BUKIDNON STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Malaybalay City, Bukidnon 8700, Philippines

________________________________________

ID Plan
(Activity 4)
________________________________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Course

ISD 301 (Instructional Design Models, Theories and Methodology)

Submitted to:

DR. WILFRED G. ALAVA, JR.

ISD 301 Professor

Submitted by:

JERIEL D. MUGAS
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN EDUCATION
Major in Instructional Systems Design
Transforming Learning Environments: A TPACK-Based
Instructional Design for Streamlined Technology
Integration
Rationale
Learning is dynamic. It is being influenced by the changing times, and
instructors are among the biggest influencers. To effectively instruct learners
and maximize their acquisition of knowledge and skills, teachers must
possess certain competences (West, Swanson, & Lipscomb, 2017). Lessons
are not learned in the same way today as they were when the teacher first
learned them. Today's students think and process information in a way that
is fundamentally different from that of their predecessors. Some students
might require the most intensive approach to adapting instruction—modify
the delivery of instruction (Iris Center, 2019).
Shulman in 1986 believed that the usual idea of knowledge in teaching
which is that teachers have a set of content knowledge – specific knowledge
about the subject they are teaching – and a set of pedagogical knowledge –
knowledge about how to teach including specific teaching methods. He calls
this pedagogical content knowledge or PCK (McGraw-Hill, 2019). Technology
in the 21st century plays a major role as a tool in helping the teachers in the
delivery of lesson and students in learning which completes the model of PCK
and this is Technology, Pedagogy Content Knowledge (TPACK). Context is
also an important aspect of educational research and the technological
pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework, but is often missing
from TPACK research, or its specific meaning is not clear (Rosenberg &
Koehler, 2015).
Students value the use of technology in the classrooms. Moreover,
teachers seemed to appreciate that technology is available to them as
means of enhancing education and making it more authentic for the students
(Ruggiero & Mong, 2015). In this era where students are exposed to the
advancement of technology, they find it not just a tool for teaching but a
help for them to learn. Teachers are another benefactor of the advancement
of technology in the classroom. This advancement makes their preparation
of learning materials easier. But, judicious use of technology is a must in
every classroom. It must be used to enhance the students’ learning and thus
improve their achievement (Santos & Castro, 2021).
Technological Pedagogy Content Knowledge (TPACK) is a theory that
was developed to explain the set of knowledge that teachers need to teach
their students, to teach effectively, and to use technology (McGraw-Hill,
2019). It attempts to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers
for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex,
multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge. This framework
extends Shulman’s idea in 1986 of Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the
study of Koehler & Mishra in 2006 as cited by Valtonen et al. (2020) (Santos
& Castro, 2021).
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) is the
effectiveness of the delivery of the lesson with technology integration. It is
an ideal application in all aspects of learning, which are all important in the
teaching and learning process.
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the ID Plan
Technology: Rolljak

Rolljak is a gamified classroom engagement tool. With Rolljak, teachers

can create interactive lessons and get both visual and written responses
from students. It is perfect for encouraging collaboration, enabling peer
evaluation, and sparking creative thinking in your classroom. It fosters
students’ problem-solving and critical thinking skills.

How Rolljak Works?

Plan
Build collaborative learning with various activities to choose from.
1. Choose your activity
Build a series of activities and prompt participants to answer an open-
ended question, write a poem, draw their ideas, or solve a formula, it's
up to you! You can browse our preset activities or create your own
activity from scratch with our various response types.
2. Engaging Quizzes
Move beyond asking MCQ questions with our sentence builder and
equation builder fill-in-the-blanks activity. Our cutting-edge technology
can even auto evaluate open ended responses!
3. Promote Discussion
It's not always about getting the right answer. Trying to encourage
participation? Increasing peer learning? Leading meaningful
discussions? With Rolljak it's all possible!
4. Enable Breakout Teams
Do you want your participants to work in smaller groups? Enable Team
Mode and you have the option to group participants into teams. You
can rearrange them in each team according to your own preferences.
 Present
Promote collaboration, conduct fun interactive quizzes for creative
problem solving skills, enable peer evaluation or Team-based activities.
1. Go Live
Invite participants to the session using a room code. Participants can
join using any smart device! While waiting, engage them as they
express their creativity by designing their avatars.
2. Gather Responses
Sit back and wait for your participants to submit their responses and
get their creative juices flowing. Add more time for the activity or skip
it entirely if you change your mind.
3. Collaborative Learning
Enabling collaboration allows your participants to exchange their
responses and develop upon the ideas of their peers with full
anonymity - allowing for all participants to freely express their
thoughts!
4. Peer Evaluation
Promote critical thinking by allowing participants to evaluate one
another's work. Peer evaluation can happen through various methods,
whether you want them to scale, invest, or tag the work. Peer
evaluation stimulates participants to think from different points of
view!

Explain
Get session reports to see quantitative and qualitative assessments of
your students with one-click exports.
1. Discuss The Results
Highlight the top-rated answers and give your participants the
recognition as well as ideas to improve.
2. Browse Gallery
Reflect on responses, identify patterns in your participants' thinking
processes, and address them as the session ends.
3. Export Reports
 One click exports allow you to always have the results and responses
at your fingertips and allows for further development of ideas and
discussion!

Assessment: CDIO Standards

The CDIO standards are a set of principles (or best practices)

underlying the implementation of CDIO in an engineering programme. They
define the distinguishing features of a CDIO programme, serve as guidelines
for educational reform, enable benchmarking with other programmes, and
provide a tool for self-evaluation to support continuous improvement
(Malmqvist, Edström & Rosén, 2020).
In this Instructional Design (ID), the author finds it relevant to suit the
ID Plan according to five standards in CDIO. These standards are (Standard
7) Integrated Learning Experiences’ (Standard 8) Active Learning, (Standard
9) Enhancement of Faculty Competence, and (Standard 10) Enhancement of
Faculty Teaching Competence.
 Figure 2. CDIO Standards

Standard 7: Integrated Learning Experiences

Integrated learning experiences that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary
knowledge, as well as personal and interpersonal skills, and product,
process, system, and service building skills.
Integrated learning experiences are pedagogical approaches that
foster the learning of disciplinary knowledge simultaneously with personal
and interpersonal skills, and product, process, system, and service building
skills. They incorporate professional engineering issues in contexts where
they coexist with disciplinary issues. For example, students might consider
the analysis of a product, the design of the product, as well as the social,
economic and environmental responsibility of the designer of the product, all
in one learning experience. Industrial partners, alumni, and other key
stakeholders are often helpful in providing examples of such cases.
Furthermore, it is important that students recognize engineering faculty as
role models of professional engineers, instructing them in disciplinary
knowledge, personal and interpersonal skills, product, process, and system
building skills, including concepts and competencies related to sustainable
development. With integrated learning experiences, faculty can be more
effective in helping students apply disciplinary knowledge to engineering
practice and better prepare them to meet the demands of the engineering
profession.
Standard 8: Active Learning
Teaching and learning based on active and experiential learning methods
Active learning methods engage students directly in thinking and
problem-solving activities. There is less emphasis on passive transmission of
information, and more on engaging students manipulating, analyzing,
evaluating and applying ideas. Active learning in lecture-based courses can
include such methods as a partner and small-group discussions,
demonstrations, debates, concept questions, and feedback from students
about what they are learning. Active learning is considered experiential when
students take on roles that simulate professional engineering practice, for
example, design-implement projects, simulations, and case studies.
By engaging students in thinking about concepts, particularly new
ideas, and requiring them to make an overt response, students not only
learn more, they recognize for themselves what and how they learn. This
process aims to increase students’ motivation to achieve program learning
outcomes and form habits of lifelong learning. With active learning methods,
instructors can help students make connections among key concepts and
facilitate the application of this knowledge to new settings.
Standard 9: Enhancement of Faculty Competence
Actions that enhance faculty competence in personal and interpersonal
skills, product, process, system, and service building skills, as well as
disciplinary fundamentals
 CDIO programs provide support for improving the collective
competence of the engineering faculty with regards to what to teach,
according to the full set of intended learning outcomes of the program as
described in Standard 2. Faculty competence refers to personal and
interpersonal skills, product, process, system, and service building skills,
including concepts and competences related to sustainable development.
Faculty competence also refers to the ability to support students to achieve
a deeper working understanding of the relevant disciplinary fundamentals.
One way to strengthen the collective competence of faculty is to take these
needs into account in faculty recruitment and promotion processes. Another
way is to systematically support the competence development of the
existing faculty members. The nature and scope of faculty development vary
with the resources and intentions of different programs and institutions.
Some of these skills are best developed in contexts of professional
engineering practice. Actions to enhance faculty engineering competence
include: professional leave to work in industry, partnerships with industry
colleagues in research and education projects, inclusion of engineering
practice as a criterion for hiring and promotion, and appropriate professional
development experiences at the university.
If engineering faculty are expected to teach a curriculum of personal
and interpersonal skills, and product, process, system, and service building
skills integrated with disciplinary knowledge, as described for instance in
Standards 3, 4, 5, and 7, they as a group need to be competent in those
skills. Engineering professors tend to be experts in the research and
knowledge base of their respective disciplines, with only limited experience
in the practice of engineering in business and industrial settings, and its role
in sustainable development. A key aspect of expertise is pedagogical content
knowledge, which refers to the ability to effectively support students in
learning the subject. The rapid pace of technological innovation also requires
continuous updating of engineering skills. The collective faculty needs to
enhance its engineering knowledge and skills so that they can provide
relevant examples to students and also serve as individual role models of
contemporary engineers.
Standard 10: Enhancement of Faculty Teaching Competence
Actions that enhance faculty competence in personal and interpersonal
skills, product, process, system, and service building skills, as well as
disciplinary fundamentals
CDIO programs take actions to enhance faculty teaching competence
required for effectively creating, delivering and improving courses in the
curriculum. The need for faculty teaching competence include for instance
the ability to provide integrated learning experiences (Standard 7), including
design-implement experiences (Standard 5) and other active and
experiential learning (Standard 8), as well as assessing student learning
(Standard 11) and evaluating and improving courses and programs
(Standard 12). One way to strengthen the collective faculty teaching
competence is to take these needs into account in faculty recruitment and
promotion processes. Another way to address the need is to systematically
support the development of the existing faculty members’ teaching
competence. The nature and scope of faculty development practices will
vary with programs and institutions. Actions to enhance faculty teaching
competence include: making requirements for teaching competence in hiring
and performance reviews, support for faculty participation in university and
external faculty development programs, creating forums for sharing ideas
and best practices at the university, national and international level.
If faculty members are expected to teach and assess in new ways, as
described in the CDIO Standards, they need opportunities to develop and
improve these competencies. Many universities have faculty development
programs and services that might be eager to collaborate with faculty in
CDIO programs. In addition, if CDIO programs want to emphasize the
importance of teaching, learning, and assessment, they must recruit and
promote faculty with these needs in mind, and they must commit adequate
resources for faculty development in these areas.

The ID Plan
Shown in Figure 3 is the ID Plan. As can be seen, the plan consists
method, model, tools, tasks, technology and assessment. The plan is to train
the teachers in higher education in enhancing their technology integration.
Figure 4 reflects how this ID Plan can be facilitated using the ASSURE Model.

Figure 3. The ID Plan

Figure 4. ID Plan Using ASSURE Model
The ASSURE Model

The ASSURE model is an instructional design model that provides a

systematic approach for designing effective lessons or learning experiences.
The acronym ASSURE stands for:

A - Analyze learners
S - State objectives
S - Select methods, media, and materials
U - Utilize technology and resources
R - Require learner participation
E - Evaluate and revise

The model was first developed in the 1970s by Robert Mager and later
refined by Sharon E. Smaldino and Deborah L. Lowther. It is widely used in
education and training settings to help instructors and trainers create
effective learning experiences for their students or trainees.
By following the steps of the ASSURE model, instructors can ensure
that their lessons are well-planned, relevant, engaging, and effective in
achieving the desired learning outcomes.
The ASSURE model is an important tool for teaching skills of teachers
because it provides a systematic and comprehensive approach to
instructional design. By following the model, teachers can ensure that their
lessons are effective, engaging, and meet the needs of their students.
Here are some specific ways in which the ASSURE model can help
improve teaching skills:
Analysis of Learners: The first step of the model is to analyze the
learners and their needs. This helps teachers to understand their students'
characteristics, learning styles, interests, and prior knowledge. By
understanding their students' needs, teachers can tailor their lessons to
meet their students' needs and interests.
Stating Objectives: The second step is to state the objectives of the
lesson or learning experience. This helps teachers to focus on what their
students need to learn and what they want them to achieve. By setting clear
objectives, teachers can measure their students' progress and ensure that
they are meeting the desired outcomes.
Selecting Methods, Media, and Materials: The third step is to
select appropriate methods, media, and materials to deliver the lesson. This
includes selecting instructional strategies, media, and materials that are
engaging, relevant, and effective in achieving the learning objectives. By
choosing the right methods and materials, teachers can enhance the
effectiveness of their lessons and make them more engaging for their
students.
 Utilizing Technology and Resources: The fourth step is to utilize
technology and resources to enhance the learning experience. This includes
using technology tools such as multimedia, simulations, and interactive
whiteboards, as well as other resources such as textbooks and other
instructional materials. By using technology and resources, teachers can
create more dynamic and engaging lessons.
Requiring Learner Participation: The fifth step is to require learner
participation, which involves engaging students in active learning activities.
This can include group work, discussions, and hands-on activities that require
students to apply what they have learned. By requiring learner participation,
teachers can promote deeper learning and help students develop critical
thinking skills.
Evaluating and Revising: The final step is to evaluate the
effectiveness of the lesson and revise it as needed. This involves assessing
whether the lesson achieved the desired learning outcomes and making
changes as necessary to improve future lessons. By evaluating and revising
their lessons, teachers can continuously improve their teaching skills and
create more effective learning experiences for their students.
In summary, the ASSURE model provides a structured and systematic
approach to instructional design, helping teachers to create effective,
engaging, and relevant lessons that meet the needs of their students. By
following the steps of the model, teachers can enhance their teaching skills
and improve student learning outcomes.
References:

Iris Center (2019). How can school personnel intensify and individualize
instruction? https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/dbi1/cresourc
e/q2/p07/
Kurt, S. (2015). ASSURE: Instructional Design Model.
https://educationaltechnology.net/assure-instructional-design-model/.
Lipscomb, A. Swanson, J. & West, A. (2017) Emerging Perspectives on
Learning, Teaching, and Technology, Global Text, Michael Orey.
Chapter 21. Retrieved from
https://textbookequity.org/Textbooks/Orey_Emergin_
Perspectives_Learning.pdf
Malmqvist, J., Edström, K. & Rosén, A. (2020). CDIO Standards 3.0 - Updates
to the Core CDIO Standards. Proceedings of the 16th International
CDIO Conference, hosted on-line by Chalmers University of
Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 8–11, 2020.
McGraw-Hill (2019). What Is TPACK Theory and How Can It Be Used in the
Classroom? https://www.mheducation.ca/blog/what-is-tpack-theory-
and-how-can-it-be-used-in-the-classroom/
Rosenberg, Joshua & Koehler, Matthew. (2015). Context and Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): A Systematic Review.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 47. 186-210.
10.1080/15391523.2015.1052663.
Ruggiero, D., & Mong, C. J. (2015). The teacher technology integration
experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of
Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 161-178. Retrieved
from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP161-
178Ruggiero0958.pdf
Santos, J. & Castro, R. (2021). Technological Pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) in action: Application of learning in the classroom by pre-
service teachers (PST). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100110