Skip to content

Assignment 2: Instructional Design (ID) Jigsaw (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 creating digital learning environments.

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 explored topics and themes.

Instructions

In this group jigsaw assignment, you will work in teams of four 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 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 three deliverables: (1) a team agreement(s) using the RRU Team Agreement Google Doc or a Fillable PDF., (2) a self-assessment of your group process, and (3) your synthesized resource list.

Assignment Expectations

Your team is required to submit three deliverables:

  • Team Agreement
  • Self-Assessment of the Group Process
  • Synthesized Resource List – A single document that includes:
    1. A synthesis/critique of each resource (approximately 150 words per critique)
    2. Alphabetized, APA-formatted references

The synthesis/critique should analyze the key findings from your research. Use the following guiding questions to structure your work:

  1. How do the resources collectively address your chosen context and lens?
  2. What themes, gaps, or critical insights emerged from your research?
  3. How do these resources inform your understanding of design in context?

We also encourage you to follow the rubric, which outlines how your work will be graded and ensures alignment with the assignment expectation.

Since your teams consist of four members, it would be reasonable for each team member to curate two resources, resulting in approximately eight resources per group. However, the assignment allows flexibility, and groups can include anywhere from six to ten resources, depending on what works best for your specific context.

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.

Submission

Your team will submit your team agreement, synthesis (resource list), and collaboratively graded team rubric in the Assignment 2 Moodle Dropbox.

Your team’s completed resource list will also be shared in the week 6 “jigsaw forum,” where each team member will share their respective key takeaways.

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

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 
Team Agreement Team developed a clear and detailed team agreement to manage their work and communication; all deadlines and deliverables were outlined and evidence of participation of a ll group members Team developed a comprehensive team agreement with minor adjustments to clarify work, communication, deadlines or deliverables and evidence of participation of a ll group members Team provided an agreement, but some aspects of the agreement were unclear or not fully followed or it is unclear how the participants all contributed Team agreement was unclear or not provided, or was insufficient to support a smooth project, team members may have reported issues related to completion of deliverables.  
Resource List Quality Resource list contains at least 8-10 high-quality, relevant, and diverse sources; all citations follow APA format with no errors Resource list contains 6-8 relevant sources; most citations follow APA format with minor or no errors Resource list contains fewer than 6 sources or lacks relevance and diversity; APA format has multiple errors Resource list is incomplete, lacks quality and relevance, and has significant APA formatting errors 
Critique & Synthesis Thorough critique and synthesis of the literature; all questions (e.g., learner needs, effectiveness, theories) are deeply explored Critique and synthesis are well-developed, addressing most questions clearly, though depth may vary in some areas Limited critique and synthesis; some questions are addressed, and/or analysis lacks depth or clarity Minimal critique or synthesis; key questions are not adequately explored, with weak or unclear analysis 
Real-Life Connections Clear, relevant connections made between the instructional design models and real-world applications; examples are insightful Relevant connections made between instructional design models and real-world applications; examples are provided but may lack depth Some connections made, but they lack relevance or depth in relation to real-world instructional design applications. Minimal or no real-life connections made; examples are unclear, irrelevant, or missing 

You will also self-assess your contribution and the contribution of each team member’s contribution using THIS TEAM RUBRIC, which you may have used previously in LRNT 521.