AECT Standard 1
An Agile Approach to Instructional Design: The Design Documentation + Formative Evaluation
Context and Conditions
An Agile Approach to Instructional Design: The Design Documentation + Formative Evaluation was designed and developed for EDET 793 in the spring of 2026 as part of my graduate studies in Learning Design and Technologies at the University of South Carolina. This design document contains both the design and the evaluation of a self-paced eLearning module intended to teach graduate-level students about the Agile approach to instructional design. This artifact includes design documentation, such as a goal analysis, learner analysis, task analysis, objectives, instructional strategies, and other planning documents, and a full formative evaluation report. The instructional module itself was developed using Genially, and it was created to be completed independently by learners within a fifteen to twenty minute timeframe.
The development of this design documentation was strongly rooted in instructional design theory. The MRK (Morrison et al., 2019) model was used as the primary framework that shaped the front-end analysis. In addition, elements of the ADDIE (Branch, 2009) model are seen through the progression from analysis and design to development and evaluation. The instructional strategies and user interface design were based on cognitive load theory (Sweller, 2024) and Mayer’s multimedia learning principles through the use of chunking, consistent navigation, and interactive elements. This artifact represents a more advanced stage in my development as an instructional designer, showing my ability to intentionally apply theory, research, and evaluation to the design of learning experiences.
Scope
Role
This artifact was a part of an individual project. I served as the instructional designer, developer, and evaluator of the instructional unit. I was responsible for all phases of the instructional design process, and I also developed the module myself using Genially. In addition, I designed and implemented the formative evaluation, including the creation of evaluation instruments such as the SME review form, pre- and post-assessments, and learner attitude surveys. I was also responsible for collecting and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data from the SME review and the small group trial.
Instructional Design
This artifact strongly reflects the MRK (Morrison et al., 2019) model and its use of front-end analysis and alignment between instructional parts. The design process included a detailed goal analysis, learner analysis, and task analysis, all of which informed the development of objectives and assessments. Elements of message design are also seen in the use of chunking, consistent navigation, and interactive elements that support learner engagement and reduce cognitive load.
This artifact also reflects all phases of the ADDIE model (Branch, 2009), which includes analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. The analysis phase is seen in the identification of learner characteristics and instructional goals. The design phase is seen in the development of objectives, sequencing, and assessments. The development phase is evident in the creation of the instructional module itself using Genially. Full-scale implementation was limited, but the module was delivered to a small group of learners during the formative evaluation. The evaluation phase is strongly represented in this artifact through a two-part formative evaluation, which included an SME review and a small group trial, which provided data on learner performance and perceptions.
Related Performance Indicators
AECT Standard 1 (Content Knowledge): Candidates demonstrate the knowledge necessary to create, use, assess, and manage theoretical and practical applications of educational technologies and processes.
Performance Indicators:
-
Creating: Candidates demonstrate the ability to create instructional materials and learning environments using a variety of systems approaches.
-
Using: Candidates demonstrate the ability to select and use technological resources and processes to support student learning and to enhance their pedagogy
-
Assessing/Evaluating: Candidates demonstrate the ability to assess and evaluate the effective integration of appropriate technologies and instructional materials.
Reflection
This artifact is a strong example of my ability to apply instructional design knowledge to create a technology-based learning experience, which aligns with AECT Standard 1. One of the strengths of this artifact is that it was developed through a structured process, which included a front-end analysis; alignment of objectives, content, and assessments; and a formative evaluation to inform revisions. The development of the module in Genially also shows my ability to select and use appropriate technological tools to support learner engagement, navigation, and the delivery of the content. This artifact represents significant growth in my understanding of instructional design principles throughout the program. Earlier in the program, my design decisions were usually based on intuition and prior teaching experience. Now, this project demonstrates a more theory-driven approach where decisions are made using models such as MRK (Morrison et al., 2019) and ADDIE (Branch, 2009).
In retrospect, there are still areas where this artifact could be strengthened. The formative evaluation provided valuable feedback, and additional rounds of testing and revision could further improve the effectiveness of the module. Additionally, focusing on the diversity of learners involved in the evaluation process would provide more comprehensive insight into how the module meets different learning needs. Overall, this artifact represents a high level of development in my instructional design skills. It demonstrates my ability to apply research-backed approaches and effectively use technology to create high quality learning experiences.