After securing a partnership with Future Integrated Schools (FIS), the analysis phase, which involved gathering data through consultations, surveys, and observations, began the week after the first meeting with my gatekeeper. To complete the forms I needed, I reviewed existing survey templates commonly used with professionals and for purposes similar to mine, as well as researched observation criteria suitable for educational settings. The survey questionnaire (see Appendix E)—developed and distributed via Google Forms—focused on obtaining the teachers' consent and information on their demographics, English teaching and proficiency, and perceived challenges in teaching English and instructional design. 

Meanwhile, classroom teaching observations of English classes from Grades 1 to 10 were conducted on March 26 and 27 to examine the teachers' practices and performance in the classroom. I had specifically requested a range of grade levels and English proficiency levels to gather a well-rounded understanding of the institutional context on which the project would be built. The observation form was developed and utilized via Safety Culture (see Appendix F). The observation items were derived from Emory University's quantitative teaching observation form (n.d.), while the items on ESL skills referenced Bay Atlantic University's academic advice on mastering ESL teacher skills (2024). 

From late May to mid-June, I worked on the development of the key deliverables of the project, which included the presentation slides, teacher's handbook, and training booklet, along with digital versions of instructional resources and templates. During this time, I was simultaneously finalizing the instructional design, as constraints and delays in communicating and collaborating with my gatekeeper continued to affect my progress with the project. Nonetheless, I made sure that I was moving forward with the development phase, given that the implementation of the EduPREP training program was drawing near. The instructional design materials I designed and produced primarily using Canva are the:

EduPREP Presentation Slides 

These were made to visually support key points and important concepts during the EduPREP training program. This is in alignment with the Dual Coding Theory, which suggests that integrating visual content with verbal explanations during a live training session enhances comprehension and long-term retention. The slides represent the project's dynamic approach in engaging both cognitive pathways to help the participants navigate complex concepts more easily and maximize learning efficiency and training effectiveness. 

This output also coincides with the Universal Design for Learning (UDL), specifically on the multiple means of representation, which is manifested in providing training information and content in various formats, such as text, audio, video, and images, to accommodate diverse learning preferences and abilities. 

In terms of design, as advised by my SME, I used Napkin to generate diagrams and infographics that were simple and minimal, yet appealing and engaging, which further supported the output's adherence to Mayer's Principles of Multimedia Learning. The principles that were applied in the design and development of the presentation slides are specified and elaborated below:

Another departure occurred during the discussion of the rubric scoring activity. The on-site attendees—both participating and facilitating teachers—omitted mentioning numerical scores and focused on pinpointing the strengths and weaknesses of the presented student speaking videos. However, they used the DOET English Speaking Contest evaluation rubrics and criteria for judging. To ensure the activity still aligned with the corresponding learning objective, the implementer, Teacher Elio, encouraged them to recommend classroom activities and instructional strategies that could help the students develop their English speaking proficiency and contest performance. Overall, the participants were able to comprehend the given videos, provide valuable rubric-based feedback, and suggest practical approaches for further speaking practice, which often included development in all factors—linguistic, performance-related, and affective. In general, it was evident that the theoretical foundations—primarily andragogy and constructivism—of the program were effectively applied. To read more about the achievement of the learning objectives, please go to the Results of Activities page. 

At the end of the implementation, a particularly resonant moment was when the teachers expressed their appreciation for the program, noting that while they were already familiar with the instructional approaches, the opportunity to revisit, relearn, and reflect on these strategies was both timely and valuable. They shared that EduPREP served as a meaningful reminder of effective teaching practices and reaffirmed their purpose as educators. With such feedback, I am hopeful that the school will view this project as a foundational step toward sustained teacher training and professional development initiatives. 

This project used both formal and informal evaluation methods. Before implementation, I relied on feedback from my gatekeeper and SME, as well as self-evaluations anchored in the project’s theoretical foundations. During and after EduPREP proper, I applied Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation—using peer sharing, rubric-based activities, activity design, classroom observation, and surveys—to assess knowledge, skills, and attitudes, ensuring a comprehensive measure of the training’s effectiveness. As aforementioned in the design phase, the four levels were carried out as follows: 

Reflecting on the results and outcomes of Project EduPREP, I can say that there were no major departures from its foundational objectives. The project was carried out in alignment with the ADDIE instructional design framework and identified theoretical underpinnings, successfully fulfilling both institutional and personal goals. However, some minor adjustments emerged along the way. These departures naturally arose from insights gained and unforeseen circumstances during the project. 

Throughout this project, I saw in practice what I had previously learned in my BES courses: that the ADDIE model is not strictly linear, but iterative and flexible. I frequently moved back and forth between the design and development phases, and the implementation and evaluation stages were also deeply interconnected. I came to realize that evaluation doesn’t simply occur at the end—it is embedded in every phase. Analysis, design, development, and implementation all require constant assessment to ensure effectiveness. Evaluation, while seemingly rigorous, is a continuous cycle that ultimately drives the success of any instructional design initiative. 

The biggest challenge I faced was working with my gatekeeper. The process became an arduous cycle of sending emails, waiting for responses, and scheduling in-person meetings. When she agreed to collaborate and take on the role of gatekeeper, I had honestly expected more hands-on advising, timely communication, constructive feedback, and a shared commitment to bringing EduPREP to life, especially given that the project was meant to support the school’s faculty and, in turn, its students. While I understood that she had other responsibilities and ongoing projects, her limited availability made the partnership more difficult than I had anticipated. 

These constraints inevitably shaped my own process. There were many times when I felt like I was working on this project alone. Still, I was determined to see it through. I had to adapt constantly, which deepened my appreciation for the flexibility and iterative nature of instructional design. Without consistent feedback, I relied heavily on self-direction, critical reflection, and problem-solving. Moments of doubt and hesitation challenged me to become more confident, resourceful, and resilient. Despite these challenges, I believe I did the best I could—demonstrating professionalism, initiative, and creativity—to make EduPREP a reality. 

Ultimately, this experience taught me that instructional design isn’t about following steps perfectly, but about responding thoughtfully to real people, real needs, and real limitations. It also highlighted the importance of continuous evaluation, not just as a final phase but as an integral part of every decision. Most of all, this project helped me grow in confidence as a designer and affirmed my ability to create meaningful, context-sensitive learning experiences.