Being in an early childhood and elementary setting, I have yet to be exposed to many Instructional Design (ID) models. I have more experience with teaching philosophies such as Reggio Emilia and Montessori, as these are the two approaches we use at work. Upon starting this course, I realised I have a slight knowledge of some IDs like Bloom’s Taxonomy (Heaster-Ekholm, 2020), where we discussed this model in my education psychology and child development classes during my bachelor’s. A more recent design I have been exposed to was the idea of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (Takacs et al., 2021).
In my final internship before graduating, one project was creating a lesson plan while keeping UDL in mind. In the specific class I was in, a couple of students already had Individual Education Plans (IEPs); thus, I was somewhat used to differentiating instruction, and I was up to creating a lesson while keeping all the students in mind. The idea of UDL is not to eliminate students’ IEPs or accommodations but to design a lesson that maximizes learning for most students (Takacs et al., 2021). I decided to do a reading comprehension activity with them, where using the Smart Board, I found a read-aloud on YouTube that incorporated the captions so they could both hear and read along. Afterwards, I asked questions about the book, and the students discussed their answers in a group. The students were engaged and enjoyed doing this activity, and it worked well to meet the needs of several students. I was lucky to have access to that technology. Using technology in the classroom was meaningful, as I did not want to use it just because it was there.
Kale et al. (2020) discuss how teachers must understand how to integrate technology into their instructional design meaningfully. While it is great that schools now have access to different types of technology like Smartboard, laptops, tablets, and more, if it is not used meaningfully, it will not help students learn effectively. I was constantly encouraged to use technology during my internships when creating lesson plans. Thus, when coming up with my lessons, I reflected on ways to use technology, not just because it was there and I had access to it, but to help students understand the content and expand their knowledge. It was and still is important to me to reflect on the “why” I should use technology in this instance.
In the end, using UDL and its three principles of multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression (Gronseth & Hutchins, 2019), I am constantly reflecting on ways to incorporate technology and how to create lessons to meet the needs of most students at once.
References
Gronseth, S. L., & Hutchins, H. M. (2019). Flexibility in formal workplace learning: Technology
applications for engagement through the lens of Universal Design for Learning. TechTrends, 64(2), 211–
218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00455-6
Heaster-Ekholm, K. L. (2020). Popular Instructional Design Models: Their Theoretical Roots and Cultural
Considerations. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and
Communication Technology, 16(3), 50-65.
Kale, U., Roy, A. & Yuan, J. To design or to integrate? Instructional design versus technology
integration in developing learning interventions. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 2473–2504 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09771-8
Takacs, S., Zhang, J., Lee, H., Truong, L., & Smulders, D. (2021). Universal design for learning: A practical
guide. JIBC. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/jibcudl/
Hi Catherine, great read! Something that hit home with me specifically was the point made about ensuring that technology is used with intention, that there needs to be meaning behind incorporation of technology and not just tech for tech’s sake! I have been struggling with the Google Classroom set up for my son recently, where the platform has to be accessed to then access another electronic database that houses (you guessed it!) another link to access his virtual homework…. to me, we have added in three steps when one would suffice. I am certainly not opposed to having technology used, my concern is the ‘why’ as you mentioned… more so the ‘why make it challenging to access the resources or activities required’ as it seems to be sending the wrong message to the students and parents both as they start out their learning journey irritated and upset before even accessing the lesson itself. I know we live in the age of technology but I am more and more appreciating the thought that is put into intentional use of these types of programs and plans. THANK YOU!
Hi Jessica, thanks for your comments! It can definitely be frustrating when you have to constantly click links, and have various tabs open just to get access to one thing. Unfortunately, I think the ‘why’ in this case could be that this is what your sons school has decided to use as a platform (so only they really know the answer your question!), personally, the schools I have worked for have been using Microsoft Teams to get the students assignments to them online. Maybe you can bring it up with them one day and see what they say, who knows? It could spark a conversation about why they specifically decided to use Google Classroom!
Hi Catherine,
Thank you for your transparency about your exposure to instructional design models. We are thrilled that you are knowledgeable about teaching philosophies and are wondering if you think there is a relationship between your teaching philosophy and the instructional design or learning design models that you might choose to use?
Your exposure to UDL also beneficial. As you highlight students with IEP are well supported by the approach. In what other ways might UDL be beneficial in your context with younger children? You also talk about integrating technology in a meaningful way what might be the value proposition for technology with students in your age group?
Hi, thank you for your questions.
With the two philosophies that I am familiar with, I tend to let the children guide me in terms of creating activities for them. For example, with Reggio Emilia, we observe the children to see what their interests are and plan our weekly lessons and then a larger project from there. Reggio tends to lean towards learner-centred ideals (Cleaver, 2023), and therefore guides my design process to keep the children’s ideas and interests in mind. On the other hand, we also use Montessori, which somewhat contradicts Reggio in that it is more teacher-guided and the materials used are more structured in that there’s a right way to use them (Cleaver, 2023). Thus, it really is a balancing act on how to incorporate the two, and while I do not have a specific instructional design in mind when planning for the week, they do guide me in how I choose to balance the two philosophies together.
In terms of integrating technology with the children, I would love to, I am currently conversing with the director of the daycare to implement some ideas. For instance, there are various technologies that can help the children with their cognitive skills like problem-solving, observing and following patterns, and more. I am also interested in using technology to help with their language skills, something that would help with the letter sounds. We have a speech pathologist that comes once a week, and I would like to continue working with those children when she is unable to come.
I hope this answers some of your questions.
Reference
Cleaver, S. (2023, August 15). What is the Reggio Emilia Approach to education?. We Are Teachers. https://www.weareteachers.com/reggio-emilia-approach/