Stereotypical title, I know, but what else can be said for one of the most face paced and ever changing field to exist in education. Instructional Design and Technology is a fitting title but it comes with enough baggage to be stopped at most airports. How can we ever agree on what we do if we cannot find a common label for our field? Why do we need such extensive ways to label ourselves when the only people that are served by it is ourselves?
I do like how Chapter 1 is laid out but I also found way to many words for what we do. Showing a progression that also includes a document that is over 120 pages long seems to be a way to distract those who are curious from being curious. I found this chapter to be a detractor as well because it took something as simple as a name and streched it paper thin.
I agree that we need validation for what we study and do, but having the AECT continually finding new ways to describe it seems like a waste of time. We have to remember that what we do does matter and giving validation through definition only turns others off of our cause which is to create ethical and educational ways to learn for our students that uses technology and is not a flash in the pan. Media has a purpose and so does technology, but does validating ourselves to no one else but ourselves help.
Times change and so do the meanings of words. As a history teacher, I face this everyday. I just need to remind myself that technology changes faster and keeping up with it should remain goal number 1 and that is how we will be known to those wish to hire us, give us new tasks, seek our advice, and/or need our talents to create valuable curriculum.