Download pdf - Final : Rationale Paper 10-31-15

Rationale Paper for a Master of Educational Technology Boise State University

Dianne Johnson-Wojnicki

EPIC Training and Support Specialist

Edward-Elmhurst Health

Lisle, Illinois

Fall 2015

Rationale Paper for a Master of Educational Technology

September 19, 2015 Page 1

Introduction

The Master of Educational Technology program at Boise State University is a

comprehensive curriculum where I have learned to balance aspects of the theoretical underpinning

of education, instructional design methodologies, and the technological skills to develop engaging

student-centered leaning experiences. This Rationale paper is designed to provide the evidence

to substantiate a Mastery of Educational Technology as defined by the Association of Educational

Communications and Technology Standards. This paper contains many of the Artifacts created

during my coursework in the M. E. T. program each aligned with the AECT Standard and Indicator

mastered.

Standard 1 - Content Knowledge

Candidates demonstrate the knowledge necessary to create, use, assess, and manage

theoretical and practical applications of educational technologies and processes.

Indicator 1: Creating

Candidates demonstrate the ability to create instructional materials and learning environments

using a variety of systems approaches. (p. 81)

EdTech 502: Plain HTML 502 page

According to Molenda and Boling (2008) “there are no processes or resources to use or

manage unless someone first creates them” (p. 81). My ability to create, use, assess and manage

instructional material and learning environments began with the creation of this simple HTML page.

While its appearance may seem insignificant, the expertise to construct and implement content is

considerable. Without the ability to generate this simple page none of the more robust artifacts

located within my portfolio would ever have been possible. This artifact illustrates the mastery of

creating subject matter, i.e. content for the purpose of knowledge transfer.

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/502.html


Page 2

The paradigm has shifted several times this century in terms of educational technology.

Today the world is wired. Taking advantage of Web 2.0 tools and beyond will enable me as

facilitator and trainer to better engage learners. Armed with these skills, I am prepared to create

learning experiences that have the features of interconnectedness, immediacy, interactivity,

communication and community. It is these features that keep business competitive and the people

they employ desirable in the workforce. (Solomon & Schrum, 2007)

Indicator 2: Using

Candidates demonstrate the ability to select and use technological resources and processes to

support student learning and to enhance their pedagogy. (p. 141)

EdTech 502 - m-Learning Activity (mobile learning)

Molenda (2008) states the whole point of creating technological resources and instructional

material is that they are used by the learner. The proficiency to create the simple HTML page

gave me the ability to produce a mobile learning experience whereby the learner can take the

learning activity on a bicycle architectural tour in the city of Chicago. This resource can be easily

modified to support similar learning experiences in any city using any mode of transportation. This

particular resource has vast pedagogical implications, providing a means of incorporating content

knowledge into a curriculum in an integrated fashion to enhance the overall educational purpose.

This artifact illustrates the mastery to select and use appropriate technological resources to

facilitate enriching learning experiences.

I can see various opportunities to use this type of mobile application in my current capacity

as a technical training and support specialist. Enabling a learner to go where the educational

opportunity exists in order to relay real-time information about their experiences holds endless

possibilities.

Indicator 3: Assessing/Evaluating

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/Mobile.html



Candidates demonstrate the ability to assess and evaluate the effective integration of appropriate

technologies and instructional materials.

EdTech 503 – Evaluation Plan

In order to provide effective transfer of content knowledge, it is imperative to evaluate and

assess the degree to which the solution fits the problem. This artifact is an evaluation plan devised

for the formative review process of my Instruction Design final project entitled “Making a Special

Occasion Boutonniere and Corsage”. According to (Smith & Ragan, 2005) even though the

evaluation appears to take place late in the creation process, indicators are being gathered to

substantiate that the instruction was successful. The formative assessment and review covered

several of the key components of effective evaluations; one-to-one evaluation of learning

materials, small group evaluation of the overall process, field trial for overall efficacy, and subject

matter expert review.

During the first phase of evaluation, one-to-one is critical to ascertain any blatant

inconsistencies or difficulties with the instructional content. The second phase, small group

evaluation, is concerned with the level of efficacy the instructional material has with a varied

learner base. The final phase of learner supported evaluation and assessment is the field trial. It

is at this phase in the evaluation that it is determined if the instruction can be implemented as

designed. Once the learner centric evaluations are complete and all revisions have been

implemented, it is time to involve a Subject Matter Expert. The instructor guide, all instructional

materials, as well as summative assessments, would be provided to the SME for thorough review.

The SME feedback would be carefully evaluated in order to incorporate any final modification to

the instructional material.

Conducting an authentic formative review was a new experience in my world of course

development. I have developed many high priority high stakes courses during my tenure as a

https://www.scribd.com/doc/279080372/ID-Project-Final-12-10-2010-Evaluation


Page 4

technical course developer, but not until I participated in EdTech 503 had I ever evaluated and

assessed whether or not the solution fit the problem. The only evaluation or assessment I had

formally experienced was “did our product hit the market before the competitors”. This is because

the first course on the market would capture the market.

Unfortunately, what appears to be excellent as a concept does not always work well when

placed in a classroom environment (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp, 2007). It is said that hindsight is 20-

20. If valuable knowledge gained from conducting a formative review during the development

process is utilized properly, hindsight could become obsolete. This artifact illustrates the mastery

of assessment and content evaluation, instructional materials and the efficacy of knowledge

transfer.

Indicator 4: Managing

Candidates demonstrate the ability to effectively manage people, processes, physical

infrastructures, and financial resources to achieve predetermined goals. (p. 178)

EdTech 506 – Facilitators Page: Unit of Instruction

According to Donaldson, Smaldino, and Pearson (2008) “effective management and

leadership are the keys to the practice of an educational technologist” (p. 190), they describe a

technologist as someone who solves real-world problems by working with others. The artifact I

selected to indicate a mastery of the management of people, processes, physical infrastructures

and financial resources is the Facilitator Page from the Unit of Instruction created in EdTech 506.

This unit of instruction was developed for an Art Awareness facilitation to be administered in

seventh grade classrooms. These facilitators are not teachers but parent volunteers. They are

selected from a pool of individuals who share an interest in Art. As facilitators they do not

necessarily have any prior teaching or facilitating experience.

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/506/FinalProjectFreeCss/Art_Awareness_Unit_Plan11-17-11.pdf



This artifact provides ample information for an Art Awareness facilitator to comprehend the

structure and goals of the sessions. The document describes the learners, the equipment and

resources required for successful delivery of the learning experience including all introductory

procedures. It provides a comprehensive list of the materials provided to successfully transfer the

content knowledge to learners. The assessment process and evaluation criteria are outlined in

terms of the informality of the event due to the enrichment nature of the instruction.

I have actually incorporated similar documents in my current capacity as technical training

and support specialist. When a new set of training materials are developed, it is imperative that

similar documentation accompany the material to enable any of the team members to successfully

deliver the training with any qualified prospective learner. This artifact illustrates the mastery of my

ability to manage varying situations in which instructional material could be administered by

individuals of various backgrounds. It illustrates my ability to create the process and

documentation required to manage the projects, the resources, and the personnel.

Indicator 5: Ethics

Candidates demonstrate the contemporary professional ethics of the field as defined and

developed by the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (p. 284)

EdTech 502: Copyright Scavenger Hunt

According to Yeaman, Eastmon and Napper (2008) “Professional ethics do not directly

control and cannot force good behavior” (p. 286), it is the goal of the AECT Code of professional

ethics to guide conscientious behavior for the persons that consider themselves educational

technology professionals. The artifact I have selected to demonstrate a master in these ethical

codes is an interactive web page from EdTech 502.

This particular artifact is an effort to educate learners about the pitfalls of plagiarism. Often

in the complex world of cyber-research, many activities can fall into what could be considered

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/scavenger.html


Page 6

“shades of gray”. But the AECT has declared in Section 3 – Commitment to the Profession that

“professionals should abide by copyright laws and encourage compliance” (AECT Code of

Professional Ethics, p. 296).

The activity is an interactive scavenger hunt where learners can become familiar with the

laws surrounding copyrights and plagiarism. Learners are also acquainted, possibly for the first

time, with Creative Commons. Creative Commons licensing options and the commons libraries of

products are presented. This activity offers not only a definition of the problem but real world

options to effectively comply. I personally found this endeavor enlightening. Today as a creator of

educational materials, I use Creative Commons libraries, licensing, and directives in my creative

work (Ko & Rosen, 2010).

AECT Standard 2 - Content Pedagogy

Candidates develop as reflective practitioners able to demonstrate effective implementation

of educational technologies and processes based on contemporary content and pedagogy.

Indicator 1: Creating

Candidates develop as reflective practitioners able to demonstrate effective implementation of

educational technologies and processes based on contemporary content and pedagogy.

EdTech 502: WebQuest

The impetus of this project stemmed from a conversation I had with my 11 year old as she

was asking for guidance to prepare for her first test in fifth Grade Social Studies. Having covered

nearly 125 pages in the text and working without a study guide, she was trying to find a strategy to

recall what she was supposed to have learned. I asked her how they cover the material in class.

She stated that they go around the room, each person reads a few paragraphs, and when the

section has been read, they close the books. I was appalled. They were studying the Birth of

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/webquest/teacher.html



America, the American Revolution, and Paul Revere. I could not believe that with all the digital

information about these events, the curriculum was so disengaging.

Since I am not a teacher yet, required by the M.E.T. program to create “authentic” artifacts

for course projects, I decided that my next project was going to cover some form of engaging

learning experience for middle school children. As a matter of fact the entire premise became a

reoccurring theme for many of my projects. I had a personal conviction; I felt vested, as well as a

sense of gratification, when I offered my projects to the teachers for classroom use.

I read during one of my research projects that rich learning experience afforded to learners

by technology today and tomorrow will never be as limiting as the boundaries of a four wall

classroom or the text of a book. If the goal of the educational community is to provide efficient,

effective, practicable and meaningful learning experiences to learners’ remains constant, then

these learning experiences should be organized, prepared and implemented to promote

exploration, engagement, empowerment and ease of use (Oblinger et al., 2001). I believe this

artifact demonstrates the mastery of effective implementation of educational technologies and

processes based on contemporary content and pedagogy.

Indicator 2: Using

Candidates implement appropriate educational technologies and processes based on appropriate

content pedagogy. (p. 141)

EdTech 506: Unit of Instruction

The artifact I chose to illustrate mastery in implementing appropriate technologies and

processes based on appropriate pedagogy is a Unit of Instruction I designed, developed and

implemented for an Art Awareness Program at my children’s school. Once again I had a personal

connection to the subject and the audience, as if they were my students.

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/506/FinalProjectFreeCss/UnitofInstruction.html


Page 8

In this course we focused on the graphical interface, the concepts of CARP: Contrast to pull

learners’ eyes to where we want them to gaze (Shank, 2011), Alignment with textual blocking to

form a perceptive chunk (Lohr, 2005), Repetition used to create a sense of harmony and unity

(Lohr, 2005) and Proximity to provide the necessary visual cues (Shank, 2011). We also learned

how sound and music can be helpful when considering alternative forms of content presentation.

When considering the responsibilities of a teacher, facilitator or an instructional designer, all of

these mechanical components of technology infused learning experiences have dramatic influence

on affecting learner outcomes.

The unit incorporated history in the form of a Dipity interactive timeline, sound to help with

the pronunciation of difficult artistic terms, graphics, YouTube for interactive tutorials, and

interactive assessments. This artifact was an amazing process to design, develop and implement.

The Art Awareness facilitators at the school were in awe of the depth and breadth of the unit.


Candidates demonstrate an inquiry process that assesses the adequacy of learning and evaluates

the instruction and implementation of educational technologies and processes grounded in

reflective practice. (p. 116-117)

EdTech 512 – Evaluation and Planning

These particular components of the Educational Technology development process are

probably some of the most familiar to me. With a longstanding background in conventional

computer applications and development I could appreciate the system development lifecycle

approach to creating courses. Although the names formative and summative evaluation, coined by

Scriven (Molenda & Boling, 2008) where unfamiliar, the process of evaluating during development

and after implementation are commonplace in systems and applications development

environments.

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/512/WBID/ScientificSucces2bb.html



The artifact I have selected to demonstrate a master of assessment and evaluation from a

pedagogical content perspective is the Evaluation Planning phase of the WBID (Web-Based

Instructional Design) project during EdTech 512. Davidson-Shivers & Rasmussen describe the

WBID model as “an integrated approach that ensures that WBI design, development, and

implementation meet the instructional goal(s) as well as the needs of the learners and the

organization” (2006, p. 62). Having functioned as a course developer in a technology company

where the only analysis and design that took place before development was analyzing how quickly

the product could be implemented. I had no formal training concerning analysis or evaluations,

merely development and implementation. I had come to believe that there was no “official” rhyme

or reason for how courses were developed, as long as they were in the marketplace before the

competition.

I believe that the knowledge gained detailing every intricacy of the ID life cycle has opened

my eyes and my mind to an “official” method for developing quality learning material where the

outcome will fit the need. I cannot say that I have seen this process used in it full implementation

outside of coursework, but I am equipped with the skills to champion these efforts during design

and development. I am confident I have the ability to fulfill any one of the tasks during any of the

phases involved in a course development project.


Candidates manage appropriate technological processes and resources to provide supportive

learning communities, create flexible and diverse learning environments, and develop and

demonstrate appropriate content pedagogy. (p. 175-193)

EdTech 512 – Concurrent Design

Strategic Planning is critical for the successful management of any project. This process

begins with needs analysis in order to select the appropriate solution. Solutions must further be

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/512/WBID/ScientificSucces2c.html


Page 10

vetted for the overall efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Once the planning phases are complete,

there is a constant state of monitoring of the project status and stakeholder engagement

(Donaldson, Smaldino, & Pearson, 2008). These are the components considered in the

Concurrent Design phase on EdTech 512 project. A painstaking but necessary phase of an

Instructional Design project, these tasks are methodically organized and expressed in the WBID

model used.

Once the analysis had determined the full extent of the need, each task must be aligned to

an objective, the expected outcome and the assessment to determine the fulfillment. A time line

for development must be developed to ensure the project meets expectations. Plan for instruction

are outlined with motivational strategies as a road map to guide the development project. The final

phase is to establish a storyboard and style guides to model the final product. Using these

integrated stages in a design process guarantees that if followed it will produce a complete

instructional experience.

I use this artifact to demonstrate a master in the process of managing the development of

technological processes and resources to create flexible and diverse learning environments.

Furthermore, I can attest to the fact that courses such as these during my tenure as a candidate

for a Master of Educational Technology have provided me with a myriad of tools, techniques,

strategies and methodologies to manage any development project.

Indicator 5: Ethics

Candidates design and select media, technology, and processes that emphasize the diversity of

our society as a multicultural community. (p. 296)

EdTech 502: Web Accessibility Hot Links

Januszewski & Molenda (2008) reiterate The AECT Code of Professional Ethics Section

1.1, with regard to Commitment to the Individual stating that the members “shall encourage

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/Accessibility.html



independent acting in an individual’s pursuit of leaning and shall provide open access to

knowledge regardless of delivery medium or varying point of view on the knowledge” (p. 296). As

such I have selected an artifact from EdTech 502 relating to web content developers being

responsible for the construction of web sites that are highly accessible for individuals with visual

impairment. While I realize this does not relate directly to the multicultural nature of communities, I

believe that the underlying premise of recognizing individual equity and respect is exhibited.

This artifact demonstrates mastery of the issues and obstacles that can exist when learning

experiences are implemented using a technology based medium. Every means should be

evaluated to ensure that all people have full accessibility to opportunities to learn.

On a very personal note my husband has suffered with vision issues much of his life. He

has found it difficult to work with visual displays on many occasions. When I was tasked with

creating a learning opportunity to highlight one of the many ethical responsibilities of a web content

developer, I focus my attention on the visually impaired. As a result of this exercise I am certain

when developing any online material I will always keep the ethical responsibilities outlined by

AECT in the forefront of my developmental efforts.

AECT Standard 3 - Learning Environments

Indicators 1: Creating

Candidates create instructional design products based on learning principles and research-based

best practices. (pp. 8, 243-245, 246)

EdTech 501 – Tech Trends: Cardiovascular system

As an Education Technologist it is imperative to stay abreast of current trends and

techniques used to design, develop and administrate educational experience. During my

experience in EdTech 501, we reviewed many educational technology journals and publications to

gain insight in to current tendencies within the industry. True professionals commonly share their

https://www.scribd.com/doc/84880907/Tech-Trends-Lesson-Plan-Mobile-Medical-Apps


Page 12

ideas and experiences through reflection and documentation (Molenda & Robinson, 2008). This

discourse facilitates to use of trends and best-practices among the industry. I have selected this

instructional unit as illustration of a master of creating instructional design based on the research-

based best practice.

I became acquainted with the Horizon Report - a yearly publication of the New Media

Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. The information contained in the 2012 Higher

Education Edition covered Technical Trends, some of which are taking place as we speak and

others which are still on the “Horizon”. The goal of this research was to choose an up-and-coming

Educational Technical Trend and create a lesson plan using that technology. I selected Mobile

Apps and the field of Medicine.

In this lesson, learners will be provided with information about the central component of the

human cardiovascular system - the heart. The information will explain each of the hearts

subcomponents: atrium, ventricle, value, artery, and vein. The material will specifically convey the

cardiac cycle. The purpose of the lesson is to prepare the learner for the Anatomy and Physiology

Section V Part 1 portion of the Certification and Registration Examination for Medical Assistants.

Indicator 2: Using

Candidates make professionally sound decisions in selecting appropriate processes and resources

to provide optimal conditions for learning (pp. 122, 169) based on principles, theories, and effective

practices. (pp. 8-9, 122, 168-169, 246)

EdTech 511 – Story board

The artifact I have selected to demonstrate a master of making sound decisions in selecting

appropriate process and resources is the Story Board component of EdTech 511 where we

developed Interactive Courseware. This class was by far the most technically challenging for me,

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1cRwWaExRyuZN2JKqcqcverPJ-eWTqYN-U608NKLIUmQ/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000



but with the skills I had already developed in course design strategies and methodologies, I feel

that the Story Board is an example of proficiency.

The story board takes into account the various resources and technology available given

the mode of delivery, in this particular case using FLASH in an HTML shell. The overall

construction of each frame of the instructional unit involved many variables and often

interchangeable components. Flash is an object-oriented software platform and development

environment that requires the use of ActionScript to perform advance interactive animated

experiences.

I believe this artifact, as well as the full interactive unit in the artifacts section of this portfolio;

will illustrate the ability to fulfill the purpose of educational technology being used. However,

before using can take place, resources must be selected and a plan for utilization must be

established (Molenda, 2008).


Candidates use multiple assessment strategies (p. 53) to collect data for informing decisions to

improve instructional practice, learner outcomes, and the learning environment. (pp. 5-6)

EdTech 522 – Online Course Evaluation Project

According to Januszewski & Molenda (2008), “In the case of educational technology, to

improve performance often entails a claim of effectiveness: that the processes lead predictably to

quality products, and that the products lead predictably to effective learning, changes in

capabilities that carry over to real-world applications” (p. 6). The goals of one the initial projects in

EdTech 522 was to evaluate various types of online courses using the Online Course Construction

and Evaluation Rubric presented Benchmarking Quality Online Teaching and Learning: A Rubric

for Course Construction and Evaluation by Ternus, M. P., Palmer, K. L., & Faulk, D. R. (2007).

https://www.scribd.com/doc/280567877/Online-Course-Evaluation-Final


Page 14

I chose this artifact as an example of a master of using multiple strategies to evaluate

instructional practice and learner outcomes. I used two courses from the list of courses provided

one a free course and the other a MOOC in hopes to compare two vastly different online learning

experiences. What I found is that they were not that dissimilar. Because they were both open and

free neither was supported by direct instructor facilitation or mediation. In both cases I found this to

be the most significant shortcoming. Dawley (2007) emphasizes that engagement is a critical

component to keeping students online and learning. As a result, I chose to further my investigation

by evaluating a fully credited course within EdTech. The evaluations speak for themselves

especially in terms of course design, interaction and communication. While the courses were all

well-structured, the for-credit course utilized technology for communication and instructional media

far better than the free courses.

I believe that this exercise opened my eyes to the disparity that exists within learning

experiences. It gave me a perspective on the composition of a quality learning experience. This

activity influenced the design and development strategy for my online course. I have seen

firsthand how each of these seemingly independent categories can affect the overall effectiveness

of an online course experience. Even though a course is well structured or included well-meaning

assignments and activities, without the ability to communicate with other learners or an instructor

about their experiences, the courses quality is considered lacking in terms of engagement and

assessment.


Candidates establish mechanisms (p. 190) for maintaining the technology infrastructure (p. 234) to

improve learning and performance. (p. 238)

EdTech 512 – Implementation Plan

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/512/WBID/ScientificSucces2d.html



The artifact I have selected to demonstrate a mastery of improving learning and

performance through the establishment of mechanisms to maintain technological infrastructure is

the Implementation phase of the course design for EdTech 512. Donaldson, Smaldino, and

Pearson (2008) state that “technologists, by definition, work with others to solve real-world

problems” (p. 190). Because they are responsible for the planning and delivery of products that

solve, they must be continuously monitoring the personnel, resources, timing and cost while

conveying the progress to stakeholders and the community.

In the Implementation Phase of this online development project, the personnel, their time

commitment, and the associated cost projections where detailed. Every member had an integral

role in the overall success of the implementation of the project. Each step for successful

implementation was outlined indicating the required resources. Finally, the overall administration

and operation of the technology must be strategically described and defined.

Many of these processes, tools, and strategies introduced in the project were new to the

community responsible for the administration of the content. The stakeholders, while supporting

the endeavor, were suspect to the overall success. It is under these circumstances that the

educational technologist is cast into the role of an agent for change. I believe that my experience

during the development of this course motivated me to apply for and accept a position as the

technology resource on the school board in an attempt to lead and inspire a technological

revolution.

Indicator 5: Ethics

Candidates foster a learning environment in which ethics guide practice that promotes health,

safety, best practice, (p. 246), and respect for copyright, Fair Use, and appropriate open access to

resources. (p. 3)

EdTech 522: Screencast: Educating and Engaging

http://prezi.com/smc6b4bhedz0/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share


Page 16

It has been said that educational technology exists to enhance the facilitation of learning by

creating and providing environments where learners are motivated to learn, to advance rapidly, to

apply their knowledge, and to have greater satisfaction. These lofty goals can be accomplished by

empowering learners through learner-centric design strategies. The artifact I have selected to

illustrate a mastery regarding the individual interests of the learner, i.e. the ethical employment of

promoting “learning how to learn”, is from EdTech 522. In this course I was tasked with developing

an online unit of instruction for adult learners. One of the components of adult education, i.e.

andragogy, I found insightful was the solicitation of immediate feedback during learning

experiences. I was exposed to the concept of the flipped classroom. This format of teaching was

termed by Lage, Platt, and Treglia (2000) as “A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning

Environment” (p 31).

I employed this strategy in the Creating Engaging Online Components Unit of Learning. I

am a proponent of alternative forms of content presentation especially in an online educational

experience. I firmly believe that in order to keep students engaged there must a variety of

approaches to present content and to evaluate the concepts presented. I found that screencasting

provides both content diversity and interactive evaluation making it a formidable approach for

engaging learners.

I can see where this approach could be used in my current position as a training and

support specialist. While many of our training topics are presented in the form of WebEx

screencasts, I would like to incorporate a form of immediate and interactive reinforcement or

evaluation of the topics covered. One of the subjects I would like to see presented in Boise State’s

EdTech M.E.T. program is an Articulate E-learning platform whereby interactivity is commonplace

within the learning components.

Indicator 6: Diversity of Learners



Candidates foster a learning community that empowers learners with diverse backgrounds,

characteristics, and abilities. (p. 10)

EdTech 502: Jigsaw Classroom

The artifact I selected to demonstrate mastery in fostering a learning community with

learners of diverse backgrounds is the Jigsaw activity from EdTech 502. This approach to learning

was developed by Elliot Aronson and was first used in 1971. The process evolved from an

atmosphere of fear and distrust among the students. In any classroom, there is a competitive

nature among students. The goal of the activity is to divide students in to equal groups of diversity

in terms of gender, ethnicity, race and ability. The learning material would then be divided into

sections, each student receiving only their segment to use in preparation. The goal is that each

student would become an “expert” on their segment of the material. Eventually the students

reconvene as a group to present the material en masse, one expert driven segment at a time.

Aronson’s objective was to teach the students to work together, as cooperative members of

an interdependent group. The end result was significantly lower hostility and heightened

cooperation. The development of cooperative learning techniques has been studied extensively

since the first Jigsaw Classroom in the 1970’s. The power of collaboration and cooperation can

have significant effect on learning outcomes.

This artifact illustrates the fulfillment of the AECT’s Code Section 3, in which Januszewski &

Molenda (2008) restate it appeal to “providing opportunities for culturally and intellectually diverse

points of view” (p. 10). Each of the individuals in these jigsaw groups will bring a different

perspective about the subject material to the presentation. With the assistance of a facilitator,

each of the points of view and interpretations will be voiced, discussed and investigated.

AECT Standard 4 (Professional Knowledge and Skills)

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/502/Jigsaw.html


Page 18

Candidates design, develop, implement, and evaluate technology-rich learning environments

within a supportive community of practice.

Indicators 1: Collaborative Practice

Candidates collaborate with their peers and subject matter experts to analyze learners, develop

and design instruction, and evaluate its impact on learners.

EdTech 542: Peer Review process evaluation and assessment

The artifact I have selected to demonstrate effective collaboration with peers to analyze,

develop and design materials and impact learners is a collaborative peer review process

conducted in EdTech 542. As the development of the Problem Based Learning project was

winding down, we entered a period of evaluation, review and reflection regarding various formats

of peer review. This component was appropriately termed “Reflect and Perfect” in the Buck

Institute for Educations: PBL Starter Kit (Larmer, Ross, & Mergendoller, 2009, p.101). This was

the first time I had formally studied and evaluated diverse formats for conducting peer-reviews. I

found the subject matter enlightening and appropriate given the nature of Problem Based Learning

strategies.

The broader scope of this particular exercise was to focus in on one of the particular

components of developing, implementing and administrating a PBL course. Once again, the

EdTech program teaches the art and science of mastering a technique while the learners are

actually practicing the technique. As the course began to unfold with the development of a PBL

well at hand, it came to me that I was actually participating in a Project Based Learning

experience. This final phase in a Project Based Learning course is important for a number of

reasons. First, learners retain more of what they learn given the opportunity to reflect. Secondly, it

acts as a form of summative evaluation for the facilitator. Lastly, it can provide a safe and nurturing

environment for learners to assess the collaborative skill for themselves and their peers.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/280874511/EDTECH-542-Peer-Review-Process

https://www.scribd.com/doc/280874511/EDTECH-542-Peer-Review-Process



According to Morrison, Ross and Kemp (2007), “Evaluation is used for the purposes of

making judgements about the worth or success of lessons, programs, or projects” (p. 236), peer

review can be a form of formative evaluation. Is the product worthy? Will the product be

successful? The peer review process is imperative to develop quality products. These concepts

have transcended from my coursework into my professional life. Exercises such as this exposed

me to options for successful peer-reviews as well as preparing me to conduct peer-reviews. I am

confident I am capable of conducting a complete and complex peer evaluation of material,

products, and presentations.

Indicator 2: Leadership

Candidates lead their peers in designing and implementing technology-supported learning.

EdTech 501: Digital Equality - Voice Thread

This particular artifact illustrates mastery in the effective leadership of peers in designing

and implementing a thoughtful and poignant piece of educational material to conquer the digital

divide. As the Lambda group we were responsible for creating a well-researched proposal on

irradiating the lack of connectivity for students. I assumed a leadership role in terms of working

with team members to determine their levels of participation, assigning productivity goals and

timelines. I worked closely with the team to discuss the details of activity and guiding their

individual responsibilities using synchronous techniques such as Skype. This enabled us to

communicate in real-time while developing the content interactively.

The unfortunate turn of events that transpired more recently was the inactivation of the

VoiceThread account where this artifact was stored. From what I gather through a series of

correspondence there was an administrative decision by powers outside my personal control. The

effect of these actions resulted in the artifacts destruction. While the Lambda group were the

creators and owners of this intellectual property, they we created under an account to which they

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QikPhcG-XfSOpf23uVQKDMMigoZn-OJnEvsZ67leLAo/pub?start=true&loop=false&delayms=3000


Page 20

did not own and the material was destroyed. The effect of not deleting the contents of an account

once the administration relinquished owners would be a security concern for me and the

administrator.

I have included a few of the components of the final artifact in an effort to illustrate

competency in leading peers in the design and implementation. It is my goal to illustrate the

leadership process and the work as it was developed. It was an extremely rewarding process. The

Lambda group worked very well, and our various skills and expertise were complimentary. Overall

I thought we developed an amazing project. The loss of this artifact has convinced me that a

leader of a collaborative process must consider the residency of intellectual property.

Indicator 3: Reflection on Practice

Candidates analyze and interpret data and artifacts and reflect on the effectiveness of the design,

development and implementation of technology-supported instruction and learning to enhance

their professional growth.

EdTech 506 – Justification Document

This artifact was created as an introspective justification of the various types of technology

and pedagogical methodology used to successfully administrate a unit of instruction targeted for a

seventh grade level Art Awareness curriculum. The learning opportunity was designed to be

facilitated by parent volunteers, many without prior teaching or educational background.

This particular project was comprised of a vast array of technological mediums as well as

diverse content. The unit began with a history lesson, accomplished with an interactive timeline,

about the artist and his historical contribution to the world of art. The lesson moved forward with

vocabulary and semantics, accomplished by encapsulating sound clips from an online dictionary.

The unit concluded with the core content: for the learners to develop the skills of the artist through

example - trial and error. Personally, the final product of this course was amazingly parallel to my

http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/johnsond/506/FinalProjectFreeCss/Art_Awareness_Justification.pdf



personal and educational outcomes. I summarize the effect this class had on my overall

competencies in the realm of educational design with a quote from my own Reflection Document:

I typically consider myself a creative person, not necessarily an artistic person, but I like to

build and create. I like to visualize the outcome, gather the material, and create. Such a

process for me involves trial and error. The final product has several iterations, using

various materials and methods of fabrication. This process is very similar to what I

experienced here in EdTech 506.


Candidates design and implement assessment and evaluation plans that align with learning goals

and instructional activities.

EdTech 522 – Rich Media Tutorial

One of the aspects of developing learning experiences that I feel very passionate about is

the degree to which the leaner is engaged. When considering the design and implementation of

assessment and evaluations that align with learning goals, I reflect on EdTech 522. I wanted to

employ an interactive form of evaluation to determine learner’s level of engagement in the learning

activity through active participation.

The unit of instruction covered the principles of developing a Google form that could be

incorporated into a learning activity to gage learner participate, learner engagement and learner

satisfaction. According to Kirkpatrick (1998) a program’s success can be measured on four levels:

by the satisfaction of the learners, the learner’s ability to attain the learning objectives, the

subsequent behavioral changes, and the overall impact to others. The artifact demonstrates the

mastery in designing and implementing an assessment aimed directly at the goals of the learning

activity. Assuming the learner participates in the learning activity, the end result would be

https://edtechdrjw.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/522-module-four-rich-media-tutorial/


Page 22

assessment. This provides a sense of involvement and active participation within the learning

component.

I have used similar mechanisms for learning or edification exercises. I intend to analyze

and evaluate the use of this format for immediate evaluation and assessment for several of the

learning activities in the training and support position. Some of the material covered in our on-

boarding instruction could be supported using a similar form of active inquiry assessment.

Indicator 4: Ethics

Candidates demonstrate ethical behavior within the applicable cultural context during all aspects of

their work and with respect for the diversity of learners in each setting.

EdTech 542: Final Project

Globalization has amplified the consequences of individual, organizational and national

actions by transforming them into the world arena. Yeaman, Eastmon & Napper (2008) remind us

that the behavior of one person is no longer the only element involved in ethical behavior (p. 310).

It is this guiding thought that drives the attention to the diverse nature of learners not only

participating in a course, but those who may be exposed to the outcome.

The artifact I have selected to demonstrate ethical behavior and respect for diversity of

learners is from EdTech 542. This course delved into the approach to develop, design and

implement a Problem Based Learning course. This was my first experience with the Problem

Based Learning approach. By its very nature PBL is literally “of the people, by the people and for

the people”. The process begins with determining the learning objectives. In many cases it is

multi-faceted, containing opportunities for learning in a variety of subject matter.

The diversity of the learners must be considered from the first word of the driving question,

to the selection of collaborative groups, throughout the selection of the community in which to

participate and finally to the format of the final presentation. The course that I developed was

https://sites.google.com/a/u.boisestate.edu/djohnson-wojnicki/



geared toward adult learners. It was set in the healthcare industry and involved participants from

many levels providing different opportunities to interface with clients. The premise of the learning

activity was to assess the current organizational culture in an attempt to develop an approach to

produce positive “cultural change”. The course required the participants to collaborate with groups

both inside and outside their organization. The course employed the creation and use of a wiki for

community building to collaborate beyond the limits of a physical location. All in an effort to

observe, evaluate, and assess diverse opportunities to inspire, ignite and promote positive cultural

change.

AECT Standard 5 – Research

Candidates explore, evaluate, synthesize, and apply methods of inquiry to enhance learning (pp.

4) and improve performance (pp. 6-7).

Indicators 1: Theoretical Foundations

Candidates demonstrate foundational knowledge of the contribution of research to the past and

current theory of educational communications and technology. (p. 242)

EdTech 501 – Educational Technology Definition Timeline

When I first contemplated the definition of Educational Technology I would have stated

similar to Dunn (2011) that it was the hardware or machines, the firmware, and the software that

facilitates the educational process or transfer of knowledge from an educator to a learner.

Considering my background as a technician, a developer of software, databases and systems it

made perfect sense. However, after having studied the field of Educational Technology for the past

5 years, my view point has shifted dramatically.

When reading the definition stated, Januszewski and Molenda (2008) state, “Educational

technology is the study of ethical practice of facilitating learning and improving performance by

creating, using, and managing appropriate technological processes and resources” (p. 1). I now

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/embed/23142/0595292422/


Page 24

appreciate the vast implications. What began as a quest to use technology to “deliver” instruction

in a variety of formats has evolved into an environment using technology to support learners to

explore and collaborate to discern their own meaningful understanding. The use of educational

technology and the capacity to empower should always be done for the “good” of society. This can

be as simple as assisting to bridge the digital divide or as complex as overcoming diversity. The

paradigm of educational technology has shifted from a tool to view content to a problem space

where learners can explore the possibilities and develop their own answers. Today’s world needs

people that can solve problems; critical thinking is the key to conceptual change. In terms of

performance, I have learned that while the learning environments of the 21st century improve, so

does the learning experience they produce and support.

Educational Technology is comprised of the ever-changing methodologies defining how

people learn and the improvement of the environments to facilitate learning confined only by the

limits of the imagination. When I first studied computer programing, punched cards were read into

a machine that created code. By the time I graduated college, the first micro-computers were

being unveiled. I believe there is more processing capability and resources in a smartphone than

the mainframe in my Universities’ computer lab.

Indicator 2: Method

Candidates apply research methodologies to solve problems and enhance practice. (p. 243)

EdTech 504 – Final project

To illustrate a competency in the application of research methodologies for problem

resolution and practice enhancement, I have selected the final synthesis paper from EdTech 504:

Discerning Humane Technogogy. This course taught me to respect research. Although I had

participated in several forms of research for a variety of different reasons throughout my

coursework in the M.E.T. program, it was this course that taught me the significance of an

https://www.scribd.com/doc/159220906/Final-Synthesis-Paper



organized approach to research. Initially, I was not as interested in the outcome because of its

lack of creative substance, in terms of building something that could be touched and felt. But the

end result I found to be very creative.

During this course I participated in my own research project to produce a final synthesis of

my findings. After researching many of the theories, new and old alike, I read something that

resonated, “Humans have an innate desire to learn”. I also discovered that one of the phrases that

mysteriously disappeared from the more recent AECT Definition of Educational Technology was

“human learning”. This omission puzzled me, and as I reviewed the various Learning Theories, I

began to realize how programmed, unemotional and mechanical they all began to sound. I

pondered for a moment the educational experiences I have encountered whether as a parent,

trainer, facilitator or student. I contemplated the aspects of the learning experience that I find most

valuable and the characteristics I appreciate. I envisioned my children and their unique

motivations. These reflections brought me to the crux of education, all too often lost in the

acquisition of higher test scores and meeting bureaucratic benchmarks, the human experience of

aspirations, creativity, choices, values, and self-realization.

Humanism is the Learning Theory addressed in this paper. In researching the various

learning theories over the last few years, I have become increasing familiar with Behaviorism,

Constructivism, Cognitivism and Humanism. Humanism can be most simply stated as the desire

to learn is intrinsic. In other words, learning is not an observable response to particular stimuli,

(Smith & Ragan, 2005) as Behaviorists would contend, nor a matter of mapping the structure of the

world to the learner (Jonassen, 1991) in terms of Constructivism, nor the mere transformation of

information within the brain (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968) as Cognitivism maintains. It is my

observation that Humanism is the amalgamation of all these learning theories as they all describe


Page 26

ways in which the human learning experience can be achieved, recognizing that humans

instinctively learn.


Candidates apply formal inquiry strategies in assessing and evaluating processes and resources

for learning and performance. (p. 203)

EdTech 505: Final Evaluation Report

The artifact I have selected to illustrate a master of formal inquiry strategies for assessing

and evaluating process and resources for learning and performance is the Final Evaluation Report

developed for EdTech 505. Boulmetis & Dutwin (2011) remind us there are two primary reasons to

evaluate: the first is to determine whether or not objectives are being achieved and the second is

to make a decision ( p. 4). During the course of this project I performed an evaluation based on

the first definition. I had the opportunity to learn why evaluations are completed in the first place.

Evaluations are conducted through understanding the questions the stakeholders are expecting to

be answered. I learned that evaluations have both formative and summative evaluation processes

of their own. Then there is the enormous amount of data that needs to be collected and analyzed.

The primary intent of the evaluation is to provide the Midwest Regional Ambulatory Care

executive administration with credible evidence substantiating a) the program will provide the

knowledge transfer required to attain marked improvement in customer communication and service

as reported by the institution-wide Recent Patient Survey, b) a standard to effectively communicate

with customers and other representatives using language aligned with hospitality, respect and

care, c) the perception that the AIDET program is a meaningful, useful and consequential

component of employment. Due to the decision-making nature of the objectives, the CIPP

evaluation model (Zhang, et al., 2011) was employed to assess the four integrated aspects of a

developing program through the utilization of rigorous and authentic assessments.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/281007180/Final-Evaluation-Report-of-AIDET



The lessons I learned in this course have assisted me in my everyday life. I now have

effective means of gathering and analyzing data to formulate conclusions for stakeholder

presentation. Not long ago, I was involved as a new comer to an existing evaluation process.

The evaluation was accomplished through observation. The decisions were made by a group of

three individuals. As I observed, the evaluation and eventually the decision making process lacked

credible data to support the decisions. I was stunned by the lack of supporting documentation to

substantiate the decision. Needless to say, it was the knowledge I have learned through this

course that gave me the confidence to take my concerns to the stakeholders. As a result, the

evaluation process has been revised and there is now a process in place to document the

observations to make decisions based on performance.

Most recently functioning as a training and support specialist I have been tasked with

performing the archetype physician workflow evaluation. The stakeholders’ intentions are to

markedly improve the physician’s use of existing technology to improve the efficacy, efficiency and

timeliness of functions. The success of this evaluation and the outcome will lead to the

development of an evaluation strategy for future applications. I believe that my experience in

EdTech 505 has empowered me to campaign this project.

Indicator 4: Ethics

Candidates conduct research and practice using accepted professional and institutional guidelines

and procedures. (p. 296-7)

EdTech 501: School Evaluation Project

I have selected a School Evaluation Project to support a master in conducting research and

practice using accepted institutional and professional guidelines. We studied that Technology Use

Planning is a course of action employed to determine, define and describe a course of action to

procure, implement and utilize technology based applications to achieve a predefined goal. To be

https://www.scribd.com/doc/91019748/Evaluation-Johnson-Wojnicki-D


Page 28

effective, the plan itself should be formally documented and should be supported by the primary

stakeholders. The education based Technology Use Plan should include but not be limited to;

students, teachers, administrators, and others who will benefit from the realization of the plan.

We were tasked with the job of evaluating a school’s Technology Maturity, modeling the

evaluation and report after the Maturity Model Benchmarks by Sibley and Kimball (1997). The

process of evaluation from this perspective was new to me, and since I am not a teacher I

approached the technology director at my children’s school. She was aware of my endeavors

working toward an MET and offered assistance. Eventually, I used some of this knowledge when I

accepted the responsibilities as the technology representative on the School Board. I am happy

to say that since this research project was conducted, the school has undergone a remarkable

change in their view of technology. I will credit this to the acquisition of a new technologically

savvy school principal. The school is in the process of moving to a one-to-one school provided

iPad environment.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to state that I am a Boise State EdTech Success. This program

enabled me to acquire the skills and the confidence to reenter the workforce after an eight year

hiatus. I have updated my technological skills to compete in today’s workforce. I have a set of

newly acquired pedagogical skills which have enabled me to pursue my profession of choice in

technical training and support. This program afforded me the tools and learning experiences to

revitalize my technical skillset to compete in the 21st century. It has challenged me to design and

develop engaging, authentic, online instruction that meets the standards established by

Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT).

Through my efforts to succeed in the MET program, I have learned and employed best

practice instructional design strategies using various methodologies of learning. I have learned to



differentiate the various learning theories: Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and

Humanism. I have the pedagogical skills to employ various strategies from face-to-face, web-

based, flipped-classrooms, project-based, and hybrid to promote engaged learners and positive

outcomes. I have determined that each can be utilized to effectively transfer knowledge based on

the need, the learner and the content. I have developed a concept of why people learn; they have

an innate desire to learn. I have an awareness of how people learn diversely; which is best

achieved when afforded diversity in content presentation. I recognize when people learn which

can be most effective if engaged by the content and given both voice and choice. And lastly, I can

appreciate where people learn which as in my own situation is anything, anytime and anywhere.

References

Aronson, E., & Bridgeman, D. (1979). Jigsaw groups and the desegregated classroom: In pursuit

of common goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 5, pp. 438-446.

Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). "Chapter: Human memory: A proposed system and its

control processes". In Spence, K. W., & Spence, J. T. The psychology of learning and

motivation (Volume 2). New York: Academic Press. pp. 89–195

Beginning Instructional Authoring: Why C.R.A.P. Is Exactly What’s Needed (Part 1) by Patti

Shank : Learning Solutions Magazine. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015, from

http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/713/beginning-instructional-authoring-why-

crap-is-exactly-whats-needed-part-1

Boulmetis, J., & Dutwin, P. (2011). The ABCs of Evaluation: Timeless Techniques for Program and

Project Managers (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Davidson-Shivers, G. V. & Rasmussen, K. L. (2008). Web-based learning; Design, Implementation,

and Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Prentice Hall.


Page 30

Dawley, L. (2007). The Tools foe Successful Online Teaching. Hershey, PA: Information Science

Publishing.

Donaldson, J. A., Smaldino, S. & Pearson, R. (2008). Managing. In A. Januszewski & M. Molena

(Eds.), Educational Technology: A definition with Commentary (pp.175-193). New York,

NY: Routledge.

Dunn, J. (2011, April 18). The Evolution of Classroom Technology | Edudemic. Retrieved from

http://www.edudemic.com/classroom-technology/

Januszewski, A., & Molena, M., Eds. (2008). Educational Technology: A definition with

Commentary, New York, NY: Routledge.

Jonassen, D. (1991). Objectivism vs constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?

Educational Technology, Research and Development, 39(3), 5-13.

Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (January 01, 2000). Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to

Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-

43.

Larmer, J., Ross, D., &; Mergendoller, J. (2009). Project Based Learning (PBL) Starter Kit. Novato,

CA: Buck Institute for Education.

Lohr, L. L. (2008). Creating graphics for learning and performance: Lessons in visual literacy (2nd

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Molenda, M. (2008). Using. In A. Januszewski & M. Molena (Eds.), Educational Technology: A

definition with Commentary (pp.141-173). New York, NY: Routledge.

Molenda, M. & Robinson, R. (2008). Values. In A. Januszewski & M. Molena (Eds.), Educational

Technology: A definition with Commentary (pp. 241-258). New York, NY: Routledge.

Moorison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp. J. E., (2007), Designing Effective Instruction (5th Ed.),

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.



Sibley, P.H.R. & Kimball, C. (1998). Maturity model benchmark. Retrieved from

https://edtechdrjw.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/501-school-evaluation/

Solomon, G. & Schrum, L. (2007), Web 2.0 new tools, new schools, Washington, D.C.:

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. L. (2005), Instructional Design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &

Sons.

Yeaman, A. R. J., Eastmon Jr., J. N. & Napper, V. S. (2008), Professional Ethics and Educational

Technology, In A. Januszewski & M. Molena (Eds.), Educational Technology: A definition

with Commentary (pp.283-326). New York, NY: Routledge.

Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). Using the

Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive

Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and Assessment of Service-Learning

Programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 57–84.