BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Instructional Design Project:

Best Practices for A Story of Units:
A curricula designed for the common core state standards in mathematics
Nancy Read
San Francisco State University
Spring, 2014

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Author Note
This paper was written for Instructional Systems Design, ITEC 801, taught by Dr. Zahira
Merchant, San Francisco State University, Graduate College of Education, Instructional
Technologies Department.
Abstract
The Common Core State Standards for mathematics (CCSSM) are to be fully adopted by states
in the 2014-2015 school year. To that end, Berkeley Unified School District chose to pilot the
curriculum developed by EngageNY, the New York State Department of Education, called A
Story of Units in grades K-5. While some teachers are successfully delivering instruction to their
students, many are struggling with the density of the modules and the lack of printed materials.
To address this performance gap, the school district is planning on delivering professional
development to all K-5 teachers and principals. This paper documents my use of the Dick, Carey,
& Carey systematic approach to address the instructional need of the school district and fulfil its
goal to make all teachers successful and satisfied with delivering the new curriculum.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Instructional Design Project:
Best Practices for A Story of Units
Background
Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) is piloting the mathematics curriculum A Story
of Units (ASOU), a pre-K through 5th grade math curriculum developed by Common Core, Inc.
(CCI) for EngageNY, the New York State Department of Education. According Common Core,
Inc. (2014), the ASOU curriculum is the only curriculum that has been designed from the ground
up to align with the Common Core State Standards for mathematics (CCSSM), which are to be
fully adopted by states in the 2014-2015 school year. As with many new curricula, there is an
extensive learning curve. Not only are teachers being asked to learn the new CCSSM, but also
the new curriculum and how to teach math at a deeper level. The ASOU curriculum is
particularly difficult due to the density of the modules and the lack of printed materials. All
materials are in digital format and currently there are no guidelines or supports for differentiating
materials for English language learners and students with special needs (C. Faulkner, personal
communication, February 10, 2014).
This project will attempt to address teachers needs in delivering the required instruction
through instructional development. The instructional development and design will include
identifying necessary supports to ensure full implementation at each school site. It will also
include the development of an instructional set of videos for each grade level, K-5, to help
teachers visualize how to successfully implement the required curriculum in the expected time,
including techniques and strategies for lesson development and delivery.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Front End Analysis
This paper utilizes the Dick, Carey, & Carey systematic instructional design framework
to define a series of interrelated parts that will achieve the instructional goal. Defining a clear
instructional goal is the foremost important step, otherwise and instruction is likely to be
developed that does not meet the needs of the learner and therefore the agency (2009). The front
end analysis outlined below, attempts to do just that; properly define a clear instructional goal so
that instruction will be developed that will meet the agencys need. The steps to that end are as
follows:

Performance analysis: defines the problem and determine the instructional need
Needs Assessment: determines the scope of the problem and the analysis instruments

used to inform the instructional design

Learner analysis: determines the learner skill sets, and learning outcomes
Context analysis: understanding the environments that the learners will be both acquiring

and using their new skills

Task analysis: defines the performance outcomes from the instructional goal statement

Performance Analysis
Currently, the ASOU curriculum has been accepted as successful by a majority of
teachers and administrators in the first term; students appear to be learning deep math at an
accelerated pace. Therefore the administration is keenly interested in a full adoption. While there
is satisfaction in student progress, a recent exit survey following a professional development
(PD) day revealed that approximately 30% of teachers are dissatisfied with certain aspects of the
ASOU curriculum and are requesting a different path to comply with the CCSSM. The majority
of the remaining teachers surveyed were willing to continue with the curriculum but didnt feel
adequately prepared, or felt unduly burdened (M. Sinclair, personal communication, January 25,
2014).

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

It is the desired state of the administration that all (100%) teachers are satisfied and
comfortable with the ASOU curriculum; they can easily understand the standards, interpret the
lesson material and deliver instruction within the proscribed amount of time, without an undue
amount of preparation time (C. Faulkner, personal communication, February 10, 2014).
Since there is a gap between the desired and current state of teacher satisfaction and
comfort in delivering the ASOU curriculum, further intervention, including instruction, is
necessary from the district to ensure that the districts goal of complying with the upcoming
common core implementation deadline.
Needs Assessment
In January of 2014, all elementary teachers participated in a professional development
(PD) day, half of the day being devoted to the ASOU curriculum. Bill Davidson, one of the
ASOU writers was brought in to train teachers on various aspects of the curriculum. At the end
of the day, teachers were asked to complete a survey. The professional development staff was
startled to discover that approximately 30% of teachers were so dissatisfied with the ASOU
curriculum that they wanted a replacement for the CCSSM adoption. The majority of the other
teachers felt that they still did not possess the tools or competencies to successfully deliver the
ASOU curriculum. The largest complaints were noted as follows:

Difficulty of preparation and density of the lessons

Amount of prep time required for each module

Lack of support materials

(M. Sinclair, personal communication, February 10, 2014).

Currently there is not another cohesive math curriculum tied to the CCSSM. Therefore, it is
imperative that there is universal acceptance of the ASOU curriculum. The danger of non-

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

acceptance is creating conflict among staff, which creates challenges for administration.
Furthermore, inconsistent implementation across classrooms leads to the absence of the
foundational knowledge required for students to succeed in successive years.
There are many opportunities to address this gap through training and instruction. BUSD
has math teacher-leaders at each elementary school as well as district-wide math coaches to help
with the implementation and transition to CCSSM. Each school year teachers receive many
opportunities for professional development in the subject they choose including:

Two full days of district-led PD

Five two-hour sessions of district-led PD
Three hours per month of site-based collaboration time
In-class support from coaches as requested

Teachers are asking for more. The feedback from teachers that are struggling or dissatisfied
most, is that it would be helpful to observe examples of exemplary instruction for their grade
level. They would also like to hear lesson development strategies from teachers that are
successfully implementing the curriculum (C. Faulkner, personal communication, February 10,
2014).
Direct teacher observations would reduce instructional time and would be logistically
unfeasible for the school sites, but video instruction could serve its place. For this instruction,
highly skilled teachers at each grade level throughout the district will be filmed delivering
instruction for a complete module of the ASOU curriculum to their class. This instruction will be
enhanced by including interviews of the teacher providing the lesson about such things as
preparation and differentiation instructional strategies. While videos showing entire 60 minute
lessons at each grade level might be effective for some learners, there may be more effective
ways to individualize video instruction. Instead of an entire video, modularizing the components
of the lesson may be more effective. For instance lesson planning, math instruction, warm-up

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

techniques, or concept development strategies could target support where it is needed so that
learner time and results are maximized.
Much time has been invested in professional development without eliminating the gap
between the existing and desired state. Along with producing video instruction, a deeper analysis
is warranted to better assess the dissatisfaction of the teachers. This analysis will help to
determine the best strategies to reach the organizational goal of implementing a math curriculum
tied to the new Common Core Standards that is both accepted and successfully delivered.
I will use the results of two methods of analysis to make suggestions to close the gap and
fulfill the districts goals. The first instrument will be interviewing the Director of Curriculum
and Instruction (Christina Faulkner) and the Professional Development Coordinator (Michelle
Sinclair) to clarify the district goals, determine available resources, and detail the supports that
have already been delivered to teachers. Secondly, teachers will be surveyed about their
competence and commitment. Questions will be asked involving their math knowledge,
preparation for the Common Core Standards, supports already delivered, and specifics about
their challenges. The survey will also hope to determine their commitment to change in adopting
the new curriculum. For example, teachers that have the competence but not the commitment
will need a different support structure than the other way around (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2009).
With this data, I will be better equipped to define the performance gaps, determine which can
be solved with video instruction and which are due to other factors such as organizational climate
or structure. In doing so, I will be well-equipped to work with the administration to determine,
design, and deliver the most effective and efficient instruction and supports that will enable all
teachers to be successful in implementing the ASOU math adoption.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Instructional Goal Statement
All BUSD elementary teachers will demonstrate competency (skills, tools, and
knowledge) in implementing the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSSM)
through A Story of Units (ASOU) curriculum in the classroom, including lesson development for
differentiated instruction and proper pacing within the allotted time during the school day.
Learner Analysis
Entry Skills, prior knowledge
Berkeley Unified School District is well-funded and desirable place to work. For this
reason there are both highly skilled new and veteran teachers. All K-6 teachers possess at
minimum a multi-subject credential from the State of California (CA), all secondary math
teachers 7-12 possess at minimum a CA teaching credential in the designated subject of
mathematics. While all teachers have obtained a BA or BS degree, many teachers have obtained
Masters and Doctorate degrees. Additionally, in order to clear their teaching credential, teachers
must complete the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) Program. Finally, all
teachers in BUSD receive extensive professional development opportunities before and during
the school year in the area that the teacher and/or administration deems most needed.
All BUSD elementary teachers have the training and experience for general classroom
instruction. Only a few however have a strong grasp of the new math curriculum, the new
CCSSM, and how they are tied together. Further information regarding prior knowledge and
entry skills will be learned after a survey is conducted as part of the needs assessment.
Attitudes toward Content and Potential Delivery System
Most teachers are motivated to be the best educators that they can be. The majority are
excepting of or enthusiastic about the ASOU curriculum. With that said, the new standards and

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

curriculum require teachers to teach math at a very deep level and in a way other than they were
educated themselves when young or later in their teacher training. This may cause some teachers
to react negatively to the change. The curriculum is in a pilot phase and requiring a lot of
additional work of the teachers. Some teachers may question the required time investment if the
curriculum is not fully adopted. Additionally, veteran teachers may not want to admit that they
do not possess the mathematics knowledge or classroom management skills necessary to
effectively deliver the curriculum. On the positive side, teachers who doubt that a lesson can be
delivered in a class period have asked for a demonstration. They are very open to in-class
modeling or video presentation that demonstrates best practices in order to be successful.
Academic Motivation
Academic motivation is perhaps the most important factor in successful instruction
(Dick, et al., p. 93). Therefore properly designing the teacher questionnaire in the front end
analysis will be vital. If learners do not see the instruction as relevant, if they do not have the
confidence that they will be successful, or if the instruction is not satisfying, the instruction is
bound to fail (Dick, et al., 2009). My goal will be to show how the instruction is relevant to their
work in understanding and implementing the CCSSM so their students are successful. I will want
to instill confidence that they can all teach math like champions, and that they will be very
satisfied having done so.
Educational and Ability Levels / General Learning Preferences / Attitudes toward
Organization
As stated previously, teachers in Berkeley Unified receive many types of professional
development. They participate in district-wide training, school site collaboration, conferences,

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

and receive support documents and coaching as needed. As a group, they are used to and respond
favorably to a wide variety of support delivery methods.
Berkeley Unified seems to lack in the area of technology, both in training and in the
classroom. Providing more technical supports (like video instruction) will not only provide the
teachers with another form of instruction, but may help motivate its use in the classroom. Having
the district embrace a technology-based delivery method for instruction may help teachers feel
better supported in their use of technology in instruction. These questions will be further
explored in the needs analysis.
Context Analysis
Performance Context
Teachers that are successful at implementing the ASOU curriculum will be well
supported by their managers, both at their school site and at the district level. If all teachers are
successful they will do a better job planning and collaborating with peers at their school site and
district wide. Successful lesson delivery district-wide leads to consistent curriculum
implementation across classrooms ensuring students will receive the foundational knowledge
required to succeed. Successful teachers will create a strong collaborative culture and help other
teachers succeed. Teachers such as these have already been elevated to coaches and teacher
leaders in the district.
The skills developed in the training will ideally be used in the classroom for both planning
and lesson delivery. Teachers will need grade level materials such as workbooks, manipulatives,
and dry-erase boards to support instruction. Document cameras are used extensively in the
classrooms for demonstration and concept development, especially at the older grades.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

As stated previously, there are a small percentage of classroom teachers, perhaps one or
two per school site that are very proficient with the ASOU curriculum delivery. Beginning with
the 2014-15 school year there will be a professional development coach assigned to each school
site that is available for curriculum support both in lesson development and modeling. As a part
of the support provided, teachers meet for three hours per month for planning and collaboration
with grade level colleagues at their school site.
Learning Context
District-led professional development typically happens at a school site. All of the tools
and materials that would be used in the classroom to deliver the lesson are present. Video
instruction provides a visual example of the performance context and teachers have the
opportunity to role-play outputs of lesson planning such as sprints (warm-ups) and content
delivery strategies. It is imperative to the success of the learner that they possess the required
verbal skills prior to participation: being able to name the CCSSM standards and to describe their
link to the ASOU curriculum. If they do not, the video instruction, role-play and coaching will be
out of context.
Learning Site Constraints Affective Design and Delivery
Even though the performance and learning context are similar in that they both take place
in a classroom, it may not be the actual learners work site, classroom set up and/or challenges.
Although teachers may perform well in the training, they may still find it difficult to transfer that
knowledge to their classroom. The need for follow-up in-class coaching, collaborative planning
or other supports such as classroom management skills may be necessary.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Analysis Instrument
The results from in-depth interviews with the Director of Curriculum and Instruction and
professional development staff will inform the questions on a teacher survey that will be given to
all teachers and principals for grades K-5, to determine competence in and commitment to the
ASOU curriculum. The survey will be sent to all elementary teachers via email with a link to a
Google form. See Appendix A for a sample survey instrument.
Task Analysis Process
Analysis Strategy and Rational
The problem for my learners is not creating math lessons, rather it is taking all of the
lesson materials provided by the curriculum, analyzing how they apply to the standards, and
deciding how to best deliver instruction to a particular group of students. According to Dick, et
al., (2009) the analysis required by the learner in my instructional goal puts it into the cognitive
domain of learning as defined by Bloom. Gagns work would define this problem as welldefined requiring intellectual skills (Dick, et al., 2009) because it asks the learner to learn
concepts, follow rules, and solve problems (Dick, et al., 2009 p. 49).
In the delivery of instruction, just as in designing instruction, one must take a number of
sequential steps to be successful, especially with new standards and a radically new curriculum.
Therefore, I have taken a step-by-step procedural approach to analyzing the instructional goal,
steps, and sub-steps the learner will take to demonstrate competency in implementing the ASOU
curriculum. While there are some instances of a hierarchical approach to my analysis, where the
learner must master one skill before moving to the next, most of the sub-steps are procedural as
each requires a similar level of skill to be accomplished.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Goal Analysis Process
Determining how to break down the goal into steps seemed fairly straightforward
to me. Since this is a new curriculum and standards, I felt that teachers would have to re-think
how they approach mathematics instruction by analyzing how the curriculum teaches the new
standards. Following steps seemed straight forward enough: create the lesson, and deliver it. Not
being a teacher, I ran my model past my subject matter expert who suggested adding analyze
student learning following lesson delivery as it is an important step in the Plan-Teach-ReflectApply approach to teaching. These revised four steps and their sub-steps are outlined in detail
below. See Appendix B for a diagram outline.
Step 1: Analyze how ASOU teaches the CCSSM
Many of the teachers at the school district, both veteran and new, are struggling with
delivering the ASOU curriculum in their classroom and keeping up with the pacing guidelines.
Before the start of the school year teachers are provided information about the new CCSSM and
complete ASOU curriculum for their grade level.
Step 1 contains five main sequential sub-steps, all of which take place outside the
classroom using simulations that are intended to give the teacher the support needed to teach
their students. First, the learner must attend a district-led professional development training day
where they are expected to come equipped with the ability to name the CCSSM and describe
how they are linked to the new curriculum. Second, teachers will engage in video instruction
where they will be required to use a paper-based tool to make notes on what they observe. Third,
teachers will be asked to determine a lesson delivery strategy based on their prior professional
knowledge, materials received, and what they learned from the video instruction. Fourth,

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

teachers will generate a sample lesson plan and finally, they will participate in a role play
scenario where they can try various components of their plan.
Step 2: Create Lesson Plan
Once teachers have received instruction, they are expected to be able to create a lesson
plan using the new curriculum. This step involves three main sequential steps, two of which have
additional procedural steps connected to them. The first step is analyze the required lesson
module. While the ASOU curriculum is very detailed on what concepts must be mastered with
each module, there are a variety of suggested paths to get there. Therefore, there are three substeps to this step that guide the teacher in determining the parts of the lesson to deliver to support
the standards being taught and guided by students knowledge gaps from prior lessons. The
second step invites the teacher to review video instruction for any strategy that they may need
support with: classroom management, sprints, concept development, etc. The third step is to
complete the district-provided lesson-planning tool that guides the teacher through three substeps helping them stay on track during lesson delivery.
Step 3: Deliver Lesson
With all of the support, pre-classroom analysis and planning, the third main step is fairly
straightforward and involves three sequential sub-steps. These steps are good indicators for
assessment of the teachers success in reaching the ultimate goal. They are: follow the lesson
plan developed with the paper-based tool, provide differentiated instruction, and deliver lesson
components within the proscribed time allotted and according to the districts pacing guidelines.
Step 4: Analyze Student Learning
I originally had the step analyze student learning as a main step of the lesson delivery
step, but it was suggested by my subject matter expert to create a separate step due to its import

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

in teaching. This step has only one sub-step, deliver student assessment. This step could be
performed by the teacher at multiple times during the instruction, but part of the ASOU
curriculum design is the use of an exit ticket, a formal check of student knowledge of the lesson
delivered that day. The culminating part of step four is a decision by the teacher; were their
instructional objectives met. If the answer is yes, the instruction is over for that lesson. If the
answer is no, the teacher must return to sub-step 2.3.2 to determine different strategies for
instruction and reassess student learning.
Instructional Road Map for Best Practices for A Story of Units
The ultimate purpose of this instructional design is to help teachers visualize how to
successfully implement the required curriculum in the expected allocated classroom time, as well
as techniques and strategies for lesson development and delivery. This instructional roadmap, or
design, describes the instruction teachers will receive to reach that goal.
Instructional Objectives
Instructional objectives have three parts: what the learner will be able to do when the
instruction is complete (behavior), the conditions that the learner will be working under or with,
and the criteria that will be used to evaluate the learners performance. The instructional
objectives, unlike the performance context of the instructional goal, reflect the context of the
learning environment (Dick et al., 2009). Table 1.0 outlines the terminal objective restated to
reflect the learning environment as well as objectives for step 1 and the related subordinate steps
as detailed in the instructional analysis chart. I chose step one to be detailed because it is the step
where the learners acquire the foundational instruction to achieve the ultimate instructional goal.
Terminal Objective and Step 1 Analysis
Terminal Objective

Given professional development and all necessary

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

documentation, all BUSD elementary teachers will be able to
deliver math instruction to their students each instructional day.
Teachers develop the lesson plan with the district tool and the
ASOU curriculum, keep instructional pace according to
curricular guidelines, assess student learning after each lesson,
and reteach by differentiating instruction as needed.
1.0 Analyze how ASOU
Given the necessary tools and instruction during a professional
teaches the CCSSM
development training in a school site classroom, teachers
develop a lesson plan. The lesson plan should use the district
tool and ASOU curriculum tied to the chosen standard.
1.1 Attend district
Given a sample grade appropriate lesson, name the associated
professional development
standards aligned to that lesson. Learner should be able to name
day
the highest level of the standard.
1.2 Receive video
Given a blank lesson planning tool, complete the tool. Learner
instruction
should be able to fill in the template tool by analyzing the lesson
demonstrated in the video instruction.
1.3 Determine lesson
Given a grade appropriate scenario and ASOU lesson, determine
delivery strategy
strategy for instruction. Learners strategy must include
analyzing deficits in the scenario and strategies for re-teaching
imbedded in the next lesson.
1.4 Generate Sample
Using the lesson delivery strategy, a grade appropriate standard,
Lesson
and given all relevant materials, generate sample lesson plan.
Learner must complete the lesson template tool and lesson must
align with the corresponding ASOU lesson for the chosen
standard.
1.5 Participate in grade
Using the developed sample lesson plan, learner will instruct a
level role play
group of peers. Learner will use the exit ticket for peer
comments and feedback, re-work the lesson planning tool, and
de-brief with a math coach or trainer as appropriate.
Table1.0 Details the terminal objective, main step 1and related subordinate steps of the planned
instruction
Instructional Sequencing Strategy
I will follow my instructional diagram in sequencing my instruction in the traditional
bottom-up, left to right fashion. Since one main step must be complete before moving on to the
next, the instruction will start from the lowest point in the first step moving up through the
hierarchy and/or to the right through the procedure until all subordinate skills are taught before
moving on to the next step (Dick et al., 2009).

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Clustering of the instruction also follows the instructional analysis and is dependent on
the delivery system. Step 1 (Analyze how ASOU teaches the CCSSM) will be delivered during
an all-day district-led workshop, whereas the following three steps will be self-paced and sitebased at a later time. The following table illustrates the sequence and cluster:
Cluster
1
2
3

Instructional Goal Step

Main step 1: Analyze how ASOU teaches the
CCSSM
Main step 2: Create Lesson Plan
Main step 3: A Create Lesson Plan
Main step 4: Analyze student learning
Terminal Objective

Time
1 day
As needed
1 hour collaboration meeting

Instructional Strategy & Activities

In order to support the most effective process of learning, my instructional strategy will
utilize Gagns nine Conditions of Learning, following the five components summarized by Dick
et al., (2009). The following sections detail how my instruction fits within these components and
the rational thereof.
Pre-instructional Activities: Motivation: Ice-breaker activities are a very common
format for opening up a large training or meeting at the school district. Using this format will
make the learners comfortable for the tasks ahead. The intention of the ice-breaker in this
instruction is to motivate the learners by following John Kellers ARCS model. The ice-breaker
itself acts to gain the attention of the learner. Learners will be grouped at tables according to the
grade level they teach. Each grade will be tasked with developing an example of how they use
ruler as a learning aid in their math instruction. The examples will be presented orally and
visually in grade-level sequence. Learners will then be presented with a short video aimed at
providing relevance to the instruction. The video will show the knowledge students gain each
year builds into something very deep. For instance how being able to describe what the number

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

100 means in first grade is linked to dividing fractions in fifth. All teachers using the same
learning aid in the example and understanding how their small part of instruction leads to a
greater student understanding, leads learners to build confidence that they will be able to master
the material to enable their students to succeed.
Objectives: After the ice-breaker exercise a lead math teacher, familiar with the CCSSM
and ASOU curriculum, will inform the learners of the objectives of the days instruction. This is
important so the learner will understand what to focus on during the instruction to be successful.
The lead teacher will start with a brief story that illustrates their own experience learning the
curriculum, and how the instruction of the day and the days ahead will allow them to be
successful in their classrooms. Having a peer introduce the material lends credibility to the
overall instruction. It also demonstrates a gain in status for those that can master it. Both lead to
greater satisfaction on the part of the learner that they too can master the material and be a leader
if they choose to.
Entry Skills: Before beginning the formal instruction, it important to remind the learners
of the essential skills that they will need to be successful (Dick et al., 2009). In this case, learners
must be well informed of the CCSSM and ASOU curriculum for their grade level. In order to
accomplish this, there will be a sequence the standards game at each table. Learners will be
given 20 minutes to play. The high score at each table will win a prize. The purpose of this game
is to promote active recall so that the learner can successfully link the new information with what
they already know, making future recall more successful (Dick et al., 2009).
Although there will be a pre-instructional activity testing entry skills, it is important to
link to this prior knowledge throughout the instruction. Having the instructor continue to link the

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

prior knowledge to the new skills being developed, reduces the cognitive load thereby helping
the learner better retain the new content (Dick et al., 2009).
Content Presentation and Learning Guidance
As mentioned previously, the first cluster will be presented in a one-day district-led
professional development training and will follow the up-down, left-right structure outlined in
my instructional analysis. During each sub-step of the first cluster, learners will be reminded how
prior knowledge is linked to the new skill being introduced. This prior knowledge will, as
previously stated, include the prerequisite skills of knowing the standards and curriculum but
will also include prior lesson delivery method knowledge.
Through each stage, learners will be shown instructional delivery examples they are
familiar with and then examples that are blended with the new curriculum and standards, and
finally the new approach. The instruction is designed to be primarily instructor-facilitated and
will be blended in format to include instructor presentation, video instruction, and instructional
aids in the form of a lesson planning template tool and sample manipulative classroom aids, as
well as the opportunity for students to role play with their peers with their newly acquired
knowledge. This blended approach is designed to enhance the learners experience, hold their
attention, and ultimately the transfer of knowledge to the performance context.
The next clusters of instruction are self-paced and performance context-based. The
learner acts independently, or with instructional support from a math coach. Here the learner
attempts to act in the performance context with the skills and knowledge acquired in the learning
context during the first cluster of instruction. Instruction available to the learner at this point is in
the form of videos. Videos are developed to align with the districts lesson planning tool so the
learner can select a video example for whatever area they need further instruction with. Videos

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

are also available to show examples of entire lesson at each grade level to demonstrate proper
pacing and classroom management techniques.
Learner Participation
According to Dick et al., (2009), one of the most powerful components in the learning
process is practice with feedback (p, 175). For this reason there are many opportunities for
practice embedded in the instruction. Pre-instructional activities allow the learner to review the
entry skill requirements through game-play with peers. In the first cluster of instruction, the
learners practice analyzing how the curriculum teaches the standards by practicing lesson
planning with the district tool. Learners are then invited to role play their lesson with their peers,
try-out their new skill in the learning context, and obtain feedback from a coach. The role-play is
perhaps the most important event because it approximates the performance context enabling the
optimum conditions for transfer (Dick et al., 2009). The remaining steps toward the instructional
goal involve practicing their newly acquired skills in the performance context. There they are
supported by math coaches, video instruction, and weekly collaboration meetings where they can
explore or discuss the areas that they are succeeding or struggling in.
Assessment
During the first instructional cluster, assessment will be embedded in the
instruction. The pre-instructional activity game is designed to test the depth of the learners
knowledge of the prior knowledge the learners possess about the CCSSM and the ASOU
curriculum. Other assessments occur as the instruction continues in the form of how well the
learners are analyzing the material and applying it to the lesson planning tool and how effective
their sample lesson is during role play. Self-assessment occurs in the performance context during
the subsequent clusters. How much more instruction or coaching is required by the learner, and

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

how well the students are performing on the exit-ticket; are there many instances of redesign
after lesson delivery for example. Ultimately, the assessment will be whether the learner can
perform the instructional goal. This can be assessed with their site-based administrator by
checking the pacing of the lesson and whether they are following the proscribed curriculum.
Follow-Through Activities
Since the terminal objective has to do with delivering instruction, there are many
activities and tools in the performance context to help the learner meet their instructional goal.
The required lessons are provided and the lesson planning tool is available to guide the learner
through the process of analyzing the lesson and translating into an actionable plan. Since the
learning and performance context are closely aligned, the transfer of learning should be almost
seamless.
Instructional Media and Delivery Methods
Classroom teaching requires a blended approach for the most effective delivery of
instruction. Instructing teachers, therefore, would require using a similar approach. The first
cluster of instruction, by far the longest, utilizes several approaches. For instance, instructional
media is paper-based in the form of lesson plans and the lesson planning tool and electronic in
the form of video instruction delivered to provide examples of best practices. Different methods
of delivering this media are also used; instructor-led large group instruction as well as smallgroup role-play. Subsequent clusters are also varied. They utilize the same media, but are selfpaced and supported by mentors and video instruction.
Evaluation Plan
The ultimate purpose of this instructional design is to help teachers visualize how to
successfully implement the required Story of Units (ASOU) curriculum in the expected allocated

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

classroom time, as well as cultivate techniques and strategies for lesson development and
delivery. The effectiveness of the proposed ASOU teacher training will be evaluated at several
stages from the design process through implementation with a variety of formative and
summative evaluation methods. Prior to beginning the formative evaluations, the draft
instructional materials will be reviewed by the Subject Matter Expert (SME), in this case the
Director of Curriculum and Instruction, to ensure that it is accurate and up-to-date and that there
are no glaring omissions or errors to address. This person is not only a content area expert, but is
very familiar with the target population, an important distinction in order to gauge how the
instruction will ultimately transfer to the performance context (Dick et al., 2009). Reports will be
generated after each evaluation phase in order to evaluate results and revise materials as needed.
This evaluation plan is focused on the evaluation materials developed in Step 1 of my
instructional strategy: Analyze how the ASOU curriculum teaches the CCSSM and how it
applies to the terminal objective of being able to deliver math instruction to their students with
the curriculum, according to the standards and pacing guidelines, each instructional day.
Formative Evaluation
Formative evaluations will be used to determine the effectiveness of the draft materials
prior to launching the instruction for the target group. By targeting specific areas and aspects of
the instruction to be tested, the evaluations should illuminate areas that need revision. For the
formative phase, I will follow the recommendation of Dick, et al. (2009) and include three
cycles: one-on-one evaluation, small-group evaluation, and a field trial. In order to most
effectively develop the evaluation instruments for the formative stage, I will develop a
framework, based on the Dick, et al. (2009) model using my instructional strategy to answer the
following questions:

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Question:
Are the materials appropriate for an
intellectual skill outcome?

Data collected when and from whom:

SME/pre-formative phase

Is the content sequenced and clustered

logically and adequate to reach the terminal
objective?

SME/pre-formative phase; one-on-one phase

with high level target learner

Is the instruction feasible in the time allowed?

SME/pre-formative phase; one-on-one phase

Are the materials clear and easily understood?

Target learners during one-to-one, smallgroup and field test

Are the materials motivating? Test for

relevance, confidence, satisfaction

Target learners during one-to-one, smallgroup and field test

One-to-One Evaluation
In order to obtain data that will inform the revision process prior to the next two phases
of formative evaluation I will present the draft materials, including documents and video, to
three teachers who represent the range of my target population: a math coach or lead teacher,
teacher currently and successfully teaching the curriculum, and a teacher new to the district.
Additionally, I will attempt to recruit a teacher that has been teaching the curriculum but is
unsatisfied with their curriculum delivery. This learner could provide especially useful data
regarding relevance, confidence, and satisfaction, since the front-end analysis has revealed that a
large number in the target population is in this group.
Additionally, this evaluation along with the small group evaluation, will provide data that
will be valuable in creating criterion referenced tests according to the Kirkpatrick model (Clark,
D., 2012) in the larger field test.
Each of the interviews for the one-to-one evaluation will be conducted in the professional
development office with paper and a computer and will be scheduled to last between one and two

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

hours. The learner will be informed of the learning objectives and given an abbreviated version
of the planned instruction including reviewing materials in the order they are presented, watching
video instruction, and completing the lesson planning template tool. As Dick, et al. (2009)
suggest, the focus of the evaluation will be to obtain information on the clarity of instruction, the
impact on the learner, and the feasibility of the instruction. What I hope to gain in those areas is
detailed in the following paragraphs.
Clarity of Instruction: The instruction for step one in the eventual learning context is
fairly dense and takes place over an entire day. For this reason, it is important to get input from
the learners on pace, sequence, segment size, and variation in the instruction. Additionally, it is
important that the learning materials are clear and any jargon or acronyms understood or
explained. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, input on the effectiveness linking the
objectives with the examples and demonstrations in the instruction must be obtained (Dick, et al.,
2009). Having both veteran and new to the district teachers being interviewed should highlight
different areas of the instruction or materials that need to be revised.
Impact on Learner: Similar to John Kellers ARCS model, impact refers to how
confident the learner is that they can accomplish the objectives, how relevant the instruction is to
their job, and the amount of satisfaction obtained with the skills learned (Dick, et al., 2009).
Since most teachers are interested in the ASOU curriculum, it will be especially illuminating if a
teacher that is dissatisfied with the ASOU curriculum can be interviewed. Posttest data, in the
form of completing the lesson planning template, will be helpful in understanding how much
learning has occurred, and what gaps need to be filled.
Data Analysis: Since there are not many participants, meaningful statistical analysis is
not possible. This does not mean that there is no meaningful data to inform revision. Results

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

from the one-to-one instruction should yield good information about entry skills assumptions,
attitudes, changes in knowledge, and clarity including time and pacing. After the data is
analyzed, revisions may be made to the instruction to prepare for the next phase of formative
evaluation.
Small-Group Evaluation
The primary purpose of small-group evaluation is to test the effectiveness of the revisions
following the one-to-one evaluations and identify any remaining issues that should be addressed
prior to release of the full instruction during field testing (Dick, et al., 2009). Most of the
instruction for step one of my instruction involves instructor interaction so obtaining data about
solo-learning as suggested by Dick, et al. (2009) is not appropriate. The video instruction
component can be used by teachers on their own on as needed basis. For this reason, questions
will be posed as to the potential for this type of instruction.
For the small-group evaluation, the instruction will be given during a monthly
collaboration meeting to approximately 12 teachers, representing grades K-5, at one elementary
school (the district has 11). Evaluating all teachers at one school will yield an approximate
district-wide average of all subgroups and eliminate selection bias. All participants will complete
a pre-test questionnaire that will collect demographic information, level of entry skill, and
attitude about the performance objective. Since the step-one instruction is intended for a noninstruction day, a full-blown trial involving a complete run-through of the instruction will not be
possible during the three-hour collaboration meeting. Instead, key aspects will be introduced in
the order that they are intended, including all materials and video instruction.
The procedure for this evaluation will follow a similar format to the one-to-one:
explaining the purpose of the evaluation, introducing the objectives of the instruction, and the

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

materials in the order that they will be presented. Participants will observe the video instruction
and complete the lesson planning template tool. Finally, participants will be informed about the
final stages of instruction including the role play activity. A posttest survey, similar to the one
planned for instruction, will be administered as well as an attitudinal questionnaire based on
suggested questions in The Systematic Design of Instruction and Don Clarks article on the
Kirkpatrick model. An example is as follows:

Was the instruction interesting?

Were the objectives clear?
Were the materials directly related to the objectives?
Were sufficient practice activities and exercises included?
Are there questions on the post test that should be eliminated or added?
Did you feel confident when completing the template tool and answering the

posttest questions?
In your view, what are the three most important weaknesses of the instruction?
In your view, what are the three most important strengths of the instruction?

(Dick et al., 2009, Clark, 2012)

Based on the answers to these questions, follow up questions may be asked. Additional questions
about relevancy, pacing, and difficulty of the materials and instruction may also be further
explored.
Since the small-group is of large enough size, meaningful quantitative as well as
qualitative data can be collected and analyzed. The same basic method will be used for the field
trial results. I will create a scoring rubric that will collect data from the pretest, posttest, and
attitudinal surveys. The results of this data analysis will inform not only faults and omissions
with the instruction, but holes in the tests themselves. A more robust item-by objective analysis
will be performed in the larger field trial. After the results are summarized, I will share them with

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

my SME and math coaches to further refine the instructional materials as well as the data
collection tools.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Field Trial
Since the step-one instruction is designed to take an entire day, the only way to
successfully field test the entire instruction is during the district planned professional
development day. The benefits of conducting the field test in this manner are: the learning
context is genuine, and the data that can be collected with such a large group (approximately 200
teachers). The statistical results will give a solid understanding of learner achievements and
attitudes about both the instruction and instructional goals. The results of the field trial will
determine the direction of future instruction.
Another benefit to testing a large group is the ability to follow Kirkpatricks suggestion of
a randomized pretest-posttest control group to test a particular part of the instruction as part of a
level 2 analysis (Clark, 2012). One of the most costly parts of the instruction is the instructional
video due to the amount of resources devoted to taping and editing. For this reason, data that
tests the effectiveness of this part of the instruction will be of great value to management.
Due to their large number, learners will be divided into groups after the pre-instructional
activities to receive their instruction. The grouping will be random based on which classroom out
of four that they choose. All learners will be given the same instruction with the exception of the
video. Two of the four groups will receive video instruction, the other two will be given a written
example. All learners will be given the same pretest and posttest, similar to the one used in the
small-group evaluation.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

I will use an item-by-objective model as demonstrated by Dick et al., (2009) to capture
and analyze the data obtained by the field trial. This analysis is intended to illuminate the
difficulty for the tasks and the objectives, and to measure how consistently the items measured
the learners performance on the objectives (Dick, et al., 2009). Although this data in its entirely
will be valuable regarding the instruction and the instructional goal, it will be incredibly
informative with regard to the ROI on the video instruction and how or if it should be used in
future instruction.
Summative Evaluation
The only logical way to make a decision about whether to continue the use of instruction
is through a summative evaluation (Dick et al., 2009). Unfortunately for new instruction, there
has not been sufficient time to go through an adequate iterative process before this decision must
be made. Even so, we should be able to get sufficient data through expert judgment and
performance context driven field trial phases to make a determination if the instruction solved
the originally defined problem and if not, how it might be altered to do so.
As outlined by Dick et al. (2009), the expert judgment phase consists of five activities:
1. Congruence between the instructional needs of the organization and the instruction
2. Completeness and accuracy of the instructional materials
3. Evaluating the instructional strategy in the instruction
4. Evaluating the utility of the instruction; are the principals of learning and motivation
clear?
5. Durability: are the materials cost-effective, efficient, and satisfactory?

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

The field trial on the other hand has two phases: the outcome analysis which measures
the effect of instruction on the learner skills, transfer to the performance context, and on the
needs of the organization The second component is the management analysis, which assesses the
attitudes of management about their satisfaction with the results, the feasibility of the
implementation and reasonableness of costs (Dick et al., 2009).
Since the instruction in this project will have gone through thorough formative
evaluation, including a large field trial, with each phase followed by data review and material
revisions with input from internal experts, the summative phase of this instruction will consist of
field-trial analysis only. Surveys will be produced to gauge the effectiveness of instruction for
two groups: teachers that are implementing the curriculum after instruction, and their managers
(principals) to gauge their satisfaction with the results. Questions on the teacher survey will
identify them as those who received video training as part of their field trial and those who did
not or perhaps did not receive any instruction at all. It will also ascertain what supports they
continue to seek out: video instruction, coaching, or peer collaboration.
The results of the summative evaluation will be used by administrators in the
organization to determine if and how to continue with the instruction. Perhaps instruction is only
given to teachers new to the district or curriculum for example. The results will also be used by
the instructional designers in order to adapt the instruction to support teachers using the ASOU
curriculum in other districts.
Conclusion
The Dick, Carey & Carey model for the systematic design of instruction provided a
detailed and cohesive framework to analyze my clients instructional need and design
comprehensive instruction to fill it. The planned evaluation will provide a framework to begin an

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

iterative design process to assist teachers in years to come. For those teachers that continue to
struggle more targeted instruction, for instance classroom management or math skill acquisition,
will be illuminated. Furthermore, the instructional design outlined in this document may be
further adapted for other curricula used in the district, or for other school districts to adopt that
too are struggling with the ASOU curriculum.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

References
Clark, D. (2012). Kirkpatrick's Four Level Evaluation Model. Retrieved from
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/isd/kirkpatrick.html
CommonCore.com (2014) Eureka Math considered the only Tier 1 Math Curriculum by LA
Department of Education. Retrieved from http://commoncore.org/maps/math/home
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2009). The systematic design of instruction (Seventh ed.).
Upper Saddle River: Pearson.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Appendix A
Sample Teacher Survey

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Table 1.0 demonstrates sample questions for a teacher survey. The survey will help determine
teacher competence with and commitment to the Story of Units Curriculum. The results will be
used to help analyze appropriate support for teachers so the district can reach its CCSSM
compliance goals.

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS

Appendix B

BEST PRACTICES FOR A STORY OF UNITS