Supra Badge Reflection

Overall Importance

I see the artifacts showcasing this competency as the pièce de résistance of my portfolio because I now know how valuable program evaluation is for an ID project, and I have walked through a formative evaluation of a working learning module in order to implement changes that were initiated through learner feedback during a pilot testing phase. Pilot testing is probably the step in the ID process that is hardest to accomplish given the timeline of most ID projects—assuming most are under tight deadlines as they were in this LDT program. In idealized settings, you would pilot test with a large “n” sample in order to get comprehensive formative feedback that would result in validation or need for changes. In reality, you pilot test with who you can, if you can.  The same goes for starting an ID project with the Program Evaluation phase—clearly this would garner a much better outcome and result for the project overall if it were possible in all cases. At least in the case of the two competencies here, I have learned the importance of an evaluation plan and how to adapt a project as a result. Outside of these artifacts, I have also adapted these materials into real-world applications at my job, so I am very proud of the work presented here.

Achievements within the Sub-Badges

Evaluate Instructional and Non-Instructional Interventions

The yoga module and its formative evaluation plan that I completed with a pilot test show that I am highly adaptable to feedback and revision. Some of this propensity is because I have worked in academic support for so many years and have taught others about effectively giving and receiving feedback, so I am naturally drawn to constructive criticism and seeing the value of input in my designs.

The Evaluation plan documents for the BCESSP program that I designed with my partner, Ritika Bhargo Chari, is one of the best set of artifacts I have created at Purdue. I am incredibly proud of our efforts and work products, especially as it relates to my ability to more immediately frame future ID projects around how they will be evaluated using the Kirkpatrick four-levels model.

Design a Plan for Dissemination and Diffusion of Instructional and/or Non-Instructional Interventions

In the case analysis presented here, I have thoroughly investigated the case and designed a creative intervention for the project owner to accomplish his goals of presenting a historical module on Japanese Internment Camps in the US during WWII. This case analysis showcases my critical thinking skills and my creative thinking skills, and shows that I can align stakeholder needs with quality instructional interventions. Examples like this show that I can evaluate others’ work and design for them, within a subject matter area that is well beyond my expertise, while other examples in my portfolio show how I can design from scratch on my own as an SME. I think this shows a nice balance of my skills and capacity for instructional design when working with project owners and stakeholders on their projects. Because this will be the bulk of the type of work I do in the ID field, I am glad I have such formative experiences at Purdue to guide me into the profession.

ID Skills Gained & Applying What I’ve Learned in the ID Field

I have gained exponential growth in my ability to design assessments as a result of having a holistic grasp on all four levels of program evaluation—level 1 reaction/satisfaction, level 2 initial learning, level 3 long-term learning, and level 4 organizational goals/outcomes. When I came into this program, I really only understood levels 1 and 2, and now I understand how important all four are. I have also bolstered my skillsets with designing for outside stakeholders and listening to feedback from learners. I think the formative evaluation that I did for the yoga module helped me empirically understand what it means to design a learning experience for learners and to seek out learners’ feedback in order to make it better. As a former educator who is pivoting into instructional design, I think I have a unique set of experiences that help me frame how a learning experience is intended to play out and how it actually plays out.

Case and point: When I was in graduate school the first time (English), I was a graduate teaching assistant. For a composition course, I designed my assignment sheet, printed it out, discussed it with students, and then let them do their thing. The problem was that a percentage of them just didn’t understand it; instead of asking them for feedback, like “how can I redesign this to make it easier for you to understand,” I just re-designed and re-implemented it from my own perspective in terms of how I interpreted the way I should re-deliver it to them. Still, some of them didn’t get it, and this experience has stuck with me all these years.  Now, with the experience of designing interventions and soliciting feedback through formal formative evaluation, I now know that I had I had a formative evaluation plan, or even understood that asking for direct feedback from students was not only appropriate but necessary (because they should be the focus!), I would have struggled less and they would have struggled less. I bring a very long history teaching and designing assignments, and I can draw on that as I move into the ID field with this incredible expanded foundation I’ve gotten at Purdue.