Sub-Badge 3: Analysis techniques for instruction

Challenge 1: Determine subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge 

Criteria for successful completion of this challenge: Evidence of determining subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge.  Reflection must address: How you determined subordinate and pre-req skills/knowledge for an audience (goal analysis, instructional analysis, etc.).

Examples: Demonstration of identifying all of the steps a learner needs in order to achieve the learner goal, organizing learning objectives in a hierarchical order, identifying the steps needed in order to meet a goal, EDCI 572 Design Documents, EDCI 577 Content/Audience analysis (Jet Blue, Instructional Product Evaluations), artifacts focused on determining pre-req skills and knowledge (design, performance, workplace, educational, other).

Reflection

I am using the Design Document 1 (DD1) and Design Document 2 (DD2) assignments from EDCI 572 in order to show that I determined subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge as I was designing a yoga workshop for new yoga teachers. In order to plan and design appropriately for the workshop, I had to identify the entry (prerequisite) skills and then the subordinate skills necessary for a full goal analysis. The Class Blocking Methodology workshop was designed with new yoga teachers (0-3 years of experience) in mind who have taught at least 5 yoga classes and who have attained their Yoga Teacher Training (YTT) certification. These are the entry skills requirements for the workshop, and with it comes an expectation on foundational knowledge as a result. The ultimate goal of the workshop is to design a safe, logical 1-hour yoga class from scratch that has a specified focus and that is teachable in a public or private setting with typical yoga equipment.

Within the above-named entry skills are a vast number of other pre-requisite and subordinate skills that need to be held in the minds of Learners, like ability to choose a class focus, knowledge of seminal yoga texts and how to use them, knowledge of how to keep students safe, knowledge of how to use yoga props and equipment like blocks and straps, knowledge of how to scaffold a yoga class to achieve a peak pose, etc. All of these are covered in the workshop to refresh their pre-requisite knowledge.  Ultimately, the workshop seeks to fill a gap between the shortfalls of YTTs that don’t teach a method of class design from scratch and the real world where yoga teachers are constantly designing classes from scratch. The Entry Skills are their shoe in the door to the workshop (attainment of YTT certification, experience teaching at least 5 classes, and 0-3 years of teaching experience), but the workshop is ultimately reinforcing pre-requisites within the “attainment of YTT certification” skill since that is the equivalent of a college class worth of material and they really should have been exposed to concepts covered regardless of who designed their YTT). However, as I have noted above, that is not always the case. Therefore, in the workshop, the pre-requisite skills are reviewed, reinforced and scaffolded as part of the approach to designing a class from scratch using my Class Blocking Methodology. The artifact demonstrates the extensive logic behind my identification and analysis of the entry skills and subordinate skills and the foundational knowledge Learners would need to already possess while in the workshop.

The competency of showing that you can determine subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge is very important to the design process, especially using the Dick and Carey model, because the Learner is the centerpiece of this method. By keeping the Learner centered in the design process, we ensure that the instruction is designed, developed, and deployed with equity and reasonableness. In a professional setting, an ID needs to be able to demonstrate an ability to determine these subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge because the design process should be comprehensive and take into consideration what the Learners are coming to the table with, and what they are not; then, the ID should scaffold toward the Terminal Objective, and knowing the subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge base is integral to success.

The artifact supports the competency because in DD1 I created a Goal Analysis Diagram which shows the steps that are used to reach the final goal and below that the entry skills are listed. This was identified after much deliberation given the circumstances of the types of Learners and the limited content to be presented (i.e. this workshop is not intended to replace a full YTT program, only a small portion). Additionally, in DD2, I identify the Performance Objectives, which includes the Subordinate Objectives—each of these reinforce the steps necessary to accomplish the Terminal Objective. Therefore, DD1 & DD2 showcase my ability to determine subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge and the evidence of my analysis and design approach.

My prior knowledge of Design Documents that are based on the Dick & Carey model was zero when I started this assignment. I have designed instruction using ADDIE principles and with the assistance of a highly skilled instructional designer, but taking the design justification to the degree required in DD1 and DD2 is new to me. However, through the process of systematic justification for the purpose and function of the learning experience, I came to see how important such an in-depth approach was to making sure I designed with equity and reasonableness with the Learner’s experience as the centerpiece of the module. I systematically created each section of the artifact document over multiple weeks with feedback from peers and my professor. Having gone through this process, I am confident in my ability to reflect on DD1 and DD2 and know that I have sufficiently determined subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge for my yoga workshop. 

In terms of previous projects when determining subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge would have been useful, I do believe I have always generally done this in my coursework design (both for classroom, seminar, and staff training and professional development) but I have never done it as formally as it is displayed in the artifact. In looking back at a basic assignment from a past English/Academic Writing class that I taught and where we read a particular book or article, I do believe I could have approached determining subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge differently had I known the Dick & Carey model. For example, in a typical Academic Writing Class, I would create and use graphic organizers as job aids while students were reading complicated texts and to help them hone in on important concepts or ideas from the reading-at-hand; however, knowing what I know now, had I re-tooled those graphic organizers to determine subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge first, and then had an active discussion with students about what they were all bringing to the table, and what subordinate skills I was looking for in order to engage with the text, then I am confident I could have scaffolded those lessons better and created better job aids for my students to use.   

The DD1 & DD2 documentation and design justification work well for this challenge because it showcases my thought process and the deep analysis that took place in order to identify the entry/prerequisite skills and knowledge that Learners would need in order to be successful from a baseline level, and the subordinate skills that they would need to learn in order deliver on the Terminal Objective during our time together (designing a yoga class from scratch using the Class Blocking Methodology). I have learned a lot from this experience because I took a basic idea and an activity that I have used for many years myself, and that I have taught to others before, and I expanded it not only in terms of the justification for my design decisions but in terms of improving the delivery and approach necessary for Learners to be successful. One of my pilot testers was someone I taught the same workshop to in a very informal way about a year ago, and she was in awe of the change in the approach and materials in our pilot test, so I look forward to seeing her future evaluation when I lead the workshop in its full glory with other Learners present who have not been through the material.

Because the workshop is picking up on a “gap” in the quality of Yoga Teacher Trainings (YTTs) in terms of teaching budding yoga teachers how to design a class from scratch, I have ultimately come to realize more deeply that many YTTs are in need of a Dick & Carey approach to design because I guarantee very few of them in my area are designing their coursework with the Learners in mind like this or considering entry/prerequisite skills and knowledge or subordinate skills and knowledge. I am therefore very pleased that I am working diligently to bridge that gap, which is on display in this artifact as Design Documents 1 and 2.

From this experience, and the focus on those entry and subordinate skills, which I now better understand that they ultimately drive the design and the instruction, I plan to continue the due diligence I have started, and I anticipate adding this level of evaluation and analysis to all projects moving forward. As they say: if you know you know. Now I do; now I will!

Artifact

The Design Document showcasing all aspects of the competency have been met.

Challenge 2: Use appropriate techniques to analyze various types and sources to validate content. 

Criteria for successful completion of this challenge: Evidence of utilizing validation techniques (checking the source, researching the author - education, experience, reputation, how many times cited, etc.).  Reflection must address: The specific techniques you used to validate your sources and content.

Examples: Any research paper (EDCI 513 Final Literature Review, EDCI 531 Final Paper), peer-reviews focusing on checking other’s sources, annotated bibliography (EDCI 660), work-related documentation (design, performance, workplace, educational, other) focused on use of or creation of validation techniques.

Reflection

The competency for this challenge is to demonstrate utilizing validation techniques for sources and content. The artifact I have chosen is the Literature Review I wrote in EDCI 513; it is titled Addressing Stereotype Threat Through Instructional Design: What Is and Isn’t Being Done About It. The assignment required us to identify a relevant topic in the field of Instructional Design and research it before compiling a professionally written review of the literature. First, I brainstormed what topics I wanted to possibly research and did some preliminary research on two that I narrowed my choices down to: addressing stereotype threat in ID and presence of indigenous voice(s) in ID. Though both were challenging to find ample sources on, I ultimately decided to pursue the stereotype threat topic. This artifact demonstrates the competency because it is the culmination of my culling and processing of the research to a manageable and relevant set of articles, and it demonstrates the successful integration of sources using APA formatting. The assignment received full points.

This competency is important because as a professional, an instructional designer should be able to easily do research and document that research in writing using standards in the field. Not only that, but an instructional designer should be able to effectively make an argument and support it with validated academic writing techniques, like the literature review. The purpose of a literature review is to provide a glimpse into what the field says about a topic and to make assertions about that topic given the evidence found during the research process. My literature review sought to investigate what, if anything, is being done to address stereotype threat in instructional design. What I found is that there isn’t much being done to specifically address stereotype threat, but there is some movement on this topic from within the field. I identified that there are other ethics-based approaches within ID that are circulating around, but there isn’t a concerted effort within the field to ensure that stereotype threat is deliberately avoided when designing learning experiences. This means more needs to be done, and it validated for me personally and professionally that I am going to keep this at the forefront of my professional work moving forward. Not only did my literature review validate my ability to write and research a topic, and successfully integrate sources using APA, but it also validated my thoughts about how I see my career as an ID progressing.

Because of my background teaching college writing, I have a lot of experience in the area of teaching best practices for validating arguments, researching and identifying credible sources, and integrating sources properly to avoid plagiarism. Though I had not written a literature review for many years, it was very easy for me to get back in the saddle, so to speak. I dusted off my research skills and set to work. Because I have taught the use of databases and the library for research for my own writing students, it was very easy for me to start my research process. I began by searching on the university’s databases using keywords, reading abstracts, doing keyword searches inside of the article for my topic, and downloading any article that seemed like it was even close to something I would want to read. I ended up with over 40 articles downloaded. I also used the Purdue Library’s Mendeley Reference Management application to keep track of articles that were not downloadable. Once I had done what I considered was an adequate job of finding articles, I then went back through those I had downloaded and continued with more keyword searches until I narrowed the list of 40 articles down to my top choices and then re-narrowed again based on their optimal suitability for my topic. Finally I read, annotated, and organized the articles in an order I thought I wanted to present them in. I have done this process many times in the past because I was also in a graduate program for English and wrote many academic essays for my classes. The process worked incredibly well for the literature review and helped me ultimately validate my topic using quality sources. My ability to not only validate my topic successfully, but to validate the use of my sources through effective integration and documentation using APA, means I am a competent ID professional who will always find sufficient justification for her designs and will always present those designs ethically when outside sources are necessary to support them.

My literature review, Addressing Stereotype Threat Through Instructional Design: What Is and Isn’t Being Done About It, works well for this challenge because it successfully demonstrates “utilizing validation techniques” by integrating each source successfully and validating the conceptually relevant articles that would provide the most accurate review of the literature on my topic. What I have learned from the experience is that it is possible to write a literature review on a topic and identify a gap in the literature, which is the case for my topic on stereotype threat, and this further illustrates how important the topic is, and should be, to the field of instructional design. What I could envision doing differently is seeking out faculty who might have more insight on this topic in order to garner a broader spectrum of understanding. As it is, I did work with the Purdue Writing Lab to validate that I had used APA correctly both in the formatting of the document and in the integration of my sources, so I am very confident that I took the task to its natural and professional state of completion. I will continue developing this competency by continuing to validate my sources, my designs, my arguments, and my decisions. Because of my background in higher education, I am confident I will continue demonstrating this competency in all that I do because it is second nature to me.

Artifact

The Literature Review showcasing all aspects of the competency have been met.