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 and RRU WriteAnswers, which allow you to ask your APA questions.

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to deepen your understanding of instructional design models by critically comparing at least two models and communicating your learning through multiple forms of scholarly communication. You will synthesize your understanding by creating a visual or organizational artifact, sharing it through an academic blog with a brief written reflection, and presenting a concise oral synthesis to your learning community. This assignment provides flexibility in how you demonstrate your learning while ensuring all students meet the same learning outcomes.

Deliverables

There are two deliverables for this assignment:

1. A comparative representation and an academic blog post, including a 300-word reflection.
2. A three-minute oral synthesis shared during our Week 2 Community Reflection on Zoom, followed by an opportunity for your peers to ask up to two follow-up questions for you to respond to.

If you are unable to attend the synchronous session, you are expected to post a recording of your three-minute synthesis on your blog so your peers can still benefit from your learning. You will also need to email your instructor a link to the community reflection blog recording.

Deliverable (1) Comparative representation and academic reflection (Blog)

You will investigate and compare at least two instructional design models and communicate your analysis through a visual or organizational artifact. Publish your comparative representation on your course blog and accompany it with a 300-word academic reflection (APA 7) that provides context for your analysis and learning. Consider the audience that would benefit most from your comparative analysis (e.g., educators, trainers, instructional designers, or educational leaders), and write accordingly.

Your reflection should situate your comparative representation and communicate the significance of your learning. You may wish to address questions such as:

• What instructional design models did you compare, and why did you choose them?
• What were the most significant similarities and differences you identified?
• What insights emerged through your comparison?
• How might these insights inform your future instructional design practice?
• Why did you select this format to communicate your analysis?

You have flexibility in how you represent your comparative analysis. Choose a format that best communicates your understanding and supports your intended message.

Provided are examples of possible formats. This list is not exhaustive, and you are welcome to propose an alternative format in consultation with the instructor: 

Format	To demonstrate
Comparison Matrix or Table	Detailed comparison across several criteria (e.g., assumptions, strengths, weaknesses, contexts)
Concept Map	Relationships between ID models and concepts
Decision Tree	Helping an instructional designer (or trainer, educator, other context) to determine when each model is most appropriate
Journey Map	Mapping the learner or designer experience through each model
Mind Map	Branching ideas and characteristics from a central theme
Timeline	Historical development and evolution of instructional design models
Venn Diagram	Similarities and differences

Deliverable (2) Community reflection (synchronous Zoom session in Week 2)

After posting on your blog, you will share your key insights during the Week 2 Community Reflection on Zoom, depending on scheduling. You will deliver a three-minute oral synthesis during our Week 2 Community Reflection on Zoom, followed by an opportunity for your peers to ask up to two follow-up questions for you to respond to.

During your oral synthesis, highlight the key insights from your comparison by:

• Explaining the key characteristics of at least two instructional design models.
• Identifying similarities and differences between two models
• Analyzing contexts in which each model is most effective
• Reflecting briefly on how these insights inform your instructional design practice.

Submission

Deliverable (1) Comparative Representation and Reflection [Blog post]

Submit a link to your published blog post and any addenda, including your AI use disclaimer, in the Assignment 1 Moodle Dropbox by the assignment deadline.

Deliverable (2) Community Reflection: Oral Synthesis [Zoom or Blog post]

You can complete this deliverable in one of two ways: (1) share your key insights during the Week 2 Community Reflection on Zoom, or (2) record a three-minute oral synthesis, post the recording to your blog, and email your instructor the link by the day of our Week 2 Zoom session.

Generative AI

Currently, generative AI invents scholars, institutional affiliations, and citations with considerable confidence. Remember, “the appearance of confidence is not proof of accuracy” (Dingle, 2026). If you use an AI when working on this assignment, you are bound by the RRU guidelines on AI use, which are built on the assumption that students will behave ethically and comply with the University Policy on Academic Integrity and Misconduct.

You are expected to submit an AI Use Declaration as an addendum to your submission in the Moodle Assignment 1 Dropbox. This declaration is separate from the assignment word count and should provide a transparent account of how AI contributed to both your process and your submitted work.

Briefly identify the AI tool(s) you used and describe how you used them. This might include uses such as brainstorming, exploring ideas, organizing or refining your comparison, supporting the development of your comparative representation, or editing for clarity, grammar, or accessibility. Explain how you reviewed, verified, adapted, or made decisions about AI-generated content and how you ensured that the analysis, interpretation, and final work remained your own intellectual contribution.

Conclude with a short reflection on your use of AI. You might consider: What did AI afford or make possible? What did it limit? How, if at all, did it influence your thinking or design decisions? What concerns or questions arose, and how did you respond?

If you did not use generative AI in completing the assignment, simply state this in your AI Use Declaration and then conclude with a short reflection on what influenced your decision not to use it.

Grading

This assignment will be marked according to the following rubric:

Criteria	Exemplary   (A+ to A)	Proficient  (A- to B+)	Developing  (B to B-)	Insufficient   (F)
Comparative representation and academic reflection	Creates a purposeful comparative representation that demonstrates thoughtful and insightful synthesis of at least two instructional design models, clearly explaining key characteristics, similarities, differences, and appropriate contexts. The accompanying academic blog effectively situates the representation, demonstrates scholarly writing, and uses APA 7 accurately.	Proficient (A- to B+) Creates a comparative representation that demonstrates thoughtful synthesis of at least two instructional design models, explaining key characteristics, similarities, differences, and contexts with appropriate accuracy. The accompanying blog introduces the representation, communicates ideas clearly, and demonstrates generally effective scholarly writing with only minor APA or writing issues.	Creates a comparative representation that demonstrates a limited or primarily descriptive comparison of instructional design models. Key characteristics, similarities, differences, or contexts require further development. The accompanying blog or representation lacks clarity, organization, or sufficient scholarly communication, and APA or writing conventions require further development.	Creates a comparative representation that does not demonstrate an adequate comparison or understanding of at least two instructional design models. Key characteristics, similarities, differences, or appropriate contexts are missing, substantially inaccurate, or insufficiently developed. The accompanying blog and representation do not demonstrate sufficient clarity, organization, scholarly communication, or appropriate use of APA 7 conventions.
Community Reflection: Oral synthesis	Delivers a confident, engaging three-minute synthesis that clearly communicates key insights and responds thoughtfully to peer questions, extending the discussion.	Delivers a clear synthesis of the comparative representation, reflects on learning and its application to instructional design practice, and responds appropriately to peer questions within the allotted time.	Presents a limited or unclear synthesis, demonstrates minimal reflection or application to practice, exceeds or falls short of the allotted time, or demonstrates limited engagement during discussion.	Does not adequately synthesize the comparative representation or communicate key learning. Reflection and application to design practice are absent or insufficiently developed, and the presentation demonstrates insufficient engagement with the oral synthesis and discussion requirements.