Rationale Paper Brenda Volk, MET Candidate Boise State University Spring 2014

Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Standard 1: Design: ......................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Instructional Systems Design ................................................................................................ 4 Artifact: 503 Instructional Design Project .............................................................................. 4 1.2 Message Design .................................................................................................................... 5 Artifact: EDTech 506 Steps of a Look Test Image ............................................................. 5 1.3 Instructional Strategies.......................................................................................................... 5 Artifact: EdTech 502 WebQuest ............................................................................................. 5 1.4 Learner Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 6 Artifact: 522 Andragogy Module 1......................................................................................... 6 STANDARD 2 DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Print Technologies ................................................................................................................ 7 Artifacts: 502 WebQuest Instructor Resources; 506 Unit of Instruction; 597 Comic Strip ... 7 2.2 Audiovisual Technologies .................................................................................................... 7 Artifacts: 503 VoiceThread Case Study Analysis, 503 Lesson Material Screencast, 522 Blackboard Blogs? VoiceThread ............................................................................................ 8 2.3 Computer-Based Technologies ............................................................................................. 8 Artifact: EdTech 597 Edutainment Scratch MLA/APA Game............................................... 8 2.4 Integrated Technologies ........................................................................................................ 9 Artifact: EdTech 502 M-Learning website ............................................................................. 9 STANDARD 3 UTILIZATION ..................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Media Utilization .................................................................................................................. 9 Artifacts: 532 Image, 504 Annotated Bibliography; 502 Virtual Field Trip .......................... 9 3.2 Diffusion of Innovations ..................................................................................................... 10 Artifact: 532 Game Proposal ................................................................................................ 10 3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization ............................................................................. 11 Artifact: TechTrends Lesson Plan ........................................................................................ 11 3.4 Policies and Regulations ..................................................................................................... 11 Artifact: 502 Netiquette page, Plagiarism Page .................................................................... 11 STANDARD 4 MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................ 12

4.1 Project Management ........................................................................................................... 12 Artifact: 503 ID Project ........................................................................................................ 12 4.2 Resource Management ........................................................................................................ 12 Artifact: 505 Evaluation Proposal to Far West Laboratory (FWL) ...................................... 13 4.3 Delivery System Management ............................................................................................ 13 Artifact: Moodle Lesson ....................................................................................................... 13 4.4 Information Management.................................................................................................... 13 Artifact: 504 Using Zotero for the 504 Annotated Bibliography and 504 Synthesis Paper . 14 STANDARD 5 EVALUATION ................................................................................................... 14 5.1 Problem Analysis ................................................................................................................ 14 Artifact: 505 Evaluation Project (Needs Assessment) .......................................................... 14 5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement .................................................................................... 15 Artifact: EdTech 502 WebQuest Evaluation page ................................................................ 15 5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation ................................................................................ 15 Artifacts: Formative Evaluation 503 ID Project; Summative Evaluation: 505 Evaluation Project ................................................................................................................................... 15 5.4 Long-Range Planning ......................................................................................................... 16 Artifact: 501 School Evaluation Summary ........................................................................... 16 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 16 References ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Introduction
In 2011, I had nearly ten years of teaching experience under my belt, four of those years teaching online only. Yet, I was at a crossroad, burnt out and looking for a spark or even a slight career change. Instead of turning one way or the other, I decided to forge a new direction, a path to a Masters in Educational Technology degree at Boise State University (BSU). The following is an account of my journey; within, you find examples of my work and how they align with the standards set by the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT). I hope you see that my words and my work demonstrate my competency and qualify me as a master in educational technology.

Standard 1: Design: Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to

design conditions for learning by applying principles of instructional systems design, message design, instructional strategies, and learner characteristics (AECT, 2001).

1.1 Instructional Systems Design

Instructional Systems Design (ISD) is an organized procedure that includes the steps of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating instruction (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 503 Instructional Design Project In my introduction, I spoke of a slight career change. This career change was from online instructor to instructional designer. Thus, when I enrolled in 503, I was very excited. Since I had designed two full 16-week online classes myself, I felt like the class would be a breeze! This class introduced me to what AECT (2001) substandard 1.1 calls an organized procedure and what Smith and Ragan (2008) and many many others (myself now included) refer to as systematic instructional design. The word systematic has been the most influential word in my entire time in this program. It refers to the purposeful step-by-step creation of a learning product, from needs assessment to implementation to evaluation. It turns what might be a halfday lesson plan into a purposeful step-by-step procedure; in all, my project ended up at 48 pages. My ID project, on introducing entry-level college students to Zotero, employed most of the stages of instructional systems design. For example, I started with a needs assessment, a survey that I administered to my students. The purpose of the needs assessment was to determine if there was, indeed, a problemand whether or not that problem could be solved by designing new instruction. Once a need was determined, I created a task analysis, re-creating the steps of the instructional task and ensuring that my learners had the pre-existing knowledge to complete each step. I then designed the instruction including screencasts and an instructors manual; I even completed a formative evaluation. Overall, I cant think of a better way to create an understanding of systematic instructional design than to have a semester-long project that takes students through the steps of the process. My EdTECH 503 project clearly aligns with AECT

substandard 1.1 and will be a valuable reference in my future as an instructor and instructional designer.

1.2 Message Design

Message design involves planning for the manipulation of the physical form of the message (AECT, 2001). Artifact: EDTech 506 Steps of a Look Test Image In EdTech 504, I learned about the dual processing theory, namely that humans have two channels for processing information: one that is visual and the other that is verbal. This theory aligns with what is called the multimedia principle. This principle recommends that instructional content contain both words and graphics (static or dynamic). Why? Because Multimedia presentations can encourage learners to engage in active learning by mentally representing the material in words and in pictures and by mentally making connections between the pictorial and verbal representations (Clark & Mayer, 2011, p. 71). Since educational technology is concerned with how people learn and the best practices for doing so, I see substandard 1.2 as a connection to both dual processing theory and the multimedia principle. Though several of my classes focused on the use of graphics in learning (502, 506, 513), I feel that an image created for EdTech 506 best demonstrates my mastery of this standard. I started with a concept that I teach my students, a concept called The Look Test. I then used both text and graphics to tap into the learners dual processing systems. I developed this image with principles of cognitive load theory in mind; I parsed words and chunked information to avoid a busy and overwhelming image. Additional cognitive load principles to focus on when creating images are to: 1. Make figure/ground distinct. 2. Clarify organizational hierarchy. 3. Make sure the parts fit with the whole (Lohr, p. 2008, p. 50). The single image selected represents all three of these elements and also serves as a framework for additional images in the lesson. As you will see in my portfolio video, the use of educational images to replace text-only instruction will be a focal point in my career.

1.3 Instructional Strategies

Instructional strategies are specifications for selecting and sequencing events and activities within a lesson (AECT, 2001). Artifact: EdTech 502 WebQuest As educators, I believe our goal is to facilitate sense-making (Clark & Mayer, 2011, p. 79). Part of sense-making is to ensure that our lessons and lectures pull students through a logical sequence of events (as noted in AECT subset 1.3). If instruction takes on twists and U-turns, if it spins its tires or takes side trips or pit stops, we are not facilitating sense-making; instead, we are wasting our students time and adding to cognitive overload. Thus, the very nature of the

WebQuest model is to chunk and sequence information and activities that set students on a logic path to their own journey of discovery. Before EdTech 502, I had never heard of a WebQuest, but now I can see how their step-by-step methodology can engage students to actively process complex information. In the WebQuest I created, I guided students through one of the highest-level thinking tasks on Blooms Taxonomy: evaluation. Evidence of this activitys alignment with AECT standard 1.3 is on the first page of the WebQuest where I provide students a forecast of the five steps of their journey. This sets up a schema in their minds. I not only set up the expectation of whats to follow, I fulfill it with the subsequent pages of the quest. Though I have not used this WebQuest in my classyetI can see that with some revision of graphics and trimming, it could replace some of my current instruction on evaluation. Or, with a career move into instructional design, I would recommend the WebQuest as a learning strategy.

1.4 Learner Characteristics

Learner characteristics are those facets of the learner's experiential background that impact the effectiveness of a learning process (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 522 Andragogy Module 1 I teach adult students; my background is not in education, but in my field: writing. So, like many other college instructors, I know a lot about my subject matter, but very little about education and learning theories. (Yes, I also find this disturbing! Fortunately this has changed for me.) I thought of (and taught) audience awareness as a component of writing. Because my teaching audience was so variedfor example, a class might have students ranging in age from 17-70I never really considered or thought it possible to design a course with their range of experiences and backgrounds in mind. I admit that I used to think in terms of types of learners and made sure to include visual examples for the visual learners in my class. But in EdTech 503, we watched a video by Willingham (2008) entitled Learning Styles Dont Exist where Dr. Willingham, a psychology professor at the University of Virginia, showed the fallacies in these assumptions. The myth of learning styles was also debunked by Clark and Mayer (2011) who said that While various individual differences such as learning styles have received the attention of the training community, research has shown that the learners prior knowledge of the course content exerts the most influence on learning (p. 24). Indeed, when I conducted needs assessments for my 503 and 505 projects, what mattered there was just thatthe learners prior knowledge of the tool, whether it was Zotero in 503 or the library databases in 505. Creating needs assessments to determine learners prior knowledge or experience aligns with substandard 1.4. Additionally, because I teach adult students, EdTech 522 Online Teaching for Adult Educators has had a tremendous impact on the way I view my adult learners. The notion of learners prior knowledge coupled with Knowles principles of adult learning will impact my future course revisions and new designs. Specifically, I want to make sure that my learners are reminded of the

relevancy of the course material to their own lives, both professionally and personally. But I dont want to be a yammering headinstead, I want to design meaningful assignments and activities that will result in adult learners self-directing and forging their own pathways of learning. I want to have fewer tests and build more reflection and more collaboration into my online course designs. In these ways, I can facilitate their meaning making, personalize the courses relevancy and add to internal motivation, enjoyment and deep learning. The artifact for this standard is my first posting for Ed Tech 522 when I was introduced Knowles principles of adult learnersand when I started thinking about my learners in a new way.

STANDARD 2 DEVELOPMENT
Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to develop instructional materials and experiences using print, audiovisual, computer-based, and integrated technologies (AECT, 2001).

2.1 Print Technologies

Print technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials, such as books and static visual materials, primarily through mechanical or photographic printing processes (AECT, 2001). Artifacts: 502 WebQuest Instructor Resources; 506 Unit of Instruction; 597 Comic Strip This substandard recognizes the value of tangible, printable media. The web has opened up opportunities for instructors to not only collaborate, but also to share their work. Open Educational Resources, commonly referred to OER Commons, is a site where instructors from around the world share ideas, lesson plans and activities. These materials can be printed and distributed with someor nointellectual property rights attached. Instructors can also find shareable and printable static images on the Creative Common website or even educational comics on sites like Pixton. Though not specifically on OER Commons, my WebQuest mentioned in Standard 1.3 as well as my Look Test Unit of Instruction both come with instructor resources. These resources include lesson plans that can be printed. In my Edutainment class, I created an educational comic that can be printed and used by instructors as an ice breaker for a discussion about self-plagiarism.

2.2 Audiovisual Technologies

Audiovisual technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials by using mechanical devices or electronic machines to present auditory and visual messages (AECT, 2001).

Artifacts: 503 VoiceThread Case Study Analysis, 503 Lesson Material Screencast, 522 Blackboard Blogs? VoiceThread In EdTech 502, most of our assignments were procedural and delivered by screencasts. As we developed our web page project for the week, it was helpful to see a screenshot and to hear the narration of the steps needed to complete the project. At the same time, we were learning new skills in Dreamweaver and those skills were relayed in Lynda tutorial screencasts. In these instances, multimedia screencasts were very effective. As noted by Clark, Nguyen & Sweller, (2006), when learning from instructional materials that teach a new computer application like Excel, you must coordinate several actions on the keyboard and mouse with the screen formats (p. 48). Rather than writing the instructions in text or with text and static graphics, using audiovisual technologies can reduce cognitive load and result in more efficient learning. My artifacts for AECTs audiovisual standard highlight my use of two different online technologies that tap into both the visual and auditory channels. First, in EdTech 503, I used ScreenR to record several screencasts of a procedure. The example given is just one of those screencasts. Additionally, in 503, I was introduced to VoiceThread. VoiceThread takes the basic Powerpoint lecture and boosts it with auditory and collaborative components. I used VoiceThread for a presentation on a case study in 503; I also later used VoiceThread for a presentation on Blackboards blogging feature in my Andragogy class. In all, I found that the development of audiovisual technologiesfrom Screencast, to VoiceThread to Camtasia most practical. In considering my own online classes, they are quiet. My voice is not present and I think its not only important for students to hear it, but also important for me to use the auditory channel for learning. As I revise my own online courses, I will look for lecture material that can be replaced with a screencast. I might even assign a VoiceThread presentation to my students to show them that they, too, can produce these materials. And, if I enter into the field of instructional design, I will recommend these multimedia tools.

2.3 Computer-Based Technologies

Computer-based technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials using microprocessorbased resources (AECT, 2001). Artifact: EdTech 597 Edutainment Scratch MLA/APA Game This standard covers a lot of ground which many, if not all, of my artifacts would fall. A relatively new area of computer-based technologies is game-based learning. I tried my hand in creating an educational game in the Scratch game created for my final project in Intro. to Edutainment. I created this game as an entertaining way for leaners to identify and shoot down incorrect MLA and APA citations. I integrated this game with an activity where the learners would then have to create a handout that explained the various MLA/APA citations that they rescued in the game. I am honored that Dr. Baek is using my game and lesson plan for his future classes.

2.4 Integrated Technologies

Integrated technologies are ways to produce and deliver materials which encompass several forms of media under the control of a computer (AECT, 2001). Artifact: EdTech 502 M-Learning website In EdTech 502, I created several different webpages; each page, with one exception, was intended to be viewed on a computer screen. The exception was my M-Learning site which used the fluid grid layout feature on Dreamweaver to render the page viewable on a computer screen, tablet or mobile phone. Not only was the site intended to be viewed on a mobile phone, but also to make the learners truly mobile. Learners clicked on links and physically toured four important buildings on campus in search of password clues! Before this webproject, I was unaware that some web pages werent designed for different media screens. I design most of my lectures using SoftChalk LessonBuilder. I realized that I while I could see my lectures when accessing the Blackboard App, only some of SoftChalks activities are mobile friendly. In fact, they have a menu specifically for mobile friendly activities. There are six activity types listed (align, identify, pairs, presenter, selection sequence). Because many of my students view the class on their phones, I can see adding some specific mobile friendly activities that they can play with in their spare time. Im interested in exploring educational Apps further to see how they can play a larger role in online course design.

STANDARD 3 UTILIZATION
Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to use processes and resources for learning by applying principles and theories of media utilization, diffusion, implementation, and policy-making (AECT, 2001).

3.1 Media Utilization

Media utilization is the systematic use of resources for learning (AECT, 2001). Artifacts: 532 BlkRainbow Lost Image, 504 Annotated Bibliography; 502 Virtual Field Trip One of the most valuable lessons I learned in these past two years is that technology should be used purposefully. Not every lesson learned needs to be carried by a sophisticated (cool) technology tool; in fact, sometimes technology can get in the way of learning. I found that in 532, SecondLife was a double edged sword. I loved sitting in the lectures with my classmatesit simulated being in a lecture hall together. However, when our avatars had to go out on missions, for me, the technology got in the way. First, I wasnt sure what I was learning from

the missions (other than exploring SecondLife)and, more importantly, I was unable to master the technology, so in this sense, SecondLife became stressful. I spent many missions simply lost and trying to find my classmates. Thus, when it comes to media utilization, it depends on the learning objectiveand it doesnt have to be fancy, just effective. In EdTech 504, for example, we were assigned to learn more about a learning theory of our choice. I chose cognitive load theory; the assignment of an annotated bibliography with online research was one of the better ways for me to compile many voices and viewpoints on this theory. On the other hand, if the purpose is to teach the learner more about a person and place, then both static and dynamic graphics should be involved. This was clearly the case in my 502 Virtual Field Trip where I combined text, images and videos to take learners on a tour of famous women writers.

3.2 Diffusion of Innovations

Diffusion of innovations is the process of communicating through planned strategies for the purpose of gaining adoption. Artifact: 532 Game Proposal More than any other class, 532 Games and Simulations opened my eyes to what could be in store for the future for online teaching. The computer is a powerful resource and when hooked up to the internet and to game designers imaginations, learning can take on a whole new shape. For example, my 532 class was delivered in a way that was completely new to me: 3D Game Lab. The purpose of the 3D Game Lab class was to earn enough points to win the game; the way to earn points was to embark on different learning quests. That there were plenty of quests to choose from allowed learners to customize the class, to blaze their own path of learning. In addition to 3D Game Lab, the class met once a week in Second Life. Embodying an avatar and being able to see, speak and interact with my classmates and professors demonstrates the power of gaming technology and how it can take online learning to a whole new level (no pun intended). Though some of the problems I experienced in SecondLife were mentioned in the previous substandard, I can see that an online virtual world can have real value in e-learning. My final project for 532 was a presentation and pitch for my 3D Game Lab idea, where students would take on the role of researchers at an educational publishing house. Essentially, I took the research class that I currently teach and spun it into a game. Because my learners range in age and experience level, a learning platform such as 3D Game Lab is perfect for self-directed learning, one of the tenants of andragogy. Substandard 3.2 is about the diffusion of innovations and this artifact is intended as a pitch and presentation piece for this innovation. I have taken this presentation out of the classroom and have pitched it to my Academic Dean; however, I have faced two stumbling blocks. First is a funding issue. Second is that there is not enough research out there (at least not yet) to encourage action in what seems like a risky move. The dean is concerned about the class being a series of hoops and that it might not engage students in that deep meaningful learning that we are all after. However, I believe Idaho Digital Learning Academy is piloting a course using 3D Game Lab, so based on how that goes, I can see myself returning to the dean with my pitch!

3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization

Implementation is using instructional materials or strategies in real (not simulated) settings. Institutionalization is the continuing, routine use of the instructional innovation in the structure and culture of an organization (AECT, 2001). Artifact: TechTrends Lesson Plan When looked through the lens of the ADDIE model, implementation is when instructional design goes off the drawing board, is released into the classroom environment and delivered to the learner. When I think of institutionalization as the continuing routine use of instructional innovation, I think of the Horizon Report. The number one trend in the 2012 Horizon Report was People expect to be able to work, learn, and study whenever and wherever they want to (Johnson, Adams & Cummins, 2012). With this in mind, it is no wonder that the report listed Apps first on the horizon for emerging technologies. At that time (2012), my students were just starting to use the Blackboard App. This showed their desire to take their learning with them. However, it was more than a desire; as in the quote above, it was (and has become) an expectation. In my TechTrends Lesson Plan, I took an existing activity and modified it into a mobile learning activity. Has this reached the implementation stage? Not yet. I will finally have the time to revise my current online classes over the summer break and one of the top priorities is to create more mobile-friendly activities. In 2012, when I created my M-lesson in Ed Tech 502, SoftChalk, the lecture writing program that I use, had just 6 activities that were deemed mobile friendly. But now, in the newest version of SoftChalk, SoftChalk Create, all the activities are mobile friendly. This highlights both the growth and importance of mobile learning and I look forward to implementing it in my fall courses.

3.4 Policies and Regulations

Policies and regulations are the rules and actions of society (or its surrogates) that affect the diffusion and use of Instructional Technology (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 502 Netiquette page, 502 Plagiarism Scavenger Hunt This substandard is a reminder that although the internet is not necessarily policed, as educators we need to know, abide by, and communicate social, academic and fair-use policies. Netiquette and plagiarism are a common part of the conversation. You can see examples of netiquette and avoiding plagiarism in my 502 artifacts. However, when I entered the EdTech program, I knew in the back of my mind that some of the images I used in my online classes likely did not follow copyright laws. However, as rightly noted in Neelsons (2013) blog, there is a lot of confusion regarding what is there for the taking. I usually went by the standard (my own standard) that if I saw the image in multiple sites, I could use it. It was hard to trace back to the original owner and see if the material was copyrighted or not. Thankfully, in my first semester of the program, I was introduced to Creative Commons. From that point on, the images used in all my projects were used legally, fairly and with attribution. The learning and application of fair-use regulations has had a major impact on

me as an instructor and also as a budding instructional designer. Youll see more about this in my Reflection video.

STANDARD 4 MANAGEMENT
Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to plan, organize, coordinate, and supervise instructional technology by applying principles of project, resource, delivery system, and information management (AECT, 2001).

4.1 Project Management

Project management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling instructional design and development projects (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 503 ID Project My 503 instructional design project best demonstrates the expectations of the project management sub-standard. In this project, I conducted a needs assessment, a task analysis, designed instruction, wrote an instructors manual and also gave an example of what the instruction, when implemented, would look like in the LMS. Fortunately, these steps were spread out over the course of a semester. This sequence and timeline highlight not only the systematic nature of instructional design but also that such projects do take timeprobably more than anyone would expect! It is important to give each step the time it needs because the design process is recursive; simply put, you dont march straight forward step by step to the finish lineand if you do, you are probably missing something. Unfortunately, I discovered in my 505 project how my own ineffective planning created some problems later down the road. The information was new to me, so I was not sure which evaluation model would be best for my project, but time was ticking and I had to create my needs assessment survey. In the end, my needs assessment questions went outside of the narrow (and controlled) scope in what I later realized was a goal-based evaluation. I learned an important lesson that I needed to start with a large-scale plan before zooming in on the specifics. My mistake watered down the results of what could have been a much better evaluation. However, the good news is that I was able to rebound from this mistake and successfully control and monitor other aspects of the evaluation; in fact, Dr. Thompson is using my final evaluation report in his upcoming evaluation classes. In all, I found both the ID and Evaluation projects to be some of the most valuable learning experiences in my time at Boise State. My educational experience and my project management skills would have been lacking without these courses. I wish there were more courses on instructional designeven an ID certificatebecause of its direct relationship to the job market.

4.2 Resource Management

Resource management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling resource support systems and services (AECT, 2001).

Artifact: 505 Evaluation Proposal to Far West Laboratory (FWL) I selected the proposal to evaluate the marketability of FWLs DIP training program as evidence of the resource management substandard. Here, I gained experience in a different side of evaluationthe commercial side. I was challenged to analyze a companys situation with their already-developed, untested training program. And, the outset of this analysis I made a difficult recommendationthat before spending the money on marketing, they need to spend their resources on front-end analysis. Once I made this recommendation, I had to write a proposal on how I would plan, monitor, and control this front-end analysis. This not only included planning a timeline, but also a bill. Creating the bill for my services looped me back through the process of resource management as I needed to determine who I would hire, how much it would cost my companyand how much I would charge FWL. This project opened my eyes to the work that goes into product development, but also that I could work as an evaluator or instructional designer in the public sector.

4.3 Delivery System Management

Delivery system management involves planning, monitoring and controlling 'the method by which distribution of instructional materials is organized' . . . [It is] a combination of medium and method of usage that is employed to present instructional information to a learner (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 522 Moodle Sandbox Unit This substandard involves a very important aspect of instruction: how the instruction is organized and delivered to the viewer. It does not matter how good an online activity or lecture is if an online student has to dig it out of an obscure area on a course page or if a student has to follow a breadcrumb of links to get there. This imposes unnecessary cognitive load on the learner before content is even accessed! I have always worked in Blackboard, so it was very valuable for me to have experience in a different LMS: Moodle. In my 522 Moodle Sandbox lesson, I created a unit on APA format. My goal was to design a clean, uncluttered learning space with a clear sequence of events. Notably in the Moodle page, I used colors and larger fonts for section headings and then indented the subordinate information. I directed learners attention to where they needed to focus with words like Start here! Finally, I used organization to not only guide the learner through the sequence of events but also to guide them through the due dates.

4.4 Information Management

Information management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling the storage, transfer, or processing of information in order to provide resources for learning (AECT, 2001).

Artifact: 504 Using Zotero for the 504 Annotated Bibliography and 504 Synthesis Paper There is so much information on the web that in order to facilitate its use, it must be managed. The Information Management substandard highlights the importance of this ability to control and appropriate the flow of incoming information. Fortunately, there are many online tools to help! For example, in EdTech 501 we were introduced to both Diigo and Zotero, two online sites where users could not only store but could also share resourcesa citation generator was also included! Since learning about Zotero in 501, I created folders for subsequent courses and collected and filed resources both provided and inspired by each class. Most specifically, I used Zotero to manage the articles for my 504 annotated bibliography and research project. Zotero made it easy for me to save files, even tag them to identify resources that would be helpful for different focal points of my paper. The effective management of information allowed me to save time and made my own learning more efficient. The best part is that now that I am at the end of my time at Boise State, I have an entire library of articles at my disposal! In addition to using Zotero as a student, I have also considered teaching my students how to use this tool. In fact, this was the focus of my 503 ID project.

STANDARD 5 EVALUATION
Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to evaluate the adequacy of instruction and learning by applying principles of problem analysis, criterion-referenced measurement, formative and summative evaluation, and long-range planning (AECT, 2001).

5.1 Problem Analysis

Problem analysis involves determining the nature and parameters of the problem by using information-gathering and decision-making strategies (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 505 Evaluation Project (Needs Assessment) How do instructional designers know what content needs developed? Do they look to what they think is needed, what the instructor thinks is needed or do they even let new technologies be the guiding light? In short, new instruction should not be developed without a front-end analysis (as evident in the 4.2 substandard). This analysis centers on three focal points: the learning context, the learners themselves and whether or not these learners need the new instruction (Smith & Ragan, 2008, pp. 42-43). Smith and Ragan advise that the adage, If it aint broke, dont fix it, (p. 43) apply. In my 505 Evaluation Project, I conducted a Needs Assessment to help me analyze whether or not the database instruction provided by my colleges library was broke and needed fixed. Youll see in my Needs Assessment artifact that I posed questions to the learners to learn more about them, their previous instruction on the library databases and both their needs and attitudes on researching using the databases versus researching using search engines like Google. It makes

sense that the actual learners headline the process that determines whether or not there is a problem that needs addressedand whether or not instruction is the solution. I shared my Evaluation project with the colleges instructional librarian and she found the information from my Needs Assessment to be one of the most tellingand most valuableaspects of the evaluation.

5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement

Criterion-referenced measurement involves techniques for determining learner mastery of prespecified content (AECT, 2001). Artifact: EdTech 502 WebQuest Evaluation page One of the most basic, but most important lessons emphasized over these past two years is the alignment of learning objectives to activities to assessment. As noted by Smith and Ragan (2008), [I]n order to ascertain what learners have learned, we must determine what kind of evidence of learning we will accept as an indication that learning has occurred. An example of this evidence of learning would be a criterion-referenced measurement such as a grading rubric. For the 5.2 artifact, I present the self-evaluation and grading rubric for my 502 WebQuest project. This rubric helps determine to what level learners have mastered the content of the WebQuest.

5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation

Formative evaluation involves gathering information on adequacy and using this information as a basis for further development. Summative evaluation involves gathering information on adequacy and using this information to make decisions about utilization (AECT, 2001). Artifacts: Formative Evaluation 503 ID Project; Summative Evaluation: 505 Evaluation Project What really stuck for me as a definition of and as a way to distinguish the differences between formative and summative evaluation is the soup metaphor attributed to Paul Black, namely that formative evaluation is when the cook tastes the soup while summative evaluation is when the guests taste the soup. In this light, I have conducted both formative and summative evaluations. First, in my 503 Instructional design project, I set up a hypothetical formative evaluation which consisted of a series of trial runs and small groups. The information gathered in these qualitative data gathering sessions would help with the design and development of the instruction. The soup metaphor above includes leaners palatessince eventually they will be eating this soup, they are important taste testers. Second, my 505 Evaluation project involved a summative evaluation, an evaluation of an existing and established piece of instruction on the librarys databases. I evaluated the database instruction using the goal-based model and found that the objectives, activities and assessment were incongruous. As mentioned earlier, this report was passed on to the Instructional Librarian and with my data in mind, the library is reconsidering not only how the database instruction is designed, but also where and when it should be deployed in the institutional curriculum. My

evaluation project might not only benefit my college, but other Ed Tech students as well because Dr. Thompson asked to use my report as a sample for his future classesan honor!

5.4 Long-Range Planning

Long-range planning that focuses on the organization as a whole is strategic planning. Longrange is usually defined as a future period of about three to five years or longer. During strategic planning, managers are trying to decide in the present what must be done to ensure organizational success in the future (AECT, 2001). Artifact: 501 School Evaluation Summary This particular substandard implies that an institution with a myopic viewpoint might not be prepared for the future; the best way to prepare for the future is to plan for it! The Long-Range Planning substandard specifies a focus on the organization as a whole (AECT, 2001) and the artifact where I have focused on an organizations long-range planning is in the 501 School Evaluation Summary report. This project, in which I analyzed and evaluated a schools current use of technology and the plans in place for the future, proved both challenging and eye opening. As an instructor, I dont often think about the organization as a whole and this has revealed the importance of both assessing the current state of technology use in my school and whether or not someone has an eye out for its long-term future.

Conclusion
Assembling this portfolio and reflecting on nearly two years of rigorous learning has allowed me to make connections between my Ed Tech classes and their practical application to the courses I teach and design. This process enabled me to realize the breadth of my learning, to extract common themes and to put on paper (and on screen!) how much I have grown. It seems that we often jump through learning hoopsand I am grateful for the opportunity to stop, think, listen and learn from myselfthe new person that I have become through the course of my studies. Thank you for this opportunity to reflect and thank you for your consideration of my candidacy.

References
AECT. (2001). What are the initial standards? Retrieved from http://www.aect.org/standards /initstand.html Clark, R. & Mayer, R. E. (2011). E-Learning and the Science of Instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Clark, R., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Lohr, L. L. (2008). Creating graphics for learning and performance (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Neelson, C. (2013, 29 September). Exploring copyright and fair use via YouTube. [weblog]. Retrieved from http://tubeteaching.blogspot.com/2013/09/exploring-copyright-and-fairuse-via.html Smith, P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (2008). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Willingham, D. (2008, August 21). Learning styles dont exist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIv9rz2NTUk