After first turning in my rough draft ID to my professor and getting a dismal grade + feedback, I dove into a more elaborate, in-depth description of what I envisioned my project to be. Our main project this mini-semester is to create an entire course, 40-45 hours of instruction, in Moodle. Whenever we are given exciting and big projects like this, I immediately think of ways that my work for grad school can be applied to my actual job (kind of killing two birds with one stone, so to speak). I have a teacher who is teaching a class in which every student will be given a laptop for completing their work. One of his goals has been to flip instruction, or at the very least implement a sort of blended curriculum. I figured, why don’t I help him out by developing the flipped content for a semester of World History? I thought it was a great idea, but my professor wanted a more condensed and consecutive approach to the project, so I modified it to be the entire six weeks instruction of their World History class (which is A LOT more work, but it would be really cool if it works out!!!). I’m really excited that what I develop – or at least parts of it – will be utilized by a teacher this year. Plus it’s a LOT of work (did I mention that already?), so I really hope it ends up being beneficial for this teacher and his students.
I gave my newly revised, twenty-something page long instructional design document to Jason, a classmate. He was very helpful in his peer review. He said he loved the idea (turns out, his project is about teaching teachers how to flip the classroom!), and could think of a number of people who would want access to this course (Hey! Maybe I can sell it! Hah).
Jason’s feedback included questions which helped clarify areas where I need to be more specific. For example, one of his first questions asked if I was personally flipping a history course or providing resources for another teacher to flip a history course. It helped me realize where I need to go into more depth in my explanation. He also pointed out that some of my listed assessments (such as quizzes, forum posts, or wikis) did not clarify where they would be completing these activities. I guess I was so tired (rewriting an ID after working 10 hours… which for me was about an 8 hour process… left my brain frazzled [so much so that I missed my other class’s online meeting!!! MAJOR face plant!!! :(]) that I didn’t realize how vague or how assumptive I was being in the document. All the activities will be in Moodle unless otherwise mentioned… but I never bothered to say that in the document. I will definitely be adding that.
I also was kind of vague on wiki and quiz implementation, in terms of teacher support. I’m seeing that I will need to add something like a Job Aid (Jason’s suggestion) or some other sort of procedural part in the IDD which helps the instructor to learn these processes and how to implement them. They definitely need to play with it before stepping in front of a class of 15 year olds and asking them to do it. Practice, troubleshoot, then implement. In my IDD, I basically have them step right into implementation without practicing first and troubleshooting problems. And we all know there seem to always be problems when it comes to new technology!!!
He also gave me a lot of great suggestions. Jason’s previous project for another class included his use of Moodle, so I feel very lucky that my assigned peer reviewer has experience using the program. He suggested, for example, that I include the schedule and assignment dates in Moodle’s calendar feature. What a great idea! I didn’t even realize that was an option. I have so much to learn about Moodle. Overall, a great big THANKS(!!!) to Jason for the peer review! It’s very helpful for another set of eyes to look over a document I’ve been staring at for hours and hours. 🙂