Share which of the models you enjoyed the most and why, now that you’ve had the chance to learn about many design and development models in the previous model, the evaluation models in this unit, and have noted their differences, similarities and overlaps. Describe your preferences for each model, if you have more than one.
Write your analysis in the comment section below.
the 2 frame works I like are the backwards design model and the Triple E framework. I like the backwards design model because it places the end goal at the forefront forcing you to focus on the needs of students. once students needs are at the center, teachers become more strategic in picking the just right materials/tools. through this through process, teachers are actively analyzing whether the materials/tools engage students, enhance instruction and extend learning. Both models compliment each other.
The model that I enjoyed the most is Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. While reading about this framework, I related to it a lot and realized that I conceptualize teaching in a way that closely resembles the framework.
Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction was developed by Robert Gagne in 1965. The nine events include:
I like this framework because it provides a step-by-step process for teaching, including ways to engage students, explain class/lesson goals or objectives, and encourage presenting content in multiple meaningful ways to promote student understanding. This is similar to the multiple means of representation from UDL.
Source: https://www.niu.edu/citl/resources/guides/instructional-guide/gagnes-nine-events-of-instruction.shtml
I also liked Bloom’s Taxonomy. According to The Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, one can use Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction with Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy to help create instruction that is both engaging and meaningful.
Bloom’s Taxonomy helps categorize educational outcomes based on their complexity and allows educators to create objectives and activities that promote higher-order thinking. The original framework had six major categories: Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation. The revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (2001), had new categories to reflect action words/cognitive processes that people use when learning (Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Create). Depending on the category, there is a different level of higher order thinking and cognitive engagement. For example, Evaluate and Create would be considered higher-order thinking in comparison to Remember and Understand.
Many aspects of this framework are complemented by Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. For example, Bloom’s category of knowledge, and later remembering, can be enhanced by the using Gagne’s Nine Events, such as: 1) Gain attention of the students; 4) Present the content using multiple variations, such as videos, demos, lecture, group work, etc.; and 5) Provide learning guidance (scaffolding, learning strategies such as graphic organizers, concept maps).
Overall, both Bloom’s Taxonomy and Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction provide prescriptive ways to enhance education and provide clear goals. I have a preference for Gagne’s framework because it seems very familiar to me, and it also does not have the hierarchical nature of knowledge that is found in Bloom’s Taxonomy.
I enjoyed Bloom’s taxonomy model because I loved how it underlines what the student will learn in 6 different categories. It also will help the teacher understand the classroom teaching. It can also help me figure out what level I am and what I need help figuring out. It will help with critical thinking and be able to go to a deeper level. This will even help me when I am in a classroom, I can evaluate and build groups based on the results I get from the Bloom Taxonomy, and it will help me differentiate.
While researching, I kept coming back to Bloom’s taxonomy as it peaked my interest. I feel this framework adheres to the different levels of students we may come across. It breaks it down into a two step process and it is easy to follow. I think it is important to build the foundation before working on higher level tasks/skills and I feel this framework allows for that.
Bloom’s Taxonomy:
This model offers a clear framework for defining learning objectives and aligning them with appropriate instructional strategies and assessments. By categorizing cognitive processes into hierarchical levels, it helps ensure that learning experiences are designed to foster higher-order thinking skills like analysis, evaluation, and creation.
Bloom’s taxonomy provides a common language for educators to discuss and share learning goals, making it easier to collaborate and ensure alignment across different courses or programs. It also serves as a valuable tool for creating assessments that accurately measure student learning at various levels of complexity.
I would prefer Bloom’s taxonomy for projects where the primary goal is to promote critical thinking and deep understanding. It would be particularly useful for designing courses or curricula that aim to develop learners’ ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information.
There are many models and are all very useful for educators. You might even say that some go hand in hand with each other. But I am sure that is up for debate. What I can say is that these models attract different learners, meaning the models I find easy to understand might be complex for another educator.
The models I prefer are:
The ASSURE model, I find this very easy to follow and straightforward.
The triple E model, another model that is easy to follow. It has only 3 steps, that are straightforward as well.
Bloom’s Taxonomy, this I find easy because it was explained to me in detail in a previous course here at Lehman. This choice might be a little bias.
I feel that at the end of the day we choose the model that stands out to us for whatever reason that may be.
Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction and Bloom’s Taxonomy are both respected educational frameworks that improve teaching and learning, making them enjoyable for educators and students alike. Gagne’s model offers an organized approach to instructional design, reinforcing the importance of engaging students at many stages, from gaining attention to providing feedback and improving retention. This structured progression helps create a more organized and effective learning experience, which students often find more enjoyable and less overwhelming.
On the other hand, Bloom’s Taxonomy offers a layered framework that categorizes cognitive skills, directing educators in designing assessments and activities that encourage higher-order thinking. By encouraging students to move from basic knowledge to higher levels of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, this model supports deeper understanding and engagement, making learning more rewarding.
Both models share a commitment to improving learning outcomes, focusing on active engagement and critical thinking. However, Gagne’s framework is more instructive and linear , while Bloom’s is more descriptive and organized. My preference leans towards Gagne’s model for its structured approach, which provides clear guidance for lesson planning, guaranteeing that all essential elements are addressed. However, Bloom’s Taxonomy is equally valuable for encouraging critical thinking and encouraging students to engage with content at a deeper level
The Triple E and the Five E Framework models are more detailed and easier to understand for me. I think the Five E model covers all the groundwork that students need to know. It allows the teacher to touch all bases on a lesson and allows students to participate, investigate, explain, and assess their work. The Triple E Framework focuses on student engagement and the desired outcome, also, aims to provide inclusive and accessible learning opportunities, and offer feedback. These two frameworks overlap in that they both help students become effective learners and develop critical thinking abilities.
My favorite of all the models there is the ASSURE model.
I like it because it’s focused on optimizing the online experience. It was a model that’s easy to understand with just 6 key parts. Of all the parts I like that the first step is to analyze the learners; this is a great way to ensure that the lesson is tailored to them. I also really like that it ends with “Evaluate and Revise.” It’s great that part of the process built in is a chance for the teacher to evaluate.
I enjoyed reading through the models, understanding their strengths, and how they can facilitate my goals. I see the magnitude in which they are needed for analyzing needs, implementing strategies, and assessing the change. These stood out for me yet I see value in all of them.
I enjoyed Kirkpatrick’s Model of Evaluation because it’s simple, comprehensive, and sequential making it easy to follow. It provides a clear roadmap for evaluating training from start to finish.
ADDIE because it provides a clear structure and allows room for flexibility. I like that it incorporates ongoing improvement and refinement. It’s a comprehensive development process. Allowing for continuous improvement and refinement ensures that the goals are met and needs are being addressed.
The 5 E’s framework is how I like to approach learning. It feels natural, and effective and can be implemented in everything. It emphasizes student engagement and exploration, which fosters a deeper understanding.
Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction focuses on learner needs and cognitive processes. The nine events provide a comprehensive guide for designing effective instructional experiences, ensuring engagement and support.
As Educators it is important to implement inclusive and accessible learning environments. In designing and developing accessible digital tools you must factor in how you would evaluate the effects of your accessibility materials. Insuring that you can reach your goal Instructional Technology Evaluation models are an important component in accessing digital accessibility tools. They focused on improving accessibility in the classroom and are to evaluate the accessibility of digital tools.
The three Instructional Evaluation models that I am familiar with are TPACK, 9 EVENTS OF INSTRUCTIONAL and TRIPLE E. These framework models allow for in depth
TPACK and Instructional Technology Evaluation Model addresses 7 components that focus on the complex interactions between a Teachers knowledge of Content (CK), Pedagogy (PK) and Technological (TK) and has a 4 stages process of evaluating:
Define – this stage of analysis / Analyze according to the results of the need in learning analysis / Development – the process of creating and developing products according to design. / Disseminate – to improve the process / Design – start to design products that will be developed.
In addition, The GAGNE’s 9 Events of Instruction, a behaviorist concept, correlates to address the conditions of learning while its focus is the outcome of behavior resulting from learning/training. Condition of Learning, identifies mental conditions or learning. The process as follows:
Gain Attention / Inform Learner of Objectives / Stimulate recall of prior learning / present content / provide learner guidance / elicit performance / provide feedback / assessment performance / enhance retention and transfer
GAGNE’s 9 Events of Instruction, is the framework is effective in assessing the digital tools used to engage a diverse set of learners.
Furthermore, The TRIPLE E model is effective as well. A framework to measure how well digital tools integrated into lessons are helping students engage in, enhance and extend learning goals. (TripleEframework.com) It measures whether students can access and use same tools outside of school.
The similarities of these Instruction Technology frameworks are that they all focus on the engaging students and the outcome, that the goal of offering inclusive and accessible learning opportunities and provide feedback
Some differences are that the TRIPLE E framework evaluates the extent of access using the same tools outside of school, an important aspect due to online learning. The GAGNE’s 9 Events OF Instruction have more areas of focus on the behavior / way of thinking of students.
Instructional Technology Evaluation models are tools necessary to prove that your goal of designing inclusive and accessible learning materials that break down barriers to allow all learners the same opportunities to learn.
Triple E Framework
– I enjoyed the easy acronym to remember
-easy to apply for all lessons
UDL
– love how it can be used for all learners and takes accessibility into account
– ensures we provide instruction that is clear for all and multiple means to assess learning
SAMR
– I like that you can revise your methodology throughout the lesson to cater to needs
– I like that it emphasizes thinking about goals and how to implement them
The overlap I see between all of them is that they all consider the learning style of the students. UDL and Triple E make sure we are engaging the students. I also see overlap with SAMR and UDL since you have to think about the content and how will you assess their knowledge.
I love the 5e and triple e framework models the most. I feel like the 5e model covers everything that students need to learn. Students get to engage, explore, explain and evaluate their work. This models encourage students to become effective learners and it promotes critical thinking skills. Both tripe e and 5e goes in more detail and are more easier to understand.
I prefer Bloom’s Taxonomy. I believe it follows a natural progression of thought and understanding with regards to learning where it begins with a smaller, simpler mindset and questioning and then it advances into a deeper understanding and thought process.
Overall, the 5 E framework provides a structured and flexible approach to instructional design, allowing me to create engaging, learner-centered experiences that promote understanding, critical thinking and the application of knowledge. It supports an active and inquiry based learning environment, which I find both enjoyable and effective for facilitating meaningful learning experiences.
The Triple E framework allows me to use technology effectively to engage learners, enhance the learning experience, extend learning beyond the classroom while differentiating instruction and assess learning in meaningful ways. It provides a structured approach to learning and the integration of technology that aligns with the goals of creating engaging, student centered learning experiences.
As I plan for the start of next year and how to improve my practice I will look into using these frameworks for lesson planning and using new technology.
I enjoy the 5E framework because it is more student driven and promotes discussion. It engages students in their learning process by following these steps: Engage,Explore,Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate.
It encourages students to be critical thinkers through problem solving, active participation, and reflection throughout the learning process.
The 5E model is an instructional framework that promotes inquiry-based learning and engages students in the learning process through five steps: Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate and Evaluate. With this model students are at the center of the learning experience. This model emphasizes inquiry and exploration. 5E promotes hands-on. 5E is flexible and adaptable to various subjects, grade levels and learning environments. Overall, it is my favorite model.
I did not know of 5E and the Triple E models before taking EDU 226. I like both models. The 5E model is a way of planning that makes sure the kids are engaged with the lesson, and have time to explore the concepts. The students have a chance to explain their thinking and extend their learning. It leaves room for self-evaluation, peer evaluation, and teacher evaluation. I teach in units and this is a great way to build a lesson plan that extends over days.
The Triple E model is great because it builds on the same ideas as 5E-engage, enhance, extend. You can use it to evaluate tools to make sure it is adding to the lesson and not just included for the sake of including technology. The chosen tools should help the students stay focused on and achieve a task. The students make connections and can apply these skills in the future when they extend them.
I agree with all of your reasons on why the 5E model is your favorite as well as mine. I feel it provides a nice flow of the lesson and it is a good model to design a lesson with.
I prefer Bloom’s Taxonomy Model. I like how there are different levels of assessment that increases in complexity. This allows for students to enter at their own level of understanding. Students can also show their understanding in different ways according to each level. Students can challenge themselves based on the level they choose. Finally, you can still monitor their understanding at each level. So the fact that Bloom’s provides differentiation and choice is why I prefer this model.
We have explored many different models throughout this course, there are a few models that I really like. One model that I like is the Triple E model. The Triple E model uses “Engagement, Enhancement, and Extension” to evaluate how effectively technology is used in a lesson. By using the Triple E model it would help keep the lesson focused on getting/keeping the students engaged, have the students actively using the technology and it bridges the gap between the classroom and the real world. By using this model, I would be able to increase the likelihood of the students retaining the skills taught in the lesson.
Another model that I like is Bloom’s Taxonomy. I like Bloom’s Taxonomy because it orders learning skills from lower-order thinking skills to higher-order thinking skills. By using this, I can create tiered lesson plans that would help my students critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Those skills are essential for 21st century students.
All the models have great benefits, but these two models are the ones I really like to implement in my pedagogy.