Artifact  9 -  Evaluation Report

Scope

The purpose of this artifact was to create an eLearning module based off evaluation that we performed at a school. This artifact could easily fit into a larger curriculum for a high school history on the United States government. By implementing this eLearning module into their lesson or as a resource, students can get extra practice on the responsibilities that each branch performs in the United States government.

​

Role

For this artifact, I designed and developed the entire project. I designed and performed the needs assessment on the students to find out about the problem that was occurring at a high school in South Carolina. Being placed in this role, I had a lot of learning to do, especially when it came to creating the evaluation plan. There was a subject matter expert (SME) who helped guide me throughout the process of teaching the US government at this school. The SME was a history teacher and department head at that specific school. Based on his guidance, he was able to help identify problems that occur specifically with that school. how the information was being taught, and any internal issues that might be occurring. I had very little knowledge of the basics of instructional design; however, we were asked to design an eLearning module based on the ADDIE model.

​

Instructional Design

This artifact aligns with the ADDIE model’s analysis and design phase. In the evaluation, we were asked to perform a needs assessment to help identify what the problem is, learners’ characteristics, the environmental characteristics, and the task analysis. By understanding the learners, I was able to identify the problem, which is that the learners knew what the three branches were, but could not identify the responsibilities of each branch. This allowed me to break and realize what the learner truly needed, and I could design learning targets to support the learners in understanding the different functions of each branch. Additionally, learner characteristic analysis identified several students with learning disabilities and limited access to the internet, which made the design of the eLearning tricky because not all learners would be accessible to them (there was a workaround by making the students take it at school with their school provided Chromebook). During the design phase, I was able to create blueprints of learning targets by using a ranking system, selecting the media that best supported the learning, and focusing on the Striker and Posner sequencing scheme to create a flawless sequence of events for the learner. By implementing these activities into the evaluation plan, I was able to develop a functional evaluation plan that eventually led to me developing an eLearning module.

​

 

This artifact aligns with the Morrison, Ross, and Ross (MRK) instructional design model, with the focus on the aim needs and the felt needs during the needs assessment. By performing a needs assessment, the designer was able to identify the problem at hand through qualitative and quantitative data. Furthermore, by using the aim needs and felt needs during the analysis phase, I was able to implement instructional strategies such as recall playing off of their prior knowledge about the United States three branches of government. According to Morrison et al., it states, “The design should activate the existing knowledge structures (i.e., recall of prior knowledge) and then help the learner to alter and encode the new structures.” (Morrison, et al., 2013). By using learners’ prior knowledge, this allowed my instructions to focus on the most important parts instead of making an extensive design that could have negatively impacted the learners’ understanding of the responsibilities of the three branches.

​

 

Related Performance Indicator

Method – Candidates utilize research methodologies to address problems and improve practice. (p. 243)

Reflection

Looking back on this artifact, I have come a long way from this artifact to now. During the creation of this assignment, I felt really proud of what I had done. It was my first time creating an eLearning module, and it was my first course in this program. I learned a lot from this course.

​

 

Coming into this program, I had very limited knowledge of what instructional design was, let alone what the ADDIE model was. During this time, we were exposed to the ADDIE model and limited learning theories such as Stricker and Posner sequencing schemes, constructivist, and a few other learning theories. And at that time, it was very helpful for that creation, but when reflecting on it with the knowledge I have now, there are a lot of things that I would like to correct. Firstly, making it accessible to all students. In the needs assessment, I note that there are a few students who have learning disabilities, but when developing the eLearning module, I never made the module accessible to them. Additionally, implementing Cognitive Load Theory would be essential because some of the slides in the learning module had way too much information and needed to be broken down even more to lower the stress on their cognition. Finally, implementing the ARCs model would have been useful in this case because keeping the learners engaged and motivated is essential for making a eLearning module useful to the learners.

​

 

This artifact connects back to AECT 2012 standard five with the method because during the process, we were following the ADDIE model method as our foundation. In this formative evaluation plan, we were tasked to analyze and assess the problem, then design and develop an eLearning module that would improve the performance of the original problem. By applying this foundation to the evaluation, I was able to work with the ADDIE model hands-on to learn the process of how it works and how instructional designers use it. Additionally, learn the foundations of what instructional design is while improving a problem that was occurring at a school in South Carolina.