The Analysis of Learning Tasks and The Design of System Instruksional [ Lecturer : Dr. Dirgantara Wicaksono, M.Pd ]

The Analysis of Learning Tasks

Once the spesific perfermance expected of the learner has been identified, we can consider what he has to learn in oder to be able to perform successfully. The next step, then is for the system designer to analyze and formulate of learning taks. The analysis and formulate of learning tasks is a prosedure having a structure spesific to it and it is composed of a set of strategies. Figure 8 presents this structure and identifies its component strategies.

Figure 8

The Analysis and Formulation of Learning Tasks

The Analysis and Inventory of Learing Tasks

Performance tasks, as described in a statement of objectives, communicate to us behavior which the product of the system is expected to be able to exhibit at output point. Learning tasks and their analysis identify whatever learning is to be undertaken by the learner to enable him to demonstrate the performance described.

Most of the performance we want to facilitatein school, however, is within the cognitive and affective domains. Some of the types of learning involved here are multiple discrimination, preseption and use of consepts and prinsiples, problem aolving, and decisions making. A descriptions of performance expectation in these domains will rarely, if ever, suffice as identification of learning tasks. Although it may be implied, a learning task is not explicit in a statement of performance. It must be uncovered, deduced by an examination and analysis of the task itself. The following examples demonstrate the analysis of learning tasks.

The learner will be able to perform such tasks as

1.      Answering questions in reference to concrete phenomena immediately observable in environment.

2.      Asking questions about the same.

3.      Describing a picture or object.

4.      Describing his actions or the actions of those around him.

5.      Repeating a short story he has just heard or read.

6.      Engaging in a conversation about events in which he has been involved.

7.      Communicating while traveling and in social situations that are routine to a foreign visitor.

An analysis of learning task commences by considering what has to be learned by student so that he will be able to communicate in the situations described and with the accuracy specified. The learning task, of course, it not to memorize utterances that may be used in communications events under the circumtances described in the objective. The defferent kinds of patterns emerging from such analysis would suggest the establishment of the different categories of an inventory of  learning tasks. One of these categories could cover sound features, intonations, and stress parttens. Another one could list sentence patterns the learner has to be able to use in order to speak in the manner implied by the objective.

The designer should include in the inventory spesific paralanguage features and kinesics. Futhermore, the analysis must identify typical situations that are representative of the circumstance indicated in the statement of objectives and in the descriptions of performance tasks. The analysis must also refer to catagories  of vocabulary that are related to the spesified situations. The items uncovered by this analysis can be listed and arranged in an inventory. The information in this inventory will then serve as input data for the design and development of the system.

Up to now, the examples provided to demonstrate the use of the strategies of the systems development have applied to learning on college and adult levels. Our next example concerns the analysis and inventory of learning tasks on the kindergarten level. The project attepted to develop a guidance subsystem for parents to prepare their child forhis new public school experience.

Of the numerous areas of development, social interaction  was explored in depth. A whole set of objectives was formulated of which only one will be presented here  as an example.

In a kindergarten class, under the direction of the teacher, heaving heard a recorded story at a listening post, a child within a group of a six to eight childern will participate in discussing a story with his peers.

expectation: Within a four week period, an increase of frequency of verbalization will be considered growth.

This objective was subjected to an analysis. The outcome of the analysis as a reported here is not inclusive at all. it gives only hints of the types of learning tasks that a complete analysis would eventually uncover.

It is obvious that the child has to learn to converse on a given topic. But what does the child have to learn spesifically in order to able to do this?

Our analysis suggests that he has to learn to

1.   Comprehend what has been communicated to him; to grasp significant elements an relationships.

2.  Recall the story, its significant elements and relationships; recall evens in chronological order.

3.  Organize his verbal account of the story with authenticity (significant elements, relationships, order, and so on)

In order to these things, he also has to learn to

1.   Use patterns of languange commonly used in the classroom.

2.  Use word within their common range of meaning.

In addition, he must learn to

1.   Understand that there are activities in which he is expected to participate.

2.  Pay attention to what being said.

3.  Respond to certain verbal an nonverbal cues.

4.  Wait for this turn.

This analysis demostrates that a description to expected output behavior is only a basis for an analysis of learning tasks and it is not in itself a description of them. As a result of an inquiri of what has to be learned in order  for the learner to be able to behave in the way described in the performace task, an inventory of learning tasks can be formulated. This inventory, however, will contain most likely more than what actually has to be learned. we will explore this notion next.

Input Competence

In most instances probably in all instances we will find that learner brings to the learning situation some skills, information, attitudes, an so on, that are relevant to what he is supposed to learn. It would be a waste of time to teach competence that the learner already prossesses. We usually refer to competence that are relevant as the initial or input capabilities of the learner.

In our kindergarten example, for intance, relevant to the child's verbal interaction with the teacher, it can be reasonably expected that the childern will have experienced a range of verbal interaction with adult members of their families and other adults in their environment. The intensity of these experieces may vary from little or no participation to extensive paticipations in such things as dinner table discussions, church school experiences, family council, nursery school participation, or visits to the doctor's office.

It is the job of the system designer to assess the capabilities the student has already acquired relative to the learning inventory. This assessment in pertinent even in a case where the learner is to acquire some esoteric knowledge, such as a foreign language has never heard of. The learner of the foreign language will have at his diaposal at the input poin features of hia native language that are trasferable into the target language. For the example, native speakers of English who target learn Spanish will find that certain syntactical constructions and some grammatical elements such as advebs, prepotions, and conjungtions work in similiar fashion in both lan gauges, the concept of plurality existsin both languages; in fact, in both languages one of the ways to form plurals is by adding an s to a noun. There are also sounds in the phonological inventory of English that are transferable.

Input Test

By using an input test we can determine what a student already knows about a subject. Of course, this will vary from one student to another. To consider this variation is highly important. If we do not pay attention to individualdifferences in input capabilities, we invite trouble. The learner who has not acquired the capabilities we believe he should have will be frustrated and will probably fail. On the other hand, the student who is scheduled to learn something he already knows is going to be bored and will help to avoid both pitfalls. It will make it possible to provide a pre-input program to overcome deficiencies in some students and to arrange for the advanced  placement of others.

The Indentification and Characterization Of Learning Tasks 

The characterization of lerning tasks provides additional information about learning tasks. This information will be used as input data for the design of the system. There are

Figure 9 

Computing the Actual Learning Task

 

Two ways that this characterization can be accomplished. One is to specify the type of learning the acquisition of a particular learning task represents. Gagne identifies a whole set of learning types, such as signal learning, response learning, motor and verbal chains, multiple discrimination, concept learning, principle learning, and problem solving. These types differsignivicantlyas to the particular conditions which need to prevail in order to ensure the mastering of learning tasks for different types. For example, productions governing this learning are very much different from the learning of the use of a new sentence structure, which is a principle learning. The use of a grammatical structure cannot be learned by copying or memorizing sentences in which the structure occurs.

            The identification of the type of  learning a learning task represents is indeed a most useful information. As we will explain later, this identification is one of the bases upon which to select and organize learning content and learning experiences.

A Review of Strategies and an Examination of Their Nature

The analysis and formulation of learning tasks lead the system designer to point where he can clearly state what has to be learned in the system in general an by specific students in particular. The information in Figure 10 briefly reviews the strategies involved in this process. It also accounts for preceding strategies.

The data gained from the formulation of objectives serves as bases from which to proceed with a query of  what has to be learnedin order to attain the objectives of the system. As a result of this inquiry, an inventory of learning tasks is evolved. This inventory is then subjected to further analysis. In most cases we find that the learner has previously acquired some of the tasks listed in the inventory. The actual learning task the residue of learning task inventory minus relevant input competence. Once the designer has indentified the actual learning tasks, he must characterize them as to the type of learning they represent and as to the degree of difficulty they pose for the learner.

The nature of the processes employed during the strategies described up to this point is primarily analysis, but at times it is also synthesis. To begin with, an analysis of systems purposes leads to gathering data from which, through further analysis, a statement of objectives can be developed. The objectives must then be further analyzed in order for him to behave in the way prescribed. This analysis provides the learning inventory. To assess input competence, a test relevant to the learning inventory versus input competence furnishes a set of actual learning tasks thatcan be characterized as to 

Figure 10 

Strategies of Analysis of Learning Tasks

The kind of learning they represent and degree of difficulty they ppose for the learner. Again, the integrated use of analysis and synthesis appears to be characteristic of these strategies.

            This integrated process becomes firther activated as system planning moves into the actual design of the system. The structure and stara=tegies of this phase of systems development will be discussed in the next chapter.

The Design of the System

Once we have identified and characterized the tasks the learner is to attain, we can proceed with the design of a system that will provide for the mastering of these tasks. The folloeing inquiris will guide the development of the design:

1.      What has to be done to enable the learner to master the tasks?

2.      Who or what has the capability of doing whatever has to be done?

3.      Who or what will do exactly what?

4.      When and when will they do it?

Consequently this third phase of systems development will consist of four major strategies :

1.      Function analyis ( what has to be done and how )

2.      Components analysis ( who or what has the potential to do it )

3.      Distribution of functions among components ( who or what will do exactly what )

4.      Schedulling ( when and where it will be done )

Function Analysis

The input data for functions anaysis is the information gained from the identification and characterization of learning tasks. The purpose of functions analysis is to identify everything that has to be done by the system in order to facilitate the attainment of the specified learning tasks. At this point the questions of  “done by whom” or “by what” are purposely avoided.

In designing the system there are four functions which need to be accomplished. They include the following:

1.      Selecting and organizing the content.

2.      Selecting and organizing the learning experiences.

3.      Managing the learners.

4.      Evaluating  the learning and operating system.

Selecting and Organizing the Content

In many subjects, we have an almost unlimited amount of content from which to select. In foreign languages, for the Relatonship of Design Strategies

Example, the vocabulary must be selected from thousand of available words. There are hundreds of basic situational contexts and numerous optional grammatical forms.

The selection of content, therefore, is a decision-making operation. As in any decision making, the aim should be to have an available rational basic upon which to select the content. As we have already mentioned, the characterization of learning tasks is a primary basis for selecting content. Information on the type of learning that a task represents helps to select appropriate content. But we should seek some other bases, too. In the foreign language field, for example, some of the factors that will influance content selection will include frequency of occurrence. Other consideration are the availability of an item, the flexibility of the item in saying different things with it, and learnability, which implies similarity, clarity, brevity, and regularity. It should be note, however, that the actual selection of course content is more complex than our neat example would sugest. In making a selection, we will find that some of the selection factors will be in conflict with others, for example, an item may occur frequently in the language, but not be easily learnable, or it may have a high degree of availability, but its coverage may be very limited.

Managing the Learners

The management of learners was described by Smith, as the process of identifying and carrying out those functions that will keep the student productively participating in the learning activity. How then can the system best involve the learner and keep him interested in learning?

            In developing a design for the management of learners, we need adequate data about the learner in order to introduce short-term and long-term incentives and to meet the requirements of the learners uniqueness so that we can keep him optimally involved in learning. The management of learners will also include the designing of procedures and strategies whereby the teacher will have an appropriate selection of available curriculum alternatives.

Evaluation

            This function provides for the constant monitoring of the learning and of the system. It poses an ongoing inquiry into the achievement of the learner and into the effectiveness and efficiency of the system. More specifically, the designer of the system must find answers to the following questions: on the basis of the progress he is making now, is the learner likely to attain his terminal objectives? If not, what adjustment need to be made? Are the functions provided by the system the best ones to achieve system goals? What are some of the shortcomings? Where and how can it be improved? By pursuing these inquiries, we can monitor the learner and the system continuously.

            The four strategies explored above comprise functions analysis. The curriculum resulting from functions analysid needs to be further qualified by the finding of component analysis which we will discuss in the following section.

Component Analysis

One of the most radical departures from present curriculum practices suggested by the system approach is the way the designer of an instructional system makes decisions about the selection of the components of the system. The term components analysis refers to who or what should be employed to carry out the specific functions identified as the outcome of functions analysis.

            Educators have rather firmly set ways of thinking about the employment of educational resources-men, media, and other material resources. We say the teacher is “in charge”, inasmuch as he is in the classroom, is the students main source of information, governs student behavior, and tests student achievement. He, of course, can use “aids” such as textbooks, and audiovisuals. This teacher-and-instructioncenteredness has not changed much, even though nowadays we employ more and more teaching aids. With the help of NDEA funds we have purchased during recent years “halfprice” equitment and media. So we have acquired lots of gadgets, even though we don’t always know just what to do with them. Thus, we know of administrators who have gotten headaches from worrying about hoe to utilize their 60-booth modern remote-controlled beautiful language lab. ( Have you ever heard about language lab cemeteries?)

            The applications of the systems concept to education has introduced a kind of thinking that is radically different from that described above. System thinking in education has brough about a new way of looking at the whos and whats of learning environment. More specifically, the value system expressed by and inherent in the trem teaching aids has completely changed. We no longer talk about the teacher and his instructional aids, but about the components of a system that are considered and used on the basis of their ability to accomplish specific educational functions. This last statement is the central concept of component analysis.

Examples of Component Analysis

            Let us now consider the teacher as acomponent of an instructional system. Extensive research done during recent years on the use of programmed materials has demonstrated that student can acquire information as well without the personal intercession of the teacher as they can with it. We thus wonder about the role of the teacher as the source of information. A systematic component analysis will lead us to recognize that the teacher may be best described as being the manager of learning. This primary function may include providing for the motivation of the learner, for the planning and managing of learning experiences, and for the examining and exploiting-with the student-of the information the student has acquired.

            Some examples and hints about component selection will further clarify the appropriate use of this strategy. Going back to our language learning example, and having the improvement of the student’s pronunciation in mind, from the systems point of view one of the questions we can ask is, how can the function of the learning of sound production be facilitated by adesigned interaction of man and media? This type of question is in rather sharp contrast to questions we usually ask, such as: how can the tape recorder and other media be used to aid the instructor in teaching pronunciation? The first question-the inquiry about designed interaction-would lead us to a different set of answers from the second: and it is these different kinds of answers that we seek throught the use of the systems approach.

In conducting component competence of the student. Tem for learning will first identify the functions that need to be carried out. Next he will assess the capabilities required to carry out these functions. Then he will consider alternative.

As an example of the assessment of the potential of a specific medium, we shall draw upon the instructional television research report of the U.S. Naval training device center. The report describes a set ofcriteria by which systematic judgment can be made as to the use of  TV as a component.

1.      For presentation  or demonstration, television is applicable. For practice, it is not.

2.      If two-way communication between instructor and student is necessary, television is not suitable. [both of these criteria reflect the fact that television is a medium for presentation.] 

3.      If rapid dissemination of information, reaching many  men early in training, or rapid distribution of new information is necessary or urgent, television is favored. Otherwise, television may be considered optional.

4.      If there is a shortage of qualified instructors, television is favored. If not, television is optional.

5.      If the training situation involves physical risk or danger, television is favored. If not. It is optional.

6.      If training aids or actual equipment is in short supply, television is favored. If  supplies are ample, television is optional.

7.      If training aids and equipment are difficult to move because they are large, heavy, or unwieldy, this circumstance favors television. If they are easily moved, television is optional.

8.      If close-ups are necessary in viewing training, this is a plus factor for television.

9.      If color is an essential element of the presentation, color television is required. Otherwise, black and white can be used.

10.  If much training time is lost in moving from one training area to another, television is desirable. Otherwise, it is optional.

11.  If making a sound record is very desirable, television can be used to prepare tapes or kinescopes. If the sound record is not important, television is optional.

12.  If weather interferes with presentation, use of television can solve this difficulty.

Components of a learning system are selected on the basis of an evaluation of their capability to accomplish functions required for the mastering of learning tasks. The examples described above demonstrate the assessment of the potential of a specific component in a particular setting.

Component  analysis in selecting and organizing content and learning experiences

The content of a course is usually determined by the selection  of textbooks or series of books.

Those who make these selections are usually state and local educational authorities, school or department committees , or-on the higher levels of education the indivual teacher. For all pratical purposes, the learner is excluded from any participation in these functions, the selection and organization of learning experiences are often taken care of by simply following the textbooks. At best they are organized by the teacher with the occasional involvement of his class. The individual learner is seldom, if ever, considered as a valid component in the accomplishment of these fonctionts.

During recent years these has been an increasing recognition of the need to provide for individual differences by having available curriculum alternatives. It has been suggested that variations in initial competence, in aptitude, and in rate and style of learning should be met by variations in content and learning experiences . the components used to determine what alternatives to choose, however, are usually people other than the student himself. It is  the teacher who manages the instructional strategy. The counselor plays a role in gathering data on the students achievement, background, interests, and needs. In the most advanced instructional setups, a computer may monitor the students learning and prescribe, from available alternatives, the specific path to follow. Thus, in the contermporary educational scene, although there is greater emphasis on learning, the learner is not yet activated as a decision-making component. It is suggested that even the most  ”modern” practices can be regarded as only halfway measures.

Distribution

Having identified function and surveyed components, the designer of a system must assign specific components. This process is called distribution. During the distribution of functions to components, the designer must consider what component offers the best potential to accomplish a particular function. He must also consider the constraints and limitations of the system. This analysis must be conducted for each component. Sometimes he will find that the most effective component is also the most excessive time involved may therefore require him to make some trade offs and selectinstead a component that is still within the range of projected effectiveness and also within the cost limits of the system. The aspect that cannot be compromised or traded off, however, is the attainment of objectives. Proper distribution , therefore, will ensure the selection of components that will produce the predetermined output product and still be within the limitations and capabilities of the system. Briefly, the goal is to bring about the best possible output within the least possible time and at the lowest possible cost. Figure 12 illustrates the trade off concept.

In figure 12 two continuums are projected on the diagram, one to represent effectiveness and the other to represent cost. We cannot move below point A on the effectiveness continuum. If we did, the quality of the output would not be acceptable. One the other  hand, we cannot move above point B on the cost continuum because we cannot affrord it. These points are determined by the resources available to us. Arrows C and D indicate the direction of the most desired state. The purpose of the trade off strategy is to attain the best possible output quality with the lowest possible expenditure.

Distribution is the stress point in the systems development process. It is at this point that key decisions are made and alternative functions and components are considered, weighed, and then rejected or selected. In view of the critical nature of this process, some further clarification is in order.

First, we must reemphasize that in making design decisions, function always leads and component always follows. By now this must sound logical to the reader, but making design decisions with this logic is not always easy. In order to exercise this logic we need to overcome the habit off some of our present prsctices. One of the marks of prevailing practices in education is that it is component oriented. Usually we first consider what components we already have 

Scheduling

            Scheduling is that part of the learning system that is concerned with time and place. once the distributions has been determined, we know what function will be accomplished by what components. The designer must then decide when and where each function should take place. Scheduling places the information gained from distribution into a time and place frame, thereby ensuring that human components and material resources with needed characterisics will be available at the appropriate time and at the place required for the purpose of crrying out functions in the most effective and economical.

The Nature of Strategies

In this chapter we have discussed the strategies of designing a system for learning. Reviewing these strategies, we may realie that their nature is of two kinds: analysis and synthesis. We can observe, however, a change in emphasis.  During the phase of formulating objectives and learning tasks,which we convered in chapter 3 and 4, we used analysis most intensively.

Implementation and Quality Control

            The product of the processes of design and development is a system ready to be put into operation. Before the system is installed, however, two additional strategies should be introduced. One is called system training and the othee, system testing.

System Training

            System trainingis a preinstallation exercise of the system. It helps to refine the operational interrelationship and the integration of the components or subsystems. During this dry run we can also ascertain if the components of the system really possess the needed capabilities. If deficiencies are discovered, we can introduce a training or adjustment process by which the required competence can be attained. At this point the two preinstallation strategies training and testinf may complement each other. That is, any inadequacies or weak points is components or functions uncovered by system testing of componets or srategies that are conducive to adjustment.

System Testing

The application of the systems concept also requires that we test the system before we install it. System testing serves the purpose of ascertaining whether or not the system can perform the processess for which it was designed. There are several ways to conduct systems testing or system evaluation. As a minimum requirement the designer must think through the subsequent steps of the design process, continuously asking himself if the product of the particular step he is testing is the best one to achive the objectives of the sysrem. this thinking through process can be done more formally by a systems analyst in fact, it is advantageous that system testing be conducted by someone other than the desifgner. We can also set up a system simulation to demostrate and avaluate the functioninf of the system that we are designing.

            A sophisticated approach to system simulation is to use computers. The use computers, however, is limited to the testing of component or strategies that are conducive for quantification. This requirement places limitations on use of computers in this area.

            In my view, the only satisfactory way to test an instructional system is by actually trying it out with students in the actual environment, or at least in a simulated environment. However, because system testing, or system evaluation, is an ongoing process, it is difficult to conclude that we have ever complecated the testing. The best we can say is that we have probably done sufficient preinstallation testing and have made any needed correction.

System Installation

System training and system testing are the two initial strategies of the implementation phase of systems operation. The product of these two strategies is the decision either to eliminate the system or to install it. If installation is decide upon, then the system is put into operation in its planned environment and it begind to process the input and then produce output. During operation, the system is continuously evaluated in order to measure its adequacy and the comulative and terminal perfomance of the laerner. Strategies of this evaluation will be discussed in the following section.

Evaluation and Quality Control

            The purpose of evaluation and quality control is to ensure that the objectives of the system are being met ore, if not, that adjustments will be introduced in orde to corret the system so that objectives can be eventually attained. This phase of system development is comprised of several srategies with specific purpose of their own, such as system monitoring, which is used to evaluate continuously the effectiveness of the system, and performance testing, which is a means of measuring the progresive achievement and terminal proficiency of the learner. of the system are being met ore, if not, that adjustments will be introduced in orde to corret the system so that objectives can be eventually attained. This phase of system development is comprised of several srategies with specific purpose of their own, such as system monitoring, which is used to evaluate continuously the effectiveness of the system, and performance testing, which is a means of measuring the progresive achievement and terminal proficiency of the learner.

The continued accomplishment of these two strategies provides us with information we can use to carry out appropriate adjustments in order to improve the terminal performance of the learner and to optimize the effectiveness and economy of the system.

System Monitoring

Monitoring the system requires its continuous evaluation and analysis. The outcome of these operations informs us about the adequacy of the system. As the system operates, the designer must introduce such queries as.

Are objectives clearly stated and formulated along measurable and operational lines?

Does the criterion test truly reflect the obectives ?

Have we interpreted our objectives properly in exploring the learning tasks?

Do the learning tasks identify everything that has to be learned in order to enable the learner the prform in the way described by the objectives of the system?

Were any tasks identified that do not contribute to the attainment of the objectives?

Did we designate all functions needed to accomplish the learning tasks, or do we have some superfluous functions?

Have we selected the best possible and most economical components and are they functioning effectively?

Inquiries of this kind should also be used to explore distribution, scheduling, and system training and testing. As a result of these inquiries, we will be able to determine what changes, if any, are necessary to maintain or improve the quality of the product and the efficiency of the system. For example:

What operations or performance espects of the system should be eliminated because  they prodyce superfluously or serve something other than the stated system goals?

What operational and system performance espects are lacking or are deficient and, thus, make less than their appropriate constribution to the system objectives ?

Are we getting our money’s worth ? can we improve the economy, and if so, how?

Performance Testing 

The evaluation of the learner’s performance is accomplished through continuous checking of student progress and by testing his performance capabilities at the terminal point.

tests,which are used throughout the program ,are designed for the purposes of.

Measuring the input competence of the learner in relaton to the learning tasks to be attended.

Measuring the degree to which the learner has the competeces that are prerequisite to mastering learning tasks.

Diagnosing learning style and learning rate so as to best accommodate the individual learner.

Assessing the progress of the learner in order to introduce changes that will enable him to perform in the expected way.

Pointing toward specific deficiencies in the system itself.

The test that is to measure output performance should assess the degree to which the student is able to exhibit the behavior specified by objectives.

System Adjustments: Change  to Improve

Existing educational programs do provide for the measurement of student progress and terminal proficiency.test results are usually communicated to students to inform them of their progress and achievement.test results,however,are only seldom used by design for the instructional program.one of the most salient aspects of the systeams approach is the continuous feedback of performance data intothe system for the purpose of making adequate adjustments in the system.

The self-adjusting characteristics of systems development prescribe change as a perpetual process in the development, operation, and maintenance of systems. We can safely say that the only valid means of maintaining a system is by purposely changing it. For those of us in education this characteristic of systems development is probably the most difficult to get used to.

Conclusion

The prupose of this study has been to explain and demonstrate the use of the systems approach in the development of instructional systems. The developmental design described here as presented us a structure ad a set of strategies for making curriculum decisions.

The nucleus of a system for learning is its purpose. It is purpose from which system obectives can be derived. Based on objectives the designer has to determine whatever has to be learned in order to ensure the attainment of objectives. Next, input competence of the learner can be assessed inorder to see if he has already acquired capabilities that are relevant to his learning task. The defferential analysis of learning task as opposed to input competence provides a set of actual learning tasks.

Once we have identified and characterized the learning task, we can begin to design the system. We must consider functions that have to be carried out bythe system to ensure the mastering of leaning tasks. Next, functions have to be distributed among components. Decisions made on this basis lead to the design of the system. Following the testing and training of the system., its installation may procees. Following the testing and training of the system., its installation may procees. Finally, the feedback gained from output testing andsystem monitoring is used to introduce adjustments and improvements in this system.figure 13 summarizes the design of instructional systems.

Innovation and Research

Once the most consipicuous characteristics of the systems approach is the necesstity to change in order to improve the system. It is this characteristic and the feedback structure of the systems design that indicate that the system approach has an inherent potential which, if properly explored, may offer a framework and set of strategies for educational innovation and research.

In doing educational research, many of us have been frustrated by a demand to isolate variables and deal with them as single entities. We have faced this situation knowing that such a demand can seldom, if ever, be satisfied. In the contemporary educational setting, we have to accept the complexity of interacting variables and it is this phenomenon which the systems approach can best accommodate. The systems approach appears to make it possibleto identify functions and components, describe thei interaction, and then predict, observe, and measure the effect of change or variations in components and funtions. The sequence of steps suggested by the decision-making structure outlined in this book suggests a sequence for exploring curriculum innovation and research.

Evaluation 

A review of the design structure and strategies described in this book will indicate that the structure and strategies of the systems approach may offer a framework and procedures that are useful In evaluating existing curriculums. An analysis of an existing curriculum, a course of study, on instructional unit will start out by inquiring into the purpose of the unit. What are the environmental demandsm conditions, and constraints under which is it to function? Are objectives specified and the formulated along meansurable and operational lines? Does the performance test reflect these objectives? Is the input competence of the learner tested apporiately? Are learning tasks clearly identified and characterized? Can we locate content and learning experiences that do not actually serve he attainment of objectives? Have we provided for all that is needed to facilitate the expected performance? Do we have available adequate alternatives in content, learning experiences, and motivation ? do components demonstrate optimum capability in carrying out functions? The questions can also be applied to distribution, scheduling, implementation, and quality control. What is suggested here is that the inquiries which are pursued to develop a new system may also be introduced for the evaluation and analysis of existing programs. There are, of course, differences between the processes of analysis and evaluation of an existing system and that of building a new one. One of differences is to pay full attention to specific systems constraints at the beginning of the analysis of an existing system, rather than, as we did in systems development, at the later stage during distribution. The other difference is implied by the tern analysis. In evaluation, the nature of strategies used is analysis. We are not building a new system; we are ony furnishing data that can be used to correct, adjust, or rebuild the system.

Early in this discussion it was suggested that educatin is a sytem in the special sense implicit in the systems concept. Looking at educatin from a systems viewpoint, we have found that the systems approach appears to be a valid decision-making process for the design of educational systems.

In closing, I suggest that the message of this book is not limited to the description and demonstration of the educational use of systems development. I am convinced that the eduvational applivation of systems theory does more than offer decision-making and systems-development procerdures. More specifically, I feel tha the use of the systems concept in education and provides a new insight into the purpose of education and puts a new emphasis on it. It forces us to face up to the question.: what is education about ? once we have the answer to this question then and not until then can we proceed to ask: what do we have to do about it ? systems thinking insist not only upon a clear statement of purpose but also upon the logical and measured implementation of the purpose. I believe that if learning were taken seriously as its purpose education would change from what it is today to something surely different. Having in mind the learning of spesific skill, knowledge, and attitude as the purpose of education will require as to make learning itself the key process after which the learner becomes the component around which all other components are organized. 

The systems approach, thus appears to have a dual role in education. First as applied in education, it offers of a powerfull methology for decision making and design development. Second, system approach, as applied to education, may bring about a clear understanding of what education  is truly about. It may be that it is from this second application that we will derive the greater benefit.