Context & Conditions
This artifact was created during Fall 2024 in EDET 722: Instructional Design and Assessment at the University of South Carolina. The assignment required the development of a comprehensive Instructional Strategy Plan that aligned with previously created performance objectives and assessment items. This artifact was built directly upon prior work, including the Needs Assessment and Front-End Analysis, and focused on designing how instruction would be sequences, delivered, and practiced within a Civil Rights Movement instructional module.
At the time of creation, I brought strong pedagogical experience as an eighth grade English Language Arts teacher, particularly in designing engaging lessons and facilitating discussion-based learning. However, I was still developing my ability to intentionally align instructional strategies with formal instructional design models. This artifact required me to move beyond general teaching strategies and instead apply structured frameworks such as the ADDIE model (Molenda, 2015) and the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (MRK) model (Morrison, et al., 2019). I also applied sequencing frameworks from Posner and Strike (1976), specifically concept-related sequencing, to organize content in a way that builds conceptual understanding across the Civil Rights Movement. Tools used included Google Docs for structuring the plan and prior artifacts (goal analysis and performance objectives) to ensure alignment. This artifact reflects my growing ability to connect pedagogy, content, and instructional design theory into a cohesive instructional plan.
Scope
The purpose of this artifact was to design a detailed instructional strategy plan that outlines how learners will engage with content, practice skills, and achieve instructional objectives. This project was created for graduate coursework but directly applies to my classroom practice, particularly in designing structured, scaffolded learning experiences for complex historical content. Within a broader curriculum context, this artifact represents the instructional design phase of a larger unit, specifically focusing on how content is delivered and practiced within a 15-20 minute instructional module.
For example, the plan includes sequencing content from historical context to influential figures, legislation, and key events, ensuring that students build knowledge progressively. Additionally, it outlines specific generative strategies (e.g., graphic organizers, document analysis, timeline creation) and aligned learner practice items (e.g., multiple choice and true/false questions), demonstrating how instruction is structured to support both understanding and application.
Role
I served as the sole instructional designer and developer for this artifact. I independently designed the instructional sequence, selected appropriate pedagogical strategies, and created aligned learner practice items for each objective. My role required me to translate abstract instructional goals into concrete teaching strategies that support student learning.
For example, I determine how each objective would be introduced (initial presentation), how students would actively process content (generative strategies), and how they would practice and demonstrate understanding (learner practice items). This required both pedagogical knowledge and instructional design thinking, as I had to ensure alignment between objectives, instruction, and practice.
Instructional Design
This artifact reflect both the ADDIE model and the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (MRK) model, with a strong emphasis on the Design phase of instructional development. From an ADDIE perspective, this work represents the Design phase (Molenda, 2015), as it outlines how instructional content will be delivered, practiced, and sequenced. For example, I explicitly planned initial presentations (e.g., multimedia instruction, primary source analysis), generative strategies (e.g., organization, integration, elaboration), and learner practice items (e.g., multiple choice and true/false questions) for each objective. These elements demonstrate how instruction moved from content delivery to active learner engagement and practice.
Within the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp model, this artifact demonstrated key components such as instructional strategies, sequencing, message design, and learner participation (Morrison et al., 2019). For instance, the use of concept-related sequencing reflects intentional organization of content so that learners build connections across topics, rather than learning isolated facts. Furthermore, the inclusion of generative strategies such as organization (graphic organizers), integration (document analysis), and elaboration (case student reflections) aligns with MRK’s emphasis on active processing of information. The pre-instructional strategy, including objectives and overview, reflects how learners are oriented to content before instruction begins. This artifact also reflects constructivist learning theory, as students actively construct knowledge through analysis, comparison, and reflection, rather than passively receiving information.
Related Performance Indicators
AECT Standard 2: Content Pedagogy
-
2.1 Applying content-specific pedagogical knowledge.
-
2.2 Using appropriate pedagogical strategies to support learners.
Reflection
This artifact represents a significant step in my development as an instructional designer, particularly in understanding how to intentionally plan instruction rather than rely on instinct or experience alone. At the time, I was beginning to recognize the importance of aligning instructional strategies with both objectives and assessment. For instance, I intentionally paired generative strategies such as document analysis and graphic organizers with specific objectives to ensure that students were actively engaging with content in meaningful ways. This reflects AECT Standard 2 because I applied pedagogical strategies that are appropriate for teaching complex historical content.
Now, I recognize that this artifact reflects an intermediate level of instructional design expertise. While the plan is thorough and aligned, I would strengthen it by incorporating more differentiation and accessibility consideration within the instructional strategies themselves. For example, I would integrate additional scaffolds such as sentence stems, multiple means of representation (e.g., audio supports), and flexible response options to better support diverse learners. I would also incorporate more interactive and technology-based strategies, such as collaborative digital tools or simulations, to further enhance engagement and application.
This artifact strongly aligns with AECT Standard 2 because it demonstrated my ability to select and apply pedagogical strategies that support learning within a specific content area. Compared to earlier work, this artifact shows growth in my ability to design instruction that is structured, intentional, and aligned with learning goals. It reflects my transition from a teacher who plans engaging lessons to an instructional designer who systematically designs learning experiences grounded in theory, pedagogy, and learner needs.
References
Molenda, M. (2015). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 54(2), 40–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21461
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2019). Designing effective instruction (8th ed.). Wiley.
Posner, G. J., & Strike, K. A. (1976). A categorization scheme for principles of sequencing content. Review of Educational Research, 46(4), 665–690.