CA. 2005.(with M. Moore) o Online Education: Learning and Teaching in Cyberspace. Book version: Wadsworth<, Belmont<, CA. 2000.WWW version: [http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/gkearsley/cyber.htm] 1999-2001. o Technology, Learning & Organizations. Book version: CRC/St Lucie Press, 1998. WWW version: [http://www.gwu.edu/~lto] 1997 - 2000. o A Celebration of Teaching Excellence. - CD-ROM/Videotape George Washington Univ. 1996. o Distance Education: A Systems Perspective. Wadsworth<, Belmont<, CA. 1996. (with M. Moore) o Exploring Learning & Instruction: The Theory into Practice Program. Hypertext database available in Hyperties, HyperCard, and via WWW [http://tip.psychology.org]. 1992 present. o Public Access Systems: Bringing Computer Power to the People. Ablex, Norwood, NJ<. 1994. o Educational Technology: Leadership Perspectives. Educational Technology o Publications, Englewood< Cliffs, NJ. 1994. (with W. Lynch) o We Teach With Technology: New Visions for Education. Franklin Beedle & Assoc. Irvine, CA. 1992. (with B. Hunter and M. Furlong) o Computers for Educational Administrators. Ablex, Norwood, NJ<. 1990. o Adminsim (MS-DOS). San Diego, CA<: Park Row Inc. 1989 o Hypertext Hands-On! A New Way of Accessing and Organizing Information. AddisonWesley, Reading, MA<. 1989. (with B. Shneiderman) o Online Help Systems. Ablex, Norwood, NJ<. 1988. o Problem Analysis (MS-DOS), San Diego, CA<: Park Row Inc. 1988

o Artificial Intelligence and Instruction. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1987. o The CBT Analyst (MS-DOS). San Diego, CA<: Park Row Inc. 1987. o Authoring: A Guide to the Design of Instructional Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1986. o Guide to Managing Information with Your PC. Scott, Foresman & Co. Glenview, IL<. 1986. (with B. Hunter & H. Hunter) o Cost/Benefits Analysis (MS-DOS). San Diego, CA<: Park Row Inc. 1986. o Guide to Telecommunications for Your IBM PC. Scott, Foresman & Co. Glenview, IL<. 1985. (with B. Hunter & H. Hunter) o Training for Tomorrow: Distributed Learning Through Computer and Communications Technology. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1985. o Computers for Kids Over Sixty. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1984. (with M. Furlong) o Training & Technology: A Handbook for HRD Professionals. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1984. o Computer Based Training: A Guide to Selection and Implementation. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1983. o Costs, Benefits & Productivity in Training Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA<. 1982. Links to Greg Kearsleys work are provided here. o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Educational Technology: A Critique of Pure Reason The Virtual Professor: A Personal Case Study Engagement Theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning Online Education: New Paradigms for Learning and Teaching Doing Doctoral Study at a Distance Engineering Degrees at a Distance: The University of Wisconsin MEPP Program MEPP: A Case Study of Online Education New Developments in Learning Tips for Training Online Instructors Gregs Guide to Developing Online Courses (PDF download) Instructional Design & Online Learning (PPT download) Is Online Learning for Everybody? Preparing K-12 Teachers to Teach Online Preparing School Administrators for Online Learning The E-Learning Department of One E-learning and Unions Preparing Engineering Faculty to Teach Online Success & Sustainability of Online Programs (PPT download) What Instructional Designers Really Do How To Design Good Online Courses (PPT download)

Engagement Theory
Dr. Kearsleys views on engagement theory are encapsulated in this document that he wrote with Ben Shneiderman. Engagement Theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning Engagement theory has emerged from the authors' experiences teaching in electronic and distance education environments (see Shneiderman, 1994, 1998; Shneiderman et al, 1995; Kearsley, 1997). The fundamental idea underlying engagement theory is that students must be meaningfully engaged in learning activities through interaction with others and worthwhile tasks. While in principle, such engagement could occur without the use of technology, we believe that technology can facilitate engagement in ways which are difficult to achieve otherwise. So engagement theory is intended to be a conceptual framework for technologybased learning and teaching.

Although not directly derived from other theoretical frameworks for learning, it has much in common with many such frameworks. For example, with its emphasis on meaningful learning, it is very consistent with constructivist approaches. Because it emphasizes collaboration among peers and a community of learners, it can be aligned with situated learning theories. Because its focuses on experiential and self-directed learning, it is similar in nature to theories of adult learning (i.e., andragogy). Basic Principles By engaged learning, we mean that all student activities involve active cognitive processes such as creating, problem-solving, reasoning, decision-making, and evaluation. In addition, students are intrinsically motivated to learn due to the meaningful nature of the learning environment and activities. Engagement theory is based upon the idea of creating successful collaborative teams that work on ambitious projects that are meaningful to someone outside the classroom. These three components, summarized by Relate-Create-Donate, imply that learning activities: occur in a group context (i.e., collaborative teams) are project-based have an outside (authentic) focus The first principle (the "Relate" component) emphasizes team efforts that involve communication, planning, management and social skills. The modern workplace demands proficiency in these skills, yet historically students have been taught to work and learn on their own. Research on collaborative learning suggests that in the process of collaboration, students are forced to clarify and verbalize their problems, thereby facilitating solutions. Collaboration also increases the motivation of students to learn, a significant consideration in settings with high drop-out rates (e.g., teen-agers, distance learners). Furthermore, when students work in teams, they often have the opportunity to work with others from quite different backgrounds and this facilitates an understanding of diversity and multiple perspectives. The second principle (the "Create" component) makes learning a creative, purposeful activity. Students have to define the project (problem domain) and focus their efforts on application of ideas to a specific context. Conducting their own projects is much more interesting to students that answering sterile textbook problems. And because they get to define the nature of the project (even if they don't choose the topic), they have a sense of control over their learning which is absent in traditional classroom instruction. Project orientation is the essence of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) approaches which are often used in medical and others types of professional education (e.g., Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980). The third principle (the "Donate" component) stresses the value of making a useful contribution while learning. Ideally each project has an outside "customer" that the project is being conducted for. The customer could be a campus group, community organization, school, church, library, museum, government agency, local business, or needy individual. In many cases, the projects can be work-related, i.e., an activity that fits into a team's occupational or career interests. The authentic learning context of the project increases student motivation and satisfaction. This principle is consistent with the emphasis on school-to-work programs in many schools systems and colleges, as well as the "service" philosophy of contemporary corporate training efforts (e.g., Jacoby & Associates, 1996). Engagement theory is different from many older models of computer-based learning in which the emphasis was on individualized instruction and interactivity. Engagement theory does promote interaction, but human interaction in the context of group activities, not individual interaction with an instructional program. The latter form of interaction tended to be measured by single responses (e.g., key presses or mouse clicks) whereas engagement requires assessment of larger units of work (e.g., reports, programs, user satisfaction). The difference

between engagement and interactivity reflects the shift in thinking about computers in education as communication tools rather than some form of media delivery devices. Furthermore, engagement theory places a great deal of emphasis on providing an authentic (i.e., meaningful) setting for learning, something not present in previous models. About Collaboration Collaboration can be as simple as a two-minute in-class exercise involving pairs of students or as elaborate as a multi-year curriculum development project involving many teams. Termlength projects done primarily outside the classroom are the most popular form of collaboration since they require minimal changes to the usual classroom routine. While a few disciplines such as laboratory science or fine arts make regular use of in-class collaboration, most courses do not. Yet collaborative learning is a technique that applies to any domain. Math students can work on problems, English students can review each other's work, Computer Science students can develop or debug programs together, and so on. Email is one of the most important collaborative tools and it usually serves as the communication backbone for all activities. Web conference boards or chat programs may also be important means for collaboration and sharing of results. The web will probably play an important role in terms of acquiring information. Read Full Article

References
Engagement Theory a framework for technology-based Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Engagement_theory Greg Kearsleys Home Page. http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/ TIP Learning Theory Website http://www.instructionaldesign.org/index.html Greg Kearsleys Resume Page http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/resume.htm

You might also like