Romiszowski's Psychomotor Perspective Applied to Instructional Design

Summarizing even the main points of the body of research and theory put forth by a prolific writer such as Romiszowski would require a book of its own. Even one of his seminal books, Designing Instructional Systems, runs to almost 400 pages. However, if we focus solely on certain aspects of his body of work, we can profitably summarize just those cogent points.

Perhaps because of the inclusive nature of the subject matter of the skills he wished to address, which include physical, emotional, cognitive and social aspects of learning, Romiszowski has been able to develop a sophisticated and far-reaching learning theory. Because of the work that he has done in analyzing the continuum of skills involved in acquisition of both coordination and judgment in operating complex equipment or performing as a star athlete, Romiszowski is able to show connections in his theory with various other theories. The overlap of these theories can become fertile ground for developing comprehensive instructional designs.

The field of second language acquisition is addressed quite well by Romiszowski's theoretical model. Language proficiency involves psychomotor skills in pronunciation, affective skills in dealing with ongoing frustration, social skills in flexible interaction with others, and cognitive skills throughout, as meaning is sought from very new types of auditory and visual input.

The five stages of the process of learning which Romiszowski describes appear to be very fundamental and very effective:

1. Acquire knowledge of what should be done, why, in what order, and how.
2. Execute the actions, in order, for each part of the operation.
3. Transfer control from the eyes to the kinesthetic or other senses.
4. Automatize the skill (through repetition).
5. Generalize the skill to wider application. (Romiszowski 1999, p. 467)

Applying these five guidelines to Rosetta Stone, we can see that the essential grammar which must be conveyed to the student is covered step by step in an orderly manner. Auditory practice in done in context, reinforcing cognitive processing. Each step requires a physical response from the learner, and there is a multisensory aspect to the input and response. Eye, ear, and hand have to work in concert. Speaking, or any other creative response can be (and should be) delayed until there has been enough practice to feel comfortable, and the responses are reinforced through reading and ultimately through writing. This helps build toward automaticity, which is the level at which the learner doesn't have to think step by step minutely through the sentence or action. He or she receives the input, and responds automatically. In language learning, automaticity, rather than continual translation in one's head, is an important goal (Ellis 1985).

The spiral structure of the program design aids this slow movement toward automaticity. Contrastive adjectives, such as large and small, gender differences, plurals, as well as numerous other aspects, are introduced in one unit and reviewed in a somewhat different form in another unit. For example, numbers are introduced in Unit 4.03, then used as a chunk again in 5.04, as a part of measurements in 10.08, 15.02, 16.01 and 16.06. Different uses of the various possessive forms are seen in 2.05, 2.09, 5.02, and 8.06. And of course, numbers, possessives and other target vocabulary or grammatical features come up again and again as the situation illustrated in the picture prompt requires.

The Spiral Curriculum (Romiszowski 1981, p. 282) – great care taken at the initial stages leads to greater flexibility as the spiral grows.

The spiral review, which is systematic, helps ensure complete coverage of the whole grammar, and vocabulary which is seen as fundamental. Transparent to the user are the careful choices of vocabulary and fairly unobtrusive grammatical sophistication embedded in the cyclic progression of the lessons in Rosetta Stone.

Another spiral built into the program design is the ability to choose to hear a sentence, hear and read it at the same time, or on demand, and the requirement to write that same sentence or to unscramble the words of the sentence into a coherent whole. Because the learner can spiral through the same material in different forms, there is repetition and reinforcement without necessarily being inflexible and boring.

A design consideration that Rosetta Stone has aptly used is described by Welford, quoted by Romiszowski (1999, p. 475). Welford's principles include

1) chunking of information;

2) helping the learner be selective in information input;

3) pacing to avoid information overload; and

4) realistic threshold levels.

For the most part, Rosetta Stone prompts are in full sentence form. The chunking principle, of putting relevant information together so that information can be recalled as a "chunk" (Abney 1991), is followed by subject matter grouping, and by seeing words embedded in a sentence whose meaning can be mostly determined by the picture. At the same time, the learner can be selective, since she doesn't need to understand every single part of the sentence in order to "get it right." Guessing is encouraged, and accuracy in the details can follow later as the material is read and written. Self-pacing allows for greater learner satisfaction, and thus helps ensure that the affective aspect of being able to succeed is addressed well. There is no embarrassment or undue penalization for temporary failure.


Romiszowski (1981, p. 270) summarizes the four system levels which need to be considered in designing a curriculum:

Level 1: The course system

Level 2: The 'lesson' level, the instruction needed to achieve one objective

Level 3: The instructional event

Level 4: The learning step - detail of the instructional event


In this schema, he is echoing work done by others, as learning objectives are broken down, step by step, into specific instructional actions. Romiszowski's unique contribution is to remind us that such structure can give us flexibility to be creative, rather than mindlessly grinding out lesson plans if we are instructors, or plodding through material if we are learners. He reminds us that systemic design, as he proposes, means more than simply being systematic. "By 'systemic' we mean 'applying the systems approach in all its aspects and in particular those aspects that have to do with creative problem solving.' (1981, p. 270) Romiszowski's reminder means for one thing that we can rely on the system to make sure that the material is covered systematically, but that we can also be very creative in choosing our media and methods within the overall plan. Variety and spontaneity can have their place as they are balanced by the structure of the overall plan, which maps out the content of what is to be studied. This also means for another thing, that in sequencing, we can make mid-course corrections as need arises. If we see that A-B-D-C will work as well as A-B-C-D, then we are free to make the change. We can also skip steps or repeat them, if evaluation along the way points to the necessity for those adjustments. Rosetta Stone allows for these kind of adjustments, of course, and in our supplementing the basic structure of the material, we can feel justified that doing so will not rob the learner of anything needful.

We may picture the process of supplementation in the following graphic manner:

Stage 1 - vocabulary and grammar structures are presented by Rosetta Stone software

 

 

Stage 2 - vocabulary connections and expansions are presented by the instructor(s)

 

 

Stage 3 - Vocabulary expansion continues (synonyms, antonyms, equivalent expressions)

 

 

Stage 4 - Vocabulary expansion continues and equivalent grammatical expressions are explored

 

 

Expressed conceptually, the software can give the overall structure necessary to learning a language and construct a "web of meaning" that the instructors can use as a scaffold, filling in many of the gaps. Rosetta Stone only has a vocabulary level of about 2,000 words, and by the end of junior high school, a student will need to be able to understand 8,000-10,000 words. (see for example, Yang 1995) This means that reading comprehension activities as well as composition exercises will need to be added in greater and greater quantity, building on the foundation begun in the software.

As the illustration to the left shows, a curriculum can be developed which uses Rosetta Stone, but supplements it with greater and greater amounts of time both in and out of class devoted to reading comprehension activities and composition exercises.

One of the chief instructional design considerations voiced by Romiszowski (1981) is that it needs to hold together - that not only do the parts make sense, the parts are integrated into a whole that is pedagogically sound and constantly being re-evaluated for effectiveness.

What should be the sources of the reading comprehension and composition topics that will form an integral part of the curriculum? Shall we use a carefully graded series of readings or should we gradually expose the learners to more and more of what they will need to encounter in real life, when they are not being helped? Does it not make good sense to help them find their ZPD when there is someone with them to do the mediating, rather than just giving them carefully pre-digested and limited-vocabulary readings throughout the time they are under instruction?


We can, using Romiszowski's framework of instructional design principles, begin to construct a new approach to assisting language acquisition. Fifty years of research and practice have not yet brought us a wholly integrated system, so there is still room to experiment with new approaches, while building on the partial successes of the past. With a solid foundation provided by Rosetta Stone and some of our tried and true materials, let us explore the possibilities of assisting our students to learn from TV, radio, and the internet. Let us help them join the larger community of language users.

Bringing Communities of Practice Together in the Classroom

Bilingual, bicultural instructors can become a nexus of a number of different communities of practice coming together, or what Wenger has called a constellation of practices. Because of their connections to different communities of practice, they can become brokers of these communities. Part of the job of language instructor involves facilitating cross-communication and cross-pollenization at the core levels of the learning community, and integrative functions at the peripheral levels. This is one of the serendipitous joys of connecting our students to the internet - we can not only meet key people and get the information we need, but we can be challenged in new ways and connected to essential groups that will help us learn and grow further. Since this part of the exploratory journey is not determined by an outside agent, an "expert" who determines what we will study and the pace at which we will work at it, it is more likely that we will find the right level of complexity and challenge, our very own ZPD. In language acquisition, as with many lifetime skills, this is a precious discovery.

As long as there is a rich environment which scaffolds discovery, guided by an experience broker, even a "lurker" or passive participant can benefit from belonging to the learning community. For this part of the course of study, there is no syllabus, no class schedule, no curriculum beyond that which is necessary for the participant to do her or his assignment of exploration, or answer his or her question. And learning will take place. In careful balance with the already structured part of the curriculum, a powerful combination can emerge.

This type of instructional design approach, a marrying of the well-conceived and carefully structured foundation with the spontaneous responsiveness necessary to discovery learning, will require flexible and confident instructors who are themselves still learning and filled with joy as they do so. It will also require that they are successful second-language learners themselves, ones who are patient and encouraging motivators. The affective and social dimensions often ignored by instructional designers will be addressed in the context of a learning community. Rather than relying solely on the efficacy of a static curriculum worked out by an instructional designer, this approach would require that the instructors become part of the design team, and go through the rigor of the extensive design process outlined in Romiszowski's Designing Instructional Systems. As they do so, in concert with one another, and with a trained instructional designer, they will be further enabled to be the best kind of information brokers, ones who know when to help overtly and when to allow the learner to explore and function with his or her own interlanguage (which is not "proper" or complete), an essential part of the learning process.

The integrated curriculum ideal does not have to take place within the minutiae of the instructional events themselves. Integration can also be achieved by making sure that each important element of the design process, each educational goal, is addressed at some point in the overall learning community experience. Ultimately, this would seem to require moving beyond baby steps and into the somewhat chaotic experience of real life, but with help. The learner is moving from tricycle to bicycle with training wheels, then to one without training wheels but supported by the instructor, and then is able to "ride the bike" along the safe, flat areas of familiar territory. Progressively, the learner is exposed to more difficult terrain, hills and busy streets, but at first a more experienced "rider" is with him or her. Finally, the learner is able to ride without supervision, but still able to ask directions, etc. This is metaphorically the type of language development we envision.

In the context of providing both structure and flexibility, of the known and tested balanced out with the wild and unpredictable world of the larger language community, we can see the possibility of a new synthesis forming. In this, and other ways, the new paradigm of instruction envisioned by Romiszowski, Wenger and others can combine the best of the past with the best of the present.