(From EDD 8124 Discussion #2)
Occurring with little or no conscious attention or effort, automaticity requires little working memory capacity, and it is described as “thoughtless” (Ormrod, 2012). In automaticity, controlled processes become increasingly automatic through repetition and practise (Ormrod, 2012).
Examples of automaticity includes the competency derived from repeating activities such as driving cars, programming, and machinery use. Often multiple subtasks can be performed within working memory, which through automaticity of some tasks, becomes less overwhelming to the brain.
Ormrod (2012) expresses that while meaningful learning is important for basic knowledge and skills, it is not enough for things that must be recalled quickly and automatically. Rather, those things should be repeated and practiced often enough to become a second nature (p.210). Through automaticity, people can perform habits without thought or remembering whether or not tasks were accomplished (Ormrod, 2012). Likewise, automaticity can increase the likelihood that an individual will recall certain procedures in the place of more useful, but less automatic, ideas (Ormrod, 2012).
How is automaticity is experienced in professional and personal lives? Automaticity is a common experience throughout an individual's daily life and effects one's work for both better and for worse. During habitual work situations, my team members and I enact rules and behavior that are associated with instructional design tools without conscious thought via automaticity. These rules and behaviors influence how our team interacts and ultimately how well we perform (Bartelt, 2014). Because such rules are enacted nonconsciously, my team is often unable to recognize the effects of their behaviors and the resulting outcomes (Bartelt, 2014).
These rules and behaviors that the team invokes has had a greater effect on our performance and the success of the design tools that were used. The implications of this unconscious behavior for my whole team, is the need to consciously assess the rules and behaviors that are associated with different tools, and to make sure that we choose tools appropriately (Bartelt, 2014). Often, we find a need to break a pattern, behavior, or rule deliberatly- which can disrupt the instructional design process- but is important nonetheless, to keep cognizant of the here and now needs of the isntitute.
Bartelt, V. R. (2014). Nature and nurture: the impact of automaticity and the structuration of communication on virtual team behavior and performance. MIS Quarterly, 38(2), 521-A4.
Ormrod, J. E. (2012). Human learning (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Ormrod (2012) expresses that while meaningful learning is important for basic knowledge and skills, it is not enough for things that must be recalled quickly and automatically. Rather, those things should be repeated and practiced often enough to become a second nature (p.210). Through automaticity, people can perform habits without thought or remembering whether or not tasks were accomplished (Ormrod, 2012). Likewise, automaticity can increase the likelihood that an individual will recall certain procedures in the place of more useful, but less automatic, ideas (Ormrod, 2012).
How is automaticity is experienced in professional and personal lives? Automaticity is a common experience throughout an individual's daily life and effects one's work for both better and for worse. During habitual work situations, my team members and I enact rules and behavior that are associated with instructional design tools without conscious thought via automaticity. These rules and behaviors influence how our team interacts and ultimately how well we perform (Bartelt, 2014). Because such rules are enacted nonconsciously, my team is often unable to recognize the effects of their behaviors and the resulting outcomes (Bartelt, 2014).
These rules and behaviors that the team invokes has had a greater effect on our performance and the success of the design tools that were used. The implications of this unconscious behavior for my whole team, is the need to consciously assess the rules and behaviors that are associated with different tools, and to make sure that we choose tools appropriately (Bartelt, 2014). Often, we find a need to break a pattern, behavior, or rule deliberatly- which can disrupt the instructional design process- but is important nonetheless, to keep cognizant of the here and now needs of the isntitute.
Bartelt, V. R. (2014). Nature and nurture: the impact of automaticity and the structuration of communication on virtual team behavior and performance. MIS Quarterly, 38(2), 521-A4.
Ormrod, J. E. (2012). Human learning (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.