Feedback from:

Kelcie Davis, ATR, LPATA; Life Enrichment Director at Creekside on Bardstown

When:

Feedback given 03.29 and 04.01 by email; not yet implemented

Goal being addressed:

With this activity, I was hoping to provide a motivating opportunity for physical engagement as well as some opportunity for musical reminiscence/socialization.

This first activity is meant to get the residents moving! I provided five videos that each pair a type of movement with a song. This is to make the videos more fun, engaging, and just make sense – I mean, who wouldn’t want to tap their feet while listening to “Blue Suede Shoes”? By having five videos to choose from, I’m hoping to give the staff some flexibility based on the mood and dynamic of the group, how much time they have, and what the staff thinks would be most helpful on a given day.

One thing I quickly realized while crafting this activity was the amount of detailed planning needed to create the videos. I wanted them to be accessible and engaging, so I had to think about how each component of the videos either helped or hurt in reaching that goal (and without the convenience of trying the activities out with the residents face-to-face). I had many questions to ask myself when planning the movements alone. How should I explain this movement? Is this movement feasible for them? What pace is most appropriate? How can I add challenge throughout the video without making it too difficult? The clarity and conciseness of my speech, the visual element of the video, and the music selections themselves also raised many other accessibility and engagement questions. Simply having the self-confidence to video record myself was already challenging enough!

I made some basic assumptions while recording these videos that may impact how the activity is received. I assumed that the residents might benefit from increased processing time, and that many of them may have some level of high-frequency hearing loss. I also thought some level of increased difficulty would be useful, so varying the movement itself during the activity would be a way to increase the difficulty. A technological assumption I made was that closed captions would automatically be available on the YouTube videos when I created them, which turned out not to be the case.

The feedback I received from Kelcie indicated that I may not have accounted enough for processing time needs. In her initial feedback, Kelcie said the Assisted Living residents would likely be able to keep up with the videos for the most part, but that the Memory Care residents might not. She suggested that some movements might be too difficult for Memory Care to be successful. She did note that having a discussion question at the end of some of the videos was helpful, including a question about traveling in which I shared about a trip.

I was quite prepared for the activity by utilizing the information Kelcie provided during our interview and by referencing the Creekside website. My annotated bibliography references were also useful and guided the way I delivered the verbal content of the videos as well as the visual content. I would have liked captions to have been included in the videos, however, so I will aim to solve this issue for the next activity. While I was creating the activity and questioning each step of the process, it may have been helpful to reference the UDL and SEL guideline websites to gain insight on some of these questions.

It was encouraging how many opportunities I found to apply UDL principles. While I am designing the next activity, I imagine it will feel even more natural. I will take additional processing time into account as well as keeping instructions and expectations simple. I have a few ideas for the second activity, so I think I will reach out to Kelcie for input on which one they might like next.