Assignment 1A: Instructional Design (ID) Jigsaw activity (Team)

Value: 15%

A gentle reminder that as with all LRNT courses, you are expected to incorporate APA standards for citations, formatting, and references and to back up your writing with evidence and appropriate academic literature as necessary. You are required to pay attention to grammar and clarity and to avoid colloquialisms. References are not included in the assignment word count. Also, don’t forget the numerous resources available to you as you build your competence and fluency with APA formatting and writing style. In particular, check out the RRU APA 7 formatting checklists as well as RRU WriteAnswers where you can ask your APA questions.

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to provide you with the opportunity to critically examine various design models and approaches used in the creation of digital learning environments.

Overview: “Jigsaw”

Reading to prepare for class discussions and forum dialogues can be challenging. Academic literature and content developed for graduate students are often difficult to read, especially within short periods, making it tricky to “discuss” the readings deeply and meaningfully. Multiple articles are typically assigned; subsequently, it can be hard to appreciate and understand the content as deeply as desired.

A jigsaw activity can help navigate these challenges by having teams of students read different but related articles, and engage with relevant multimodal content (podcasts, blogs, videos, social media etc.) to support a deeper understanding of the topics and themes being explored.

Instructions

In this group jigsaw assignment, you will work in small teams of 2 to 3 members to research and examine the literature and other relevant sources exploring Instructional Design (ID) models for your chosen context (for example, higher education, the military, hospitality etc.). It will be up to your team to reach a consensus on which context you choose to explore the ID models in.

You should work together as a team to determine the detailed processes and formulate team agreements that will lead to your group’s successful completion of this assignment (for example, planning meetings, determining deadlines and deliverables etc).

You will be asked to submit your team agreement(s), self-assessment of your group process, and your assignment.

Each team will review the literature from their selected context to gather 6-10 relevant resources and discuss, critique, and synthesize a developed knowledge of institutional design in your context to share with the rest of the class.

Some questions to consider as you engage in your shared critique:

How are the diverse needs of learners considered in these models, approaches, and processes?
How is the design success measured? Is it a reliable measurement?
Which learning theories are underpinning these approaches? Do the underpinning theories support effective design? Why? Why not?
Do the models work in all contexts? Or do some work better in some contexts than other contexts?

Your completed resource list should be alphabetized and structured in an APA formatted reference list; to be submitted with your academic synthesis.

This “Jigsaw” activity has been adapted from:

SERC Carleton (n.d.). Jigsaw examples. CC BY-SA 3.0. https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/jigsaws/examples.html

Format

Your team will submit your synthesis and accompanying references in both, (1) the Jigsaw forum for shared learning and optional feedback, and (2) the Jigsaw assignment dropbox for facilitator grading and feedback.

You are expected to adhere to APA standards for citations, formatting, and references and to support your critique with appropriate academic literature.

Submission

Submit a Word or pdf version of your synthesis and team self-assessment in the Assignment 1A: Instructional Design Models Jigsaw Activity (Team) Dropbox in Moodle. Additionally, post your teams synthesis and references to the Jigsaw forum.

Grading

This assignment will be marked according to the following rubric:

Assessment Criteria	Excellent (A+ to A)	Proficient (A- to B+)	Satisfactory (B to B-)	Unsatisfactory (F)
Adheres to Academic Standards, APA, spelling grammar	APA, spelling and Grammar are error-free	APA, spelling and grammar have less than 3 errors	APA, spelling and grammar have less than 5 errors	APA, spelling and grammar errors throughout the work
Writing structure, flow and use of literature or traditional knowledge	Writing is clear and effective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are thorough and well organized and literature or traditional knowledge is well synthesized.	Writing is clear and effective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are clear and organized and literature or traditional knowledge is synthesized.	Writing is somewhat unclear or ineffective for potential audiences, making it difficult to understand key messages. Resource summaries are unclear and literature or traditional knowledge or synthesis is lacking.	Writing is unclear and ineffective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are inadequate to understand key messages.
Shared Leadership \| Teamwork Competencies and Skills Framework A collaborative approach to teamwork that involves dynamic sharing and transference of roles, tasks and initiatives amongst team members who collectively take responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish team goals and outcomes	A+ = All expectations of the shared leadership competency are consistently surpassed. The team demonstrates mastery in their collaborative approach to teamwork. The sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is exemplary. Team members expertly take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to surpass goals and outcomes. A = All expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met, with 2 or 3 major instances of exceeding expectations. The team demonstrates an excellent collaborative approach to teamwork. The sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is excellent. Team members skilfully take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish and, some cases, surpass goals and outcomes.	A- = All expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met, with 2 or 3 minor instances of exceeding expectations. The team demonstrates a skilful collaborative approach to teamwork that includes very good sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. Team members collectively take responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish all goals and outcomes. B+ = Expectations of the shared leadership competency have been fully met. The team demonstrates a good collaborative approach to teamwork. Appropriate sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is evident. Team members generally take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes.	B = Basic expectations of the shared leadership competency have been mostly met, with 2 or 3 minor instances of not doing so. The team’s collaborative approach to teamwork is acceptable. There is an acceptable level of sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. There is some collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes. B- = basic expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met with more than 3 minor instances of not doing so. The team’s collaborative approach to teamwork is still developing and may include some sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. There is limited and/or inconsistent collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes.	The expectations of the shared leadership competency have not been met. The team may meet some of the criteria for competency, but evidence of 2 or 3 of the following is absent: a collaborative approach to teamwork; sharing and/or transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives; collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals.
Evaluation and Feedback	The critique demonstrates an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the group’s references The insights and recommendations provided are clearly aligned with the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials. Feedback is thorough, and insightful and demonstrates critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates a sufficient analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations provided are mostly aligned with the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials. Feedback is present and supports evidence of critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates basic analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations are somewhat aligned to some theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the module materials. Feedback is partially present but superficially demonstrates limited evidence of critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates a limited analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations provided are not aligned to the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the module materials. Feedback is inadequate to demonstrate critical thinking and connected learning.

You will also self-assess your contribution and the contribution of each team member’s contribution using this team rubric.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f-F0yFo6G77EvfaUaXF2AxGG0idYp5pEs5BnAaseRnY/edit?usp=sharing

Value: 15%

A gentle reminder that as with all LRNT courses, you are expected to incorporate APA standards for citations, formatting, and references and to back up your writing with evidence and appropriate academic literature as necessary. You are required to pay attention to grammar and clarity and to avoid colloquialisms. References are not included in the assignment word count. Also, don’t forget the numerous resources available to you as you build your competence and fluency with APA formatting and writing style. In particular, check out the RRU APA 7 formatting checklists as well as RRU WriteAnswers where you can ask your APA questions.

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to provide you with the opportunity to critically examine various design models and approaches used in the creation of digital learning environments.

Overview: “Jigsaw”

Reading to prepare for class discussions and forum dialogues can be challenging. Academic literature and content developed for graduate students are often difficult to read, especially within short periods, making it tricky to “discuss” the readings deeply and meaningfully. Multiple articles are typically assigned; subsequently, it can be hard to appreciate and understand the content as deeply as desired.

A jigsaw activity can help navigate these challenges by having teams of students read different but related articles, and engage with relevant multimodal content (podcasts, blogs, videos, social media etc.) to support a deeper understanding of the topics and themes being explored.

Instructions

In this group jigsaw assignment, you will work in small teams of 2 to 3 members to research and examine the literature and other relevant sources exploring Instructional Design (ID) models for your chosen context (for example, higher education, the military, hospitality etc.). It will be up to your team to reach a consensus on which context you choose to explore the ID models in.

You should work together as a team to determine the detailed processes and formulate team agreements that will lead to your group’s successful completion of this assignment (for example, planning meetings, determining deadlines and deliverables etc).

You will be asked to submit your team agreement(s), self-assessment of your group process, and your assignment.

Each team will review the literature from their selected context to gather 6-10 relevant resources and discuss, critique, and synthesize a developed knowledge of institutional design in your context to share with the rest of the class.

Some questions to consider as you engage in your shared critique:

How are the diverse needs of learners considered in these models, approaches, and processes?
How is the design success measured? Is it a reliable measurement?
Which learning theories are underpinning these approaches? Do the underpinning theories support effective design? Why? Why not?
Do the models work in all contexts? Or do some work better in some contexts than other contexts?

Your completed resource list should be alphabetized and structured in an APA formatted reference list; to be submitted with your academic synthesis.

This “Jigsaw” activity has been adapted from:

SERC Carleton (n.d.). Jigsaw examples. CC BY-SA 3.0. https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/jigsaws/examples.html

Format

Your team will submit your synthesis and accompanying references in both, (1) the Jigsaw forum for shared learning and optional feedback, and (2) the Jigsaw assignment dropbox for facilitator grading and feedback.

You are expected to adhere to APA standards for citations, formatting, and references and to support your critique with appropriate academic literature.

Submission

Submit a Word or pdf version of your synthesis and team self-assessment in the Assignment 1A: Instructional Design Models Jigsaw Activity (Team) Dropbox in Moodle. Additionally, post your teams synthesis and references to the Jigsaw forum.

Grading

This assignment will be marked according to the following rubric:

Assessment Criteria	Excellent (A+ to A)	Proficient (A- to B+)	Satisfactory (B to B-)	Unsatisfactory (F)
Adheres to Academic Standards, APA, spelling grammar	APA, spelling and Grammar are error-free	APA, spelling and grammar have less than 3 errors	APA, spelling and grammar have less than 5 errors	APA, spelling and grammar errors throughout the work
Writing structure, flow and use of literature or traditional knowledge	Writing is clear and effective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are thorough and well organized and literature or traditional knowledge is well synthesized.	Writing is clear and effective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are clear and organized and literature or traditional knowledge is synthesized.	Writing is somewhat unclear or ineffective for potential audiences, making it difficult to understand key messages. Resource summaries are unclear and literature or traditional knowledge or synthesis is lacking.	Writing is unclear and ineffective for potential audiences. Resource summaries are inadequate to understand key messages.
Shared Leadership \| Teamwork Competencies and Skills Framework A collaborative approach to teamwork that involves dynamic sharing and transference of roles, tasks and initiatives amongst team members who collectively take responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish team goals and outcomes	A+ = All expectations of the shared leadership competency are consistently surpassed. The team demonstrates mastery in their collaborative approach to teamwork. The sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is exemplary. Team members expertly take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to surpass goals and outcomes. A = All expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met, with 2 or 3 major instances of exceeding expectations. The team demonstrates an excellent collaborative approach to teamwork. The sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is excellent. Team members skilfully take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish and, some cases, surpass goals and outcomes.	A- = All expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met, with 2 or 3 minor instances of exceeding expectations. The team demonstrates a skilful collaborative approach to teamwork that includes very good sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. Team members collectively take responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish all goals and outcomes. B+ = Expectations of the shared leadership competency have been fully met. The team demonstrates a good collaborative approach to teamwork. Appropriate sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives is evident. Team members generally take collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes.	B = Basic expectations of the shared leadership competency have been mostly met, with 2 or 3 minor instances of not doing so. The team’s collaborative approach to teamwork is acceptable. There is an acceptable level of sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. There is some collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes. B- = basic expectations of the shared leadership competency have been met with more than 3 minor instances of not doing so. The team’s collaborative approach to teamwork is still developing and may include some sharing and transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives. There is limited and/or inconsistent collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals and outcomes.	The expectations of the shared leadership competency have not been met. The team may meet some of the criteria for competency, but evidence of 2 or 3 of the following is absent: a collaborative approach to teamwork; sharing and/or transference of roles, tasks, and initiatives; collective responsibility for leading and following each other to accomplish goals.
Evaluation and Feedback	The critique demonstrates an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the group’s references The insights and recommendations provided are clearly aligned with the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials. Feedback is thorough, and insightful and demonstrates critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates a sufficient analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations provided are mostly aligned with the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials. Feedback is present and supports evidence of critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates basic analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations are somewhat aligned to some theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the module materials. Feedback is partially present but superficially demonstrates limited evidence of critical thinking and connected learning.	The critique demonstrates a limited analysis and evaluation of the group’s references. The insights and recommendations provided are not aligned to the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the module materials. Feedback is inadequate to demonstrate critical thinking and connected learning.