Reflection + Synthesis.
One of the key challenges I encountered as I designed and developed instruction throughout this program was learning to hold back and avoid overloading instruction with too much content. Initially, I believed that providing more information would always lead to better outcomes; however, I have since realized that this would often increase extraneous cognitive load and reduce effectiveness. Now, I know how to apply principles from cognitive load theory (Sweller, 2024) more intentionally, such as reducing unnecessary redundancies and prioritizing essential content. At the same time, I began to bring in more strategies aligned with Universal Design for Learning or UDL (Israel, 2020). My instructional design, both in my graduate studies and in my own career, has become more focused and accessible for learners.
If I were given the chance to enroll in a program like this one again, one that involved so much instructional design work, I would like to focus more on understanding the “big picture” of instructional design earlier in the program, specifically how different components such as objectives, assessments, models, theories, and evaluation processes connect and support each other. Early in the program, many of these elements felt disjointed; however, through much reflection on my work this semester, I began to truly see how they function as a system. Another connection I observed throughout this program was how my prior experience as a classroom teacher both aligned and conflicted with formal instructional design concepts, theories, and principles. My classroom instruction was always very project-based and incorporated iterative learning, but these approaches were not always rooted in clear objectives or measurable assessments. I have a better understanding now of the importance of intentional alignment, and this program has helped me refine my practice using instructional design frameworks, models, and theories.
Throughout this program, my development as an instructional designer was marked by both uncertainty and a growing sense of confidence. Specifically, this process has helped me with developing a greater openness to feedback, as I became more willing to revise my work and view constructive critique as an essential part of the design process, not a reflection of failure. Reflecting on all my growth over the past two years, I recognize that my initial understanding of designing instruction was not incorrect. Rather, it was incomplete and lacked a strong theoretical foundation. This program has provided me with the language and structure needed to create that foundation, allowing me to move beyond intuitive practice and into intentional, theory-driven design. I now approach instructional design with greater clarity and confidence, and I am better prepared to create meaningful learning experiences in my future work.
When I first began the Learning Design and Technologies program at the University of South Carolina, I believed I already had a strong understanding of how to design instruction; however, I now recognize that I was lacking a truly theory-driven and research-backed approach and a deeper perspective on learning and instructional design. The artifacts included in this portfolio capture this shift and demonstrate how my approach to instructional design has evolved from intuitive design choices to more deliberate, research-informed practices. For example, my portfolio includes artifacts such as a web-based learning module, a formative evaluation report, and supporting design documentation, with each reflecting different stages of the instructional design process. More importantly, they show how my approach has become more informed by theory, evaluation, and reflection.
Several key lessons helped to shape my development throughout this program, particularly the importance of front-end analysis, objective-content-assessment alignment, and iterative design. One of my most significant successes in this program was developing stronger alignment between learning objectives, instructional content and activities, and assessments. For example, in my web-based module Level Up: How to Think, Study, and Work Like a High Schooler, I designed knowledge checks and scenario-based assessments that directly reflect the stated learning objectives. I have learned that alignment both improves effectiveness of instruction and provides clearer guidance for learning. I have moved beyond creating activities that were simply engaging to design experiences that are both purposeful and intentional.
