I like this question authority - even your own. Keeps you grounded.

The framework of something like ADDIE or SAM can give a broad outline to the process so you don't miss out on something important such as learner analysis but loose enough to allow for innovation.

And by not having to innovate everything, we can take what already exists and adapt and modify to fit with the unfamiliar.

I think that this could be related to design in other fields as well. We don't expect a fashion designer to follow a set of loked down steps to create a new line of fashion. They take what is know, what has been made before, what marerials they have and produce something that is a synthesis of all of these things and that is shaped by the designers vision.

Instructional design should be the same. We take what already exists, mix in new things, adapt to the needs of the learners and the institution requesting the design and come up with a design that melds these things along with the designers own viewpoint.

I find that my high achieving students struggle with this the most. They want to be right and to be told they are right. Ambiguity is frustrating - the good kind of frustrating that leads to understanding.

When you can get here with a group of students, you can really see that they have taken in the information and truly mastered it. And the students are so proud of themselves when they can ut all of the pieces together.

Here is where it is important to teach students how to ecaluate and critique the work of others and t accept constructive criticism. I just had a great conservation with my junior level advisement kids to day. They asked me to show them how to do constructive criticism by giving them eash some constructive criticism. We had a blast and it generated great conversations. If they can give and take personal criticisn, they should be able to evaluate the ideas of themselves and otheres.

This is where "What if we did....." comes in.

I like that this takes idea genreation beyond brainstorming. good ideas instead of wild or random ideas. Ideas with some meat behind them.

Creativity is more than just coming up with ideas, these ideas need to be edited and refined and curated to find the ideas that will actually address the problem. That is where the critical thinking comes in.

This is a concern for me as a parent and a high school teacher. I have seen abuse of technology, bullying via technology, and dishonesty facilitated by technology. We need to do better with teaching our youth how to be a respnonsible person when using tech.

This lockstep idea is what made me wary of some ISD when we studdied ADDIE and SAM. I rarely find learning to be linear and exploration of ideas is usually circular to some degree.

I actually like these other terms better. I think creative is such a broad yet nebulous term that it can be applied to anything that is remotely different. Is different always creative?

I understand the client in professional learning for employees etc. But who is the client in K-12 education? the student? the parent? the community? the state?

Is there any way to make ALL of these possible clients satified at the same time?

In my experience with teens, this is key. I can have all of the objectives I want and know the most "efficient" way to teach them, but if the student have tuned out, I have not achieved my goal.

Some of my most successful lessons are ones in which the students are given the time and space to struggle and backtrack and redo and most importantly create their own learning.It is effective but talkes a TON of time and so may not be efficient. But the REMEMBER and understand and isn't that our real goal?

Extensive is the key word here. I don't think you can skin the survace in these areas and come up with interesting instruction.

I think this is where the boring comes in. While students find routine comforting and the structure helps maintain behavior expectations, it can be monotonous to see the same routine in EVERY class.

I think when you switch it up, it does a better job of engagment.