R/D10

Two of the major themes that I felt went accross the contexts between K-12, Business, and  Higher Education were constant evolution and collaboration.   In all of the contexts where instructional designers worked the text discussed how a instructional designer must be willing to work with others.  In some cases this could be school boards, project managers, tenured faculty, grad students, principals, owners, and content specialists to name a few.  Because collaboration is seems to be essential in instructional design it will be imperative that instructional designers are good communicators and are open to the ideas and opinions of others.   The different steps of instructional design make it essential for collaboration.  Analysis, design, development, implementation,  and evaluation could include a few to a large number of people depending on the scope of the project.  No matter what context an instructional designer may work in it seems inevitable that they will be collaborating with a multitude of people and rarely working as an island start to finish.  

The other area that I found interesting is the constant evolution of the IDT field.  This totally makes sense as the field is based on design and at the end of every design cycle I have looked at their is some sort of "test and evaluation" phase.  After an evaluation there would be a need for more analysis and design to solve any issues that the evaluation found. It would be no wonder that a field where everyone is constantly analyzing, developing, and evaluating their would be constant change as they would always be looking to improve themselves.  This is a positive thing for the betterment of field but may could become daunting to keep up with if a person is not practicing and keeping up with the field.