Reflection: EDTC 6025 Analysis and Evaluation in Instructional Technology

1. State the competency, or standard that is appropriate for your degree and licensure area. This could be standards for 077 licensure or ISTE Advanced Standards for Technology Facilitators. When appropriate you may use standards from the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT). Choose one or two standards that most representative of your artifact. The reflection should include discussion for each of the standards you've identified for the artifact.

TF-I Technology Operations and Concepts

Educational technology facilitators demonstrate an in-depth understanding of technology operations and concepts. Educational technology facilitators:

A. Demonstrate knowledge, skills, and understanding of concepts related to technology (as described in the ISTE National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers). Candidates:

1. Assist teachers in the ongoing development of knowledge, skills, and understanding of

Technology systems, resources, and services that are aligned with district and state technology plans.

2. Provide assistance to teachers in identifying technology systems, resources, and services to meet specific learning needs.

B. Demonstrate continual growth in technology knowledge and skills to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies.

Candidates:

1. Model appropriate strategies essential to continued growth and development of the

understanding of technology operations and concepts.

2. Describe requirements for your artifact. What was assigned and how did you complete the project. Only 100 to 150 words are needed for this section. Include theoretical base for what you did in the project. Include references to textbook authors, readings, and online resources discussed in your course.

            EDTC 6025:  Analysis and Evaluation in Instructional Technology was taught in the 2013 fall semester by Dr. William Sugar.  This course was designed to give practical experience in the design of a professional development project using an Instructional Design Model of our choice after exploring several different models.  While required to complete an entire ISD project the emphasis in this course was on the analysis of needs, evaluation of the instruction, and evaluation of participants learning as a result of instruction. This course built on the skills we acquired in EDTC 6020 which emphasized the front end analysis in the Instructional Design process.

            I chose to use the Dick and Carey Model of Instructional Design for this project. According to Dick, Carey and Carey (2009) their model incorporates learning theories of behaviorists, cognitivists and constructivists.    I also incorporated Keller's ARCS model of motivation in the design of this ISD project.  Keller (1987) proposed that there are definite activities that the designer of instruction can do that will motivate the learners to be interested in the instruction, participate actively and to do their best to achieve the objectives being presented.  Part of this assignment was to address learner motivation and the ARCS model provided the theoretical base for the activities in my instruction.

            I chose to develop an ISD project to teach teachers how to use the collaborative features on Google Docs.  This decision was based on an analysis of a needs assessment survey distributed to the staff at the high school at which I work.  The first step in the Dick and Carey ISD Model is to identify the goals of the instruction (Dick, Carey, & Cary, 2009).  This needs assessment provided the new skills on which I wrote the goals for this instruction.

3. Explain how your artifact is a good example of the objective, competency, or standard. Defend your evidence as if you were a lawyer defending the validity of evidence submitted for the trial. Include references to theory in Instructional Design and Technology.

            This ISD project directly supports the ISTE Standard TF-I Operations and Concepts.  This standard states that the Technology Facilitator will assist teachers in the ongoing development of knowledge, skills, and understanding of Technology systems, resources, and services that are aligned with district and state technology plans" (ISTE Standard I A).  Google Documents is a tool the school district is utilizing in professional development and supports the districts 1:1 initiative.  My instruction resulted in seven teachers learning how to use and incorporate Google documents into their instruction for students and for the management of shared documents with other staff members. 

            Using the Dick and Carey Model of Instructional Design, I was able to systematically map my instruction based on sound principles and learning theory.  The Dick and Carey Model pulls from many sources of learning theory and does not peg the user into one philosophy or another.  This flexibility in the model along with the systematic structure was ideal for the novice designer, such as me. 

            The Dick and Carey Model starts with identifying the goals of instruction which is based on a needs analysis (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2009).  A survey sent out to the teachers on my staff identified the topic of Google Documents and a second questionnaire identified the specific skills teachers needed. 

            I worked with another Technology Facilitator in the district that I considered a Subject Matter Expert with Google Documents in order to identify the steps teachers needed to perform to accomplish the goals I had written.  This process according to Dick, Carey and Carey (2009) helps to identify the entry skills learners need to succeed.  From that I analyzed the learners and the instructional setting, wrote objectives for the instruction and decided on a checklist of skills to be used for evaluation of the teachers mastery of the objectives. 

            When planning the actual events of instruction I incorporated Keller's ARCS model of motivation to maximize attention and achievement.  Keller (1987) does not propose an instructional design model, but The ARCS model enhances the instructional events of the instructional part of an ISD model. Activities suggested by this researcher include those that grab students attention, establish relevance, build confidence that the objectives are achievable and give the learner satisfaction about their accomplishment.   The structure of the instructional events not only served to enhance my instruction but modeled good design to the teacher participants as well.  ISTE Standard IB states that Instructional Facilitators should model appropriate strategies essential to continued growth and development of the understanding of technology operations and concepts.  In this professional development teachers learned a new technology skill, but also had modeled for them effective instruction of the skill.

4. Discuss how you might change the content, strategy, or design of the artifact. If you see no need for change, elaborate on how the artifact is a good exemplar for the competency or standard.

            There was a flaw in the instruction that was unforeseen and if I were to revise this plan I would change.  In the instructional sequence I asked the participants to compose a one paragraph document that they would then share with another participant and make revisions and comment.  The process of composing the paragraph slowed the pace of the class and resulted in downtime for some participants that completed the paragraph quickly.  In hindsight I would have provided the participants with a paragraph to revise and make corrections.  The keyboarding skills of the participants varied greatly and I did not anticipate this as an issue.

5. Discuss how the artifact is representative of future career goals and plans.

            Designing effective instruction is an essential skill for a technology facilitator. Using a systematic approach for designing professional development ensures that all aspects of instruction have been carefully planned.  While it is tempting to skip steps it is important to let an ISD model be your guide. 

References

Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2009). The systematic design of instruction. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:  Pearson Education, Inc.

Keller, J. M. (1987, November/December). The systematic process of motivational design, performance, & instruction, 1-7.