In applying the instructional design principles and best practices

covered in this course, my understanding of instructional design as a

process has definitely grown, as has my confidence in my abilities as a
designer. I was able to experience several concepts and phenomena
described by William Horton (2011) very acutely as I worked through
the creation of my learning objects. First, in applying the backwards
design practice of defining and creating assessments before learning
activities, I found that some of my objectives needed further revision
and clarification, even though theyd all met the criteria for sound
objectives. It wasnt until I was faced with writing the assessment
items themselves that certain details came into focus and helped me
to see places where the objectives were unclear.
Secondly, in creating my activities, I found different areas in
which my objectives were not as meaningful as they ought to be. For
example, Id originally written the objective Delineate the three new
types of assessment items in next-generation assessments. Once I
began designing the learning object for that enabling objective, it was
obvious that my objective was not as robust as it should have been,
since just distinguishing between the three different item types would
be too simple a task for my learners and would not have a great deal of
relevance to them; it is far more important that they gain a thorough
understanding of the features and purposes of the different item types.
So the revised objective became Explain how each of the three main

item types unique to next-generation assessments helps to achieve the

level of rigor prescribed by the Common Core State Standards for
English Language Arts. Furthermore, the latter half of the revised
objective (the level of rigor prescribed by the Common Core State
Standards for English Language Arts) helped me to realize that I
needed to craft an additional terminal objective to provide essential
background knowledge and to increase motivation for learning. That
objective became Describe the potential value of the Common Core
State Standards initiative to the U.S. education system.
In addition to the principles and practices described by Horton,
the work of Mayer and Moreno (2007, 2002) has also had a significant
impact on my views of instructional design best practices. Though I
was already familiar with the Mayer principles of multimedia design,
the experience of applying them to my learning activities has helped
me to internalize them and to more fully comprehend their importance.
For example, in the primary absorb activity I created, I adopted a
cognitive rather than purely informational view of content delivery (i.e.,
the content delivery should be approached with the aim of maximizing
cognitive processing rather than simply delivering the information) and
in doing so, made several design changes such as providing narration
and meaningful images instead of on-screen text, presenting images
and narration simultaneously, and eliminating all but the essential onscreen text to avoid cognitive overload.

Lastly, but certainly far from the least contributing factor to my

growth and change throughout this course are the principles and
practices of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). As with the Mayer
principles, I had a basic familiarity with UDL prior to this course;
however, Ive now come to have a much deeper understanding of the
importance of the principles and feel that they should be globally
applied across all instructional design. I do wish that wed studied UDL
a bit earlier in the course, since I see now that it would have helped to
have had them in mind throughout the entire instructional design
process and especially in the module on activity building. As it is, I can
see how I applied the principles of UDL to my activities only
retroactively. If Id been more focused on UDL prior to the design and
creation of my sample activities, I would have made a few different
choices. For example, though I did incorporate the first principle
(Provide multiple means of representation) into my primary sample
absorb activity by using a combination of text, narration, graphics,
and video, I now realize that my activity could have benefitted greatly
from the addition of closed captioning for my narration. The platform I
used, however, does not offer that option. Id have liked to explore
other platforms where I could easily have added closed captioning. And
though I also incorporated the second and third principles (Provide
multiple means of action and expression; Provide multiple means of
engagement), by offering a combination of discussion and written do

activities and a mix of independent and group connect activities, I

would have liked for those choices to have been more informed by
UDL. Luckily, Hortons absorb-do-connect philosophy of activity
building ensures at least a broad coverage of UDL.
The information Ive taken from the course as a whole, however,
has been invaluable to my strengths as an instructional designer, and
Im looking forward to designing my next learning objects from this
fortified perspective.

References
CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0.
Wakefield, MA: Author.
Horton, W. (2011). E-Learning by Design (2nd Edition) [Texidium
version]. Retrieved from http://texidium.com
Mayer, R. and Moreno, R. (2007). A Cognitive Theory of Multimedia
Learning: Implications for Design Principles. Retrieved from:
https://gustavus.edu/education/courses/edu241/mmtheory.pdf
Mayer, R. and Moreno, R. (2002) Aids to computer-based multimedia
learning. Retrieved from
http://digitalstrategist.typepad.com/Readings/EDBT5501/Mayer%20and
%20Moreno.pdf