Evaluating an instructional design is crucial because it offers feedback that informs all other design process stages to ensure continual improvement of the teaching methodology. The introduction to calculus class trains on the concepts and skills, such as solving equations and manipulating functions. which are vital for learners to explore rates of change, limits, and integrals. I chose active learning using interactive technological tools as the best instructional design for this lesson. In this essay, I will evaluate my instructional method to ensure continuous improvement of the training design and that it fulfills its intended purpose.
Pre-Assessment
First, I pre-assessed the instructional design to determine what needs to be done before the lesson starts. The evaluation established the starting point of the task by finding out what the instructional design has already covered and what skills required more instruction (Jaafar & Lin, 2017). My initial examination of the lesson involved a criterion-referenced test, which identified mini-quizzes and surveys as items that test the overall comfortability with entry skills of the class (algebra, geometry, and trigonometry). The current active learning design is based on the cognitive constructivist learning theory, which dictates that my instructional design should work on modifying the existing algebraic and trigonometric structures to accommodate the new coaching material needed to solve advanced calculus problems. The team involved in the educational process includes proactive students and the instructor (me).
Formative Assessment
Secondly, formative assessment is used by educators throughout the teaching process to establish the effectiveness of the learning and modify it accordingly. I formatively analyzed my instructional design using alternative testing forms, such homework, informal tests, and exit tickets (Chigonga, 2020). Specifically, I gave learners daily written exercises, informal tests, exit tickets and plickers. The evaluation of the feedback obtained determined how well the instruction covered the various aspects of the topic. Additionally, these results enabled me to track learning, provide feedback, and adjust teaching to focus on enhancing cognitive skills, thus progress towards achieving the learning goals. As a result, I targeted a specific problem area within the instructional content—applying principles to open-ended and word problems. Therefore, I adapted the instruction to focus more on training cognitive skills rather than algebraic and trigonometric formulas.
Summative Assessment
Summative assessment is employed at the end of the lesson to determine the instructional design’s impact on students’ knowledge and skills. The evaluation informs and reports on the gaps and strengths of the instructional procedure, helping educators decide whether they should continue using it (Chytry & Kubiatko, 2021). The Kirkpatrick Model was the best evaluation technique for my instructional program as it accounted for the active learning with interactive technology style. The method has four levels, including reaction, learning, behavior, and, finally, results (Kurt, 2018). In the first step, I asked learners whether they enjoyed the learning experiences. Most students loved the active teaching method that engaged them throughout the lesson through visualization techniques and other technologies. Besides, the learning material was valuable in representing the subject ideas visually to students, enhancing comprehension of the background principles and application of calculus concepts to practical problems. Secondly, the learning stage involved gauging the level of knowledge and skills that students have gained through informal and formal assessments. I administered mid-term examinations to measure how much learners have comprehended the class material. The results showed that most students appropriately applied concepts to situations and could explain the principles behind their calculations. There was an improvement from previous lessons that did not employ this instructional design.
The third phase, behavioral change, entailed analyzing how students’ attitudes, knowledge, and skills in calculus have changed following the instruction. The instructional design enabled learners to apply critical thinking and calculus principles in solving word and open-ended problems. The final level of the model was dedicated to measuring the direct results of the learning. I assessed whether the learning outcomes and objectives of the lesson had been achieved (Almazyad & Alqarawy, 2020). Examining the quizzes set for learners showed that they aligned with the lesson outcomes and goals. Additionally, the design improved performance in subsequent calculus units, making it effective over time. Conclusively, active learning provides the resources, assessments, and skills needed for educators to evaluate learning after the lesson. In addition, it coaches on higher-level thinking skills and the ability to synthesize data from word and open-ended situations.
Difference between Learner and Instructional Design Evaluation
Evaluating learners entails a systematic process of establishing whether students achieved the educational objectives of a program. On the other hand, assessing my instructional design involves reviewing the plan’s teaching components and resulting outcomes to establish if it attains the desired outcomes. Therefore, instructional design evaluation focuses on me and how I convey class material, while learner assessment considers the student, how they acquire knowledge, and their performance.
Steps to Ensure Success of an Instructional Design
Educators should take various steps for their instructional design to succeed. The first step is establishing the problem faced by students participating in the lesson. Secondly, they determine the broad level task to be accomplished and the specific learning objectives, goals, and outcomes. Then, learner analysis is done to understand learners’ entry behaviors, strengths, and weaknesses. Subsequently, instructors develop an engaging instructional design that embraces active learning and focuses on achieving the established goals and objectives. The teaching method should allow educators to obtain feedback throughout the process and accommodate necessary adjustments. Additionally, it should employ the use of graphics, clips, and other forms of technology.
Design Alignment to an Evaluation Theory
My active learning with interactive technology design aligns with the Kirkpatrick evaluation model because the paradigm effectively measures the effectiveness of the teaching method. It provides a simple approach to assessing aspects of my instructional design in four phases. Additionally, it is easy to implement because it enables the establishment of straightforward structures for getting information from me and the teaching framework without interfering with learning (Brown & Green, 2020). For example, it requires me to ask learners to examine the learning processes to know whether the expected outcomes have been met. Besides, it gauges the effectiveness of teaching through quizzes, tests, and examinations, which is part of the instructional process.
Effectiveness of Instructional Designers
As a program designer, I evaluate my effectiveness through conducting an alignment mapping activity to ensure the instructional design meets the learning outcomes and objectives. Besides, I can undertake a lesson evaluation process after its completion to set quality standards that should be completed or measured. To assess the effectiveness of my team, I will consider the frequency to which teamwork skills, which include coordination, interpersonal skills, leadership, communication, and decision-making, are applied by every member in the development team of the instruction.
Conclusion
To conclude, evaluating the active learning instructional design will allow educators to ensure training offers the necessary skills to appropriately apply cognitive thinking and accurate principles to real-life business problems and subsequent calculus units. Therefore, assessing the instructional design will allow instructors to tailor their teaching throughout the class to ensure the design teaches the necessary calculus concepts and how cognitive thinking can be applied in different situations. As a result, the lesson will ensure knowledge and skills that align with the expected goals and outcomes are disseminated, thus lower the possibility of inappropriate instruction.
References
Almazyad, R., & Alqarawy, M. (2020). The design of Dick and Carey Model. In D. Schmidt-Cwarford (Ed.), Society for information technology & teacher education international conference (pp. 544-547). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2020). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and practice. Routledge.
Chigonga, B. (2020). Formative assessment in mathematics education in the twenty-first century. In G. F. Kehdinga (Ed.), Theorizing STEM education in the 21st century. IntechOpen.
Chytry, V., & Kubiatko, M. (2021). Pupils’ summative assessments in mathematics as dependent on selected factors.EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(8), em1995. Web.
Jaafar, R., & Lin, Y. (2017). Assessment for learning in the calculus classroom: A proactive approach to engage students in active learning.International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(3), 503-520. Web.
Kurt, S. (2018). Kirkpatrick Model: Four levels of learning evaluation. Educational Technology. Web.