Competency 7: Apply Instructional Design Principles

In these artifacts, I

Identify and analyze learning and performance problems
Design, plan, and develop instructional interventions using appropriate strategies and techniques
Develop an evaluation plan for a project based on stated goals and recognized standards

Identifies and analyzes learning and performance problems

I developed this competency in this case analysis where I examined ID problems regarding a medical center's education materials for neurodiverse patients. Initial feedback data indicated that neurodiverse patients were struggling to adhere to their instructions. I investigated the underlying causes of these struggles instead of only focusing on the low adherence rates.

Through this analysis, I identified prominent ID issues contributing to the problem, such as the overwhelming format of the the materials. I also evaluated contextual constraints that affected the feasibility of potential solutions, including the limited budget. I then prioritized the identified issues based on their impact on patients' comprehension and justified my rankings. For example, I placed the overwhelming format of the materials as the highest priority issue since it directly contributed to patients experiencing cognitive overload.

I then proposed two different intervention approaches based on information from the case and external readings that could realistically be implemented to address the root cause. Ultimately, this assignment enabled me to demonstrate the ability to identify learning/performance problems, analyze instructional and contextual factors that contribute to the problems, and provide feasible solutions.

Designs, plans, and develops instructional interventions using appropriate strategies and techniques

This competency is demonstrated in this document where I investigated how CGT 345, a face-to-face synchronous class, could be transitioned to an asynchronous online format. This redesign process included creating framework criteria checklists, reviewing the course with the OSCQR rubric, and forming a change matrix. It also involves proposing several interventions to ensure that CGT 345's structure, facilitation methods, activities, and assignments would remain effective in an online environment.

The redesign heavily focused on implementing proven theories/frameworks. For example, the redesign emphasized promoting autonomy (according to the Theory of Transactional Distance) as online asynchronous courses require students to take greater responsibility in their learning. Additionally, the redesign utilized the Community of Inquiry's social presence to build trust and establish a community, as this primarily occurred during in-class interactions.

When developing facilitation plans for peer reviews, discussions, and overall course delivery, I incorporated strategies and techniques supported by research on online learning. For example, in the facilitation plan for discussions involving analysis, I integrated Critical Incident question prompts to facilitate higher levels of critical thinking. Overall, this project allowed me to design and develop interventions that are informed by theories/frameworks and supported with strategies/techniques based in research.

Develops an evaluation plan for a project based on stated goals and recognized standards

I developed this competency as I worked in a group to complete this evaluation plan for McKinsey & Company's Forward Program, which focuses on the development of essential career skills. My partner and I used Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation as a foundation to ensure alignment between the program's goals, evaluation strategies, and organizational outcomes.

At the beginning of the project, my partner and I identified key goals for the evaluation, including assessing the program's effectiveness in developing career skills and assessing its impact on participants' professional growth. Kirkpatrick's Four Levels Model guided the development of evaluation instruments and data collection procedures across each level. For example, level 1 uses an online Likert scale survey to capture participants' reactions to the program while level 2 assesses participants' learning through pre-tests, post-tests and knowledge checks in between.

For level 3, our evaluation involved measuring short-term and long-term behavior/performance changes with supervisor observation and online self-report surveys. These tools give insights into the program's effectiveness by combining objective evidence from observations and participants' self-reported applications of career skills. Level 4 measures the Forward program's impact on McKinsey & Company's organization outcomes by measuring business metrics (e.g. key performance indicators) and conducting return on investment analyses.

This project enabled me to develop my evaluation skills by designing/developing an evaluation plan using a widely recognized framework, aligning evaluation methods with stated goals, and utilizing data collection strategies that measure reactions, learning, behavior change, and organizational impact.