The Power of Peer Review

My peer review group got off to a chaotic start, but in the end, I was lucky enough to receive feedback from both Benny and Neethu on my instructional design document (IDD). The peer review experience did help me to improve the content in my document. Simply reading through my peer’s document enlightened me on some requirements and formatting that needed my attention.  For example, I did not fully understand the requirements outlined in the rubric for the section on learning theory. So, I searched and found several peer reviewed journal articles and included them as references to strengthen and support why I chose the constructivist learning theory. I included the statement that constructivism is the foundation of project-based learning in which students are approached with a problem and engage in activities that allow and lead to real world problem-solving (Almala, 2005). Then, I linked the learning activities in my project to the constructivist learning theory. Now, I feel the paragraphs on learning theory meet the expectations outlined in the rubric. 

Next, there was information in the environmental resources that needed more detail in which I assumed the reader would understand. So, I added the specifics of items such as naming the particular learning management system participants would be utilizing. Towards the end of the document, the reviewers restructured a few sentences and added and deleted words.  I made all of these changes based on their suggestions. In addition, a great resource was shared that explains the levels and adoption of technology integration into the classroom. Although, I didn’t use the resource in my design document since the analysis was already conducted, it is a website that I will introduce in our district as we look at teacher levels of technology integration.

Another suggestion that I considered was changing how I numbered my goals and objectives. In the first instructional design course I completed, we did not use the format that Benny suggested. However, when I looked at how the goals and learning objectives for this course were formatted, I noticed that it was the format in which Benny referenced. So I used the G.1 and O.1.1 format when listing goals and objectives. I have noticed there are several inconsistencies with how things were presented in our previous instructional design course versus this instructional design course. So, I will need to ensure that I read the directions and rubrics carefully as not to assume I already know the expectation.

My design document was similar to one of my peers, so that reassured me I was on the right track. I know that the instructional design document needs to be well thought out because the course in which I will be building the next twelve weeks will be based on the information outlined in it.  Therefore, I appreciate having a peer from the class review the IDD and make suggestions as it only strengthens the content of the document. 

Reference

Almala, A. H. (2005). A constructivist conceptual framework for a quality e-learning environment. Distance Learning, 2(5), 9-12. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/230696773?accountid=7113