Context & Conditions
This artifact was created during Spring 2026 in EDET 746: Management of Technology Resources at the University of South Carolina. The assignment required the development of a comprehensive technology procurement and life cycle management plan for a selected instructional technology tool. Building on a prior module where I compared Canva and Newsela, this project required me to apply a systematic, research-based approach to technology selection, funding, implementation, and long-term sustainability planning.
​
At the time of creation, I brought strong classroom experience using instructional technology, but this assignment pushed me to think beyond classroom-level decisions and instead consider organizational, financial, and systems-level factors. I applied concepts related to technology management, resource allocation, and sustainability, as well as instructional frameworks such TPACK (Koelher & Mishara, 2009) and ISTE Standards (ISTE, 2026). This artifact also reflects principles of the ADDIE model (Molenda, 2015), particularly the Analysis and Design phases, as I identified instructional needs, evaluated tools, and designed a structured implementation plan. Tools used included research databases, prior evaluation criteria, and structured planning within a formal proposal format. This artifact represented my ability to bridge instructional design with leadership and resource management.
​
Scope
The purpose of this artifact was to design a technology procurement and life cycle management plan for Canva for Education within a middle school context. This plan was created for graduate coursework but is highly applicable to real-world educational leadership and instructional design roles. Within a broader instructional system, this artifact represents strategic planning and management of instructional technology, rather than direct instruction or content design.
​
The plan includes a full procurement process (needs assessment, evaluation, pilot, and rollout), funding strategies (internal, external, and creative fundraising), and a structured life cycle replacement plan. For example, I outlined a phased implementation timeline and 3-5 year evaluation cycle to ensure the technology remains aligned with instructional goals over time. This demonstrates my understanding that effective technology integration requires long-term planning, not just initial adoption.
​
Role
I served as the sole instructional designer and planner for this artifact. I independently conducted the needs assessment, selected the technology solution, developed the procurement plan, and designed the life cycle management strategy. My role required me to think as both an instructional designer and a decision-maker responsible for resource allocation. For example, I identified multiple funding sources, including Title I funds, grants, and community partnerships, and proposed a creative fundraising strategy through a “Student Digital Showcase Night.” This demonstrates my ability to consider both instructional impact and financial feasibility when making technology decisions.
​
Instructional Design
This artifact reflects both the ADDIE model and the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (MRK) model, with a strong emphasis on Analysis, Design, and Management of resources. From an ADDIE perspective, this work reflects the Analysis phase through identification of instructional needs (e.g., need for student engagement and multimodal expression) and the Design phase through development of a structured implementation and evaluation plan (Molenda, 2015). Unlike earlier artifacts focused on lesson design, this artifact expands ADDIE into a broader systems-level application.
​
Within the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp model, this artifact reflects components such as identifying instructional problems, considering learner characteristics, selecting resources, and planning delivery systems (Morrison, et al., 2019). For instance, the decision to adopt Canva was grounded in its alignment with constructivist learning principles and its ability to support student-created content across disciplines. Additionally, this artifact reflects principles of resource management and evaluation, including ongoing monitoring, data-informed decision-making, and planned replacement cycles. The inclusion of a structured life cycle plan and evaluation criteria demonstrates an understanding of instructional design as an ongoing, iterative process rather than a one-time implementation.
​
Related Performance Indicators
AECT Standard 4: Professional Knowledge and Skills
-
4.1 Applying project management techniques
-
4.2 Applying resource management techniques
-
4.4 Applying information management techniques
Reflection
This artifact represents a major shift in my thinking from classroom-level instruction to systems-level instructional design and leadership. At the time, I was beginning to understand that selecting a technology tool is not just about engagement or ease of use, but about sustainability, funding, scalability, and long-term impact. For instance, I moved beyond simply choosing Canva as a tool and instead developed a full plan that included procurement, implementation, evaluation, and replacement cycles. This reflects AECT Standard 4, as I applied professional knowledge and management skills to support instructional technology decision-making.
​
Now, I recognize that this artifact reflects an advanced level of thinking in instructional design, particularly in resource and project management. However, I would strengthen this work by incorporating more quantitative cost analysis, such as total cost of ownership (TCO), and by including stakeholder input data (e.g., surveys from teachers or students) to further justify decisions. I would also expand the evaluation plan to include more formal metrics for measuring impact on student learning outcomes over time.
​
This artifact strongly aligns with AECT Standard 4 because it demonstrates my ability to manage instructional resources, plan for implementation, and ensure long-term sustainability of technology integration. Compared to earlier artifacts, this work shows a significant growth in my ability to think strategically and systematically. It reflects my development as an instructional designer who can not only design learning experiences, but also make informed, data-driven decisions about the tools and systems that support those experiences.
References
Canva. (n.d.). Canva for education. https://www.canva.com/education/
​
International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards for students. https://www.iste.org/standards
​
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.
​
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.