One of the most beautiful aspects of my graduate education is gathering feedback from my classmates. I find this fact a revelation to me, because my past work experiences have almost always gravitated toward stand-alone assignments. Over time, I have become known as a professional hermit of sorts. I really like working by myself and serving as the sole creative mind behind my projects. However, this past year of immersing myself into Instructional Design has changed my perspective. I now look forward to reading and hearing the insight provided by others. I value input.
Three Reviewers
For my draft design document, I was fortunate to partner with three peers that each bring unique wisdom and suggestions to my project. Even better, each classmate was able to directly connect to my project in one way or another due to his or her own work experiences. I feel almost as though I was able to enlist three new subject matter experts to oversee and guide me in my undertaking.
The first review was submitted by a fellow teacher. I found her understanding comments about the current shift in K-12 educational practices during COVID-19 to boost my confidence. She understood and validated many of my instructional decisions. Her supportive tone made it easy to respect her recommendation to vary my summative assessments from the standard objective and short-answer exam. I see how consistency can sometimes lead to monotony. If the curriculum and time frame allows, I would like to act on this advice so that the learners will have a more complete experience when demonstrating their growth.
My second reviewer hails from a different professional background. Although she does work with an academic institution, she brings content expertise to the table. My instructional design project addresses select environmental science concepts for a high school audience; my peer reviewer has an extensive work history in an environmental science office. It is quite the match! This reviewer was able to make connections to additional content that I can either incorporate or spiral back to. She also contributed solely wearing the hat of an instructional designer by reminding me to apply Bloom’s taxonomy to my objectives and accurately report any necessary technology. Consequently, I plan to revisit the verbs chosen for my objectives so that they precisely convey the desired mastery level. Communication is most certainly key.
My third and final reviewer is another high school teacher also wrestling with the thorny educational issues presented by COVID-19. I truly appreciate his input since I know he is a fellow comrade in the trenches. This reviewer’s ideas serve to help me polish my organization of the learning activities outlined in my design draft. I did choose descriptive names such as “Article Reading,” “Online Forum,” “Internet Research,” and “Inquiry Activity” to categorize my lessons. However, my reviewer recommended adding a legend or key that would fully flesh out these names into specific, understandable actions. I agree that such a construct would improve the transmission of learning expectations to the learner and instructor alike.
The take-away?
I value the words of my peers, and I found their comments to be on target and beneficial to my progress. Although I choose not to incorporate every formatting or content suggestion, I do know that my project will improve with more critical eyes on its development. Peer review is nothing to be feared or avoided. It is a necessary component of constructivist learning.
Grrowing Ideas 