Educational Philosophy

My educational philosophy is grounded in several learning theories. My focus is on creating Learner-Centered environments that make the education meaningful for individual learners—I believe in meeting students where they are and tailoring educational experience to their needs1. I believe that learning is a process of active construction and I try to tap into learners' prior experiences to bolster the effectiveness of the instruction2. I emphasize the importance of preparing learners with skills and tools they can directly apply in their personal and professional lives. I believe that learners grow in there practice through reflection in which they can examine their growth, accomplishments, and challenges3. I believe in accessiblity and equity for all learners through the use of Universal Design for Learning.4

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. Jossey-Bass.

Wilson, B. G., & Novak, K. (2023). Constructivism for active, authentic learning. In R. A. Reiser, A. A. Carr-Chellman, & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (5th ed., pp. 96–111). Pearson.

Pratt, K., & Palloff, R. M. (2008). Assessment online. In Assessing the online learner: Resources and strategies for faculty (pp. 28–48). Wiley Professional Development.

CAST. (n.d.). Universal design for learning guidelines. CAST. https://www.cast.org/udl-guidelines

Theoretical Foundation

In a Master’s program for Instructional Design at Caifornial State University San Bernardino, we were trained in the following areas:

  1. Learning Theories: Cognitive, behavioral, and constructivist theories, emphasizing how individuals acquire, process, and retain knowledge. This foundation helps designers understand how to align instructional materials with various cognitive processes.

  2. Instructional Design Models: Models like ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) and SAM (Successive Approximation Model) are core, guiding the systematic development of learning experiences to maximize engagement and learning outcomes.

  3. Motivation and Engagement: Theories such as ARCS (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction) model by Keller are examined to help designers integrate motivational elements into instructional materials.

  4. Assessment and Evaluation: Principles of formative and summative assessment, along with evaluation models (e.g., Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation), provide tools to measure the effectiveness of instructional interventions and the achievement of learning objectives.

  5. Educational Technology: The integration of technology in learning, including multimedia learning principles, online learning platforms, and the implications of digital learning environments, is foundational for instructional designers working in digital and hybrid contexts.

  6. Universal Design and Accessibility: Emphasis on creating inclusive and accessible instructional materials that support diverse learners, ensuring equity in digital education.

  7. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Usability: Concepts in HCI inform the creation of intuitive, user-centered learning environments, which is crucial for designing digital interfaces that facilitate seamless learning.

These foundations support a well-rounded understanding of how to design, develop, and evaluate learning experiences that are pedagogically sound, technologically adept, and accessible for a diverse range of learners.

Definition of IDT

History of IDT

Foundational Examples

annotated bibliography assignment

Reflection

The amount I have learned about the foundational knowledge of Instructional Design and Technology in this first semester of the Master's program at CSUSB is almost unquantifiable. Aside from reading the primary materials from Skinner, Brune, Vygotsky, Piaget, Bloom, et al., I feel like I've absorbed an enormous amount about the psychological underpinnings of Instructional Design. The cognitive scientists of the past have laid the groundwork for dilletants like myself to stand upon and direct the design of my learning materials.

Through this process, I have deepened my understanding of how theories like constructivism and connectivism shape effective, student-centered learning environments. I have gained clarity on the importance of designing experiences that prioritize active engagement, collaboration, and critical thinking while leveraging technologies that empower learners to construct knowledge and connect with diverse networks. This reflection has reinforced my belief in tailoring instruction to meet learners where they are, emphasizing their role as co-creators in the learning process. 

As I move forward as an instructional designer, I will carry these principles into creating adaptable, dynamic learning environments that support both individual growth and collaborative learning. I plan to integrate tools like Canvas and Google Docs more strategically to encourage active participation and peer interaction. As a professor, I have already applied these insights by fostering meaningful discussions, encouraging peer reviews, and using technology to scaffold learning. This process has solidified my commitment to blending theory with practice to create learning experiences that are both engaging and transformative.