2.6 Instructional Design
Candidates model and facilitate the effective use of research-based best practices in instructional design when designing and developing digital tools, resources, and technology-enhanced learning experiences. (PSC 2.6/ISTE 2f)
ITEC 7460: Technology Workshop
The One-Hour Technology Workshop assignment I planned in ITEC 7460 of course took more hours than just one - good design takes time, I learned. The workshop modeled an online module on our LMS about syntax type and the effects of those types of syntax on a reader’s interpretation of the work. In this module, I designed a series of steps students worked through individually and collaboratively to enhance the face-to-face instruction I gave about the topic in the classroom. Because syntax is difficult to teach and because students usually give up trying to master writing about its effects, I decided it would be a good choice of skills to enhance with technology. Perhaps I could make it more bearable for all parties concerned. By analyzing my students’ weaknesses in discussing syntax and then designing an exemplar module which took advantage of proven strategies for learning, my hope was to propel our English department toward a more engaging way to teach this difficult concept. I personally designed and coded the pages of the module, sequenced them carefully based on an assessment of my own students’ current skill level with syntax, and then provided two assessments which pointed toward strengths and weaknesses in content mastery. My students critiqued the module as they worked through it, and then I presented it to my AP/IB team. Following the ADDIE process (Rosenberg, 1982), I made a successful module that proved helpful to my own students. I used the same ADDIE process to design the Technology Workshop itself so that my own team could evaluate its strengths at the end.
The ADDIE process as outlined by Rosenberg (1982) suggests a cycle of best practices for the designer that closes a feedback loop between the anticipated learning and the actual learning. So, I began with a needs assessment of my department. I determined that the most effective technology workshop for them would be on where I modeled the advantages of our online LMS tools when used intentionally to increase learning. I chose a difficult concept that all of us have trouble teaching and which students typically do not enjoy practicing. I designed a module that analyzed and assessed the background knowledge of my students about syntax and its effects on a passage as a whole. Then, I designed a sequence of pages (starting at the point of current knowledge) which would order further learning about syntax and its effects. Then I used our online LMS tools to develop a series of learning activities such as compare/contrast, prediction, collaboration, and self-assessment that have been proven to have high affective rates in student learning (Marzano, 2017). Importantly, I implemented the learning module with my own students to determine its success. Finally, my students critiqued and help shape the module into its final form as they evaluated its efficacy and level of engagement for me.
On the whole, the exemplar worked quite well, and so I was confident that I had modeled an engaging, effective process for teaching a historically tricky skill. To facilitate the use of the module, I also used the ADDIE process to design a Technology Workshop for the teachers in my department. Having already conducted the needs assessment to find the intersection of their need for help teaching syntax and digital tool usage to do that, I designed and developed a series of steps to help them learn how to use the module and tweak it to fit their own students’ needs. Most importantly, I showed the teachers my students’ work that resulted from engagement with the module. Impressed with the superior results, my colleagues decided to try the module in their own classrooms. I facilitated their use of the module by obtaining permission for the teachers to copy it into their own pages. Then, after the workshop, I helped each teacher tweak where necessary and code where he or she didn’t have the skills. Lastly, I provided troubleshooting so that their modules would work seamlessly when presented to students. In an evaluation of the workshop, all teachers, even ones who were resistant to the idea before the workshop, said that they would be willing to use the module to teach that concept. Thus, the Technology Workshop assignment allowed me to practice the ADDIE process twice: once with my own students and then once again with my own colleagues.
In all, I learned that teachers can be students, and students can be teachers. The ADDIE process is useful for gaining information about where to start designing instructional steps for an audience. Further, if a designer adheres to the ADDIE process, she is not allowed room for skirting an evaluation of the design. So, the process becomes more patient and intentional, and hopefully, the learning becomes more focused and important to the learners. Because I was not skilled yet in using the process, I admit to some flaws in execution of the artifact. For instance, I would probably use more pointed questions next time about very specific things the audience wants to learn instead of assessing what they already know since that’s only half the needed information. Then, I learned that I designed too many steps for learners to actually take in at once. The evaluation process gave me feedback about the length of the module and the number of ideas I was using in each of my lessons. I learned that a good module does not - and probably should not - necessarily have many steps.
Ultimately, the assignment allowed me to teach myself how to use our LMS tools to take my own students through a rigorous skill set. So, students benefited because their writing about the effects of syntax developed far more than it usually does; in fact, students in our department who used the module showed higher scores on those district questions than our students usually do. Finally, the assignment invited me to share my new knowledge with others. I felt much more motivated to teach the syntax concept, and my students seemed much more engaged than usual. If the overall impact is increased motivation to teach and learn and then higher scores as a result, then the online module for this concept and the professional development that goes with it is a success.
References:
Marzano, R.J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching: More than fifty new instructional strategies for student success. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. p. 39-41.
Rosenberg, M. J. (1982). “The ABC’s of ISD.” Training and development Journal. Vol. 36 Iss. 9. P. 44-50.
The One-Hour Technology Workshop assignment I planned in ITEC 7460 of course took more hours than just one - good design takes time, I learned. The workshop modeled an online module on our LMS about syntax type and the effects of those types of syntax on a reader’s interpretation of the work. In this module, I designed a series of steps students worked through individually and collaboratively to enhance the face-to-face instruction I gave about the topic in the classroom. Because syntax is difficult to teach and because students usually give up trying to master writing about its effects, I decided it would be a good choice of skills to enhance with technology. Perhaps I could make it more bearable for all parties concerned. By analyzing my students’ weaknesses in discussing syntax and then designing an exemplar module which took advantage of proven strategies for learning, my hope was to propel our English department toward a more engaging way to teach this difficult concept. I personally designed and coded the pages of the module, sequenced them carefully based on an assessment of my own students’ current skill level with syntax, and then provided two assessments which pointed toward strengths and weaknesses in content mastery. My students critiqued the module as they worked through it, and then I presented it to my AP/IB team. Following the ADDIE process (Rosenberg, 1982), I made a successful module that proved helpful to my own students. I used the same ADDIE process to design the Technology Workshop itself so that my own team could evaluate its strengths at the end.
The ADDIE process as outlined by Rosenberg (1982) suggests a cycle of best practices for the designer that closes a feedback loop between the anticipated learning and the actual learning. So, I began with a needs assessment of my department. I determined that the most effective technology workshop for them would be on where I modeled the advantages of our online LMS tools when used intentionally to increase learning. I chose a difficult concept that all of us have trouble teaching and which students typically do not enjoy practicing. I designed a module that analyzed and assessed the background knowledge of my students about syntax and its effects on a passage as a whole. Then, I designed a sequence of pages (starting at the point of current knowledge) which would order further learning about syntax and its effects. Then I used our online LMS tools to develop a series of learning activities such as compare/contrast, prediction, collaboration, and self-assessment that have been proven to have high affective rates in student learning (Marzano, 2017). Importantly, I implemented the learning module with my own students to determine its success. Finally, my students critiqued and help shape the module into its final form as they evaluated its efficacy and level of engagement for me.
On the whole, the exemplar worked quite well, and so I was confident that I had modeled an engaging, effective process for teaching a historically tricky skill. To facilitate the use of the module, I also used the ADDIE process to design a Technology Workshop for the teachers in my department. Having already conducted the needs assessment to find the intersection of their need for help teaching syntax and digital tool usage to do that, I designed and developed a series of steps to help them learn how to use the module and tweak it to fit their own students’ needs. Most importantly, I showed the teachers my students’ work that resulted from engagement with the module. Impressed with the superior results, my colleagues decided to try the module in their own classrooms. I facilitated their use of the module by obtaining permission for the teachers to copy it into their own pages. Then, after the workshop, I helped each teacher tweak where necessary and code where he or she didn’t have the skills. Lastly, I provided troubleshooting so that their modules would work seamlessly when presented to students. In an evaluation of the workshop, all teachers, even ones who were resistant to the idea before the workshop, said that they would be willing to use the module to teach that concept. Thus, the Technology Workshop assignment allowed me to practice the ADDIE process twice: once with my own students and then once again with my own colleagues.
In all, I learned that teachers can be students, and students can be teachers. The ADDIE process is useful for gaining information about where to start designing instructional steps for an audience. Further, if a designer adheres to the ADDIE process, she is not allowed room for skirting an evaluation of the design. So, the process becomes more patient and intentional, and hopefully, the learning becomes more focused and important to the learners. Because I was not skilled yet in using the process, I admit to some flaws in execution of the artifact. For instance, I would probably use more pointed questions next time about very specific things the audience wants to learn instead of assessing what they already know since that’s only half the needed information. Then, I learned that I designed too many steps for learners to actually take in at once. The evaluation process gave me feedback about the length of the module and the number of ideas I was using in each of my lessons. I learned that a good module does not - and probably should not - necessarily have many steps.
Ultimately, the assignment allowed me to teach myself how to use our LMS tools to take my own students through a rigorous skill set. So, students benefited because their writing about the effects of syntax developed far more than it usually does; in fact, students in our department who used the module showed higher scores on those district questions than our students usually do. Finally, the assignment invited me to share my new knowledge with others. I felt much more motivated to teach the syntax concept, and my students seemed much more engaged than usual. If the overall impact is increased motivation to teach and learn and then higher scores as a result, then the online module for this concept and the professional development that goes with it is a success.
References:
Marzano, R.J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching: More than fifty new instructional strategies for student success. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. p. 39-41.
Rosenberg, M. J. (1982). “The ABC’s of ISD.” Training and development Journal. Vol. 36 Iss. 9. P. 44-50.