DaZah Toler

EDCI 270
Individualized Instruction Narrative
During the beginning stages of the individualized instruction project, I made planning
cards. At first the planning cards did not seem to have much purpose to me. However, as I
actually began creating my PowerPoint, these cards were vital to my success. If I had not
planned out the project, I would have struggled with the order of the slides, and just getting
started. The planning cards were like a rough draft. So when making my PowerPoint, it was like
creating a final draft. There were a few edits I made, but the framework mostly remained the
same.
After I had made my changes, I then had a peer review. The individual who reviewed my
project offered great advice. She said my images were too juvenile for my audience. Originally, I
just thought the PowerPoint was cute. However, I was not thinking about my audience. The
review made me realize just because I thought it was cute meant nothing. It was about my
audience.
After my peer review, I had my TA review. I opened my PowerPoint on a Windows
computer. I had been using a MacBook. Numerous issues had occurred because of the
conversion between systems. For example, I had numbered a slide one through four. Although it
was correct on my MacBook, when I opened it on the Windows computer, all of the numbers
changes to threes. The TA also pointed out minor details that I needed to work on.
I learned that creating an entire instruction online is not as difficult as first thought.
However, it is very tedious. I think it is worth it though because by having these online
instructions, students can access the lessons and activities anywhere there is a computer, tablet,
or smart phone. This allows students the opportunity to learn new material or review material on
their own. There is no need for a physical teacher. Before this project, I never knew what
hyperlinking was and that is a valuable skill. Overall, I would say this project has allowed me to
grow my technological skills.
Throughout the development the project, there were numerous ISTE standards were
addressed. One of the standards was standard three, learning environments. The standards states,
The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative
learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self
motivation. This is covered through the peer and TA review. Both of these reviews involved
collaboration about the content in the project. Especially in the TA review, the reviewer stressed
how important it is to create an engaging project. Secondly, standard six, assessment, was
addressed. In the standard it state that teachers uses multiple methods of assessment to
monitor learner progress. In my individualized instruction project I used three types of
assessment. There was a matching section, a multiple-choice section, and numerous reflections.
These three activities were ways to assess students understand of the material in different ways.
There were different levels of evaluation. There was the basic recall method, the more advanced
analysis level, and then finally the evaluation or judgment level. By testing these different levels
shows credibility in the assessment, in addition to the correlation between the assessment and the
objectives. The third standard that was covered was standard seven, planning for instruction.
This standard states that teachers create material that supports each student to meet rigorous
learning goals. This entire project included creating instructional material. The material required
students to be able do apply what they learned to real-life reflection questions. Also, this material

required students to think critically of their schooling experience, and reflect on how those
experiences may impact the way that they teach. The rigorous learning goals were set through
the objectives and then tested throughout the instruction as well as at the completion of the entire
instruction.

References
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011, April). InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards:
A Resource for State Dialogue.
Geib. (2006). Blooms Taxonomy.