The big takeaway from the class of Principles of Design and Management in Educational Technology and Online Learning is undoubtedly the principle of planning and development. In the mere mention of this principle it can overwhelm educators (Shah, Kumar, and Smart, 2018), especially in a K-12 platform, because they may not know where to begin on such a large scale.  Though it is clearly the most crucial component, it is a collaborative work that helps the group as a whole overcome any challenges that may arise (Murphy, Allred, and Brescia, 2018).

The conceptual framework is based on structure (Antonenko, 2015): Ideas are formulated, building and testing various  processes, ascertaining problems, evaluating  systems, and finalizing the design are the basic steps needed to create the framework for the successful implementation of  educational technology and online learning.

In my personal theory of learning, I am a proponent in the behaviorism learning theory.  I like structure, especially when it comes to helping young students learn.  As they mature, you question how they learned such concepts.  This is when they begin to take ownership.  They either stay with what they already know because it works for them or they personally evolve the concept to make it work for their needs. There is some congruency between the principle and my theory.  Based on what can be developed (learned) through the conceptual framework, it is possible for the design to work founded on how it was learned, how it worked, yet with the potential to evolve into something better to meet the user (learner) needs.   This is the idea of how we learn.  It has to start with something small and morph into something greater, the more we put it into practice and use it wisely.


Antonenko, P. D. (2015). The instrumental value of conceptual frameworks in educational technology research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 53-71. doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9363-4

Murphy, C. A., Allred, J. B., & Brescia, W. F. (2018). The role of educational technology professionals as perceived by building administrators. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 179-191. doi:10.1007/s10639-017-9593-2

Shah, V., Kumar, A., & Smart, K. (2018). Moving forward by looking backward: Embracing pedagogical principles to develop an innovative MSIS program. Journal of Information Systems Education, 29(3), 139-156.

Module 5- Book Chapter Review Blog



Chapter 6 examines the theory of Applying the Modality Principle which can be defined as the use of narrative words in short and concise audio form, rather than being portrayed on screen as text (Clark and Mayer, 2016, p. 114) thus resulting in positive learning (Clark and Mayer, 2016, p. 113).  This serves as the primary purpose for this theory.

First, the Modality Principle, which Clark and Mayer begin in their outline, rationalizes how learners may experience an overload of visual graphics especially when written words run concurrently with the images.  In developing a distance learning program, there is suggestion to minimize overstimulation of visual learning, but rather enhance auditory learning. Second, the limitations of the modality principle sometimes present technical demands (such as speakers, Wi-Fi, etc.) which can increase costs and intensify sounds not conducive to the learning environment; also, words may need to be used with the visual but used at the discretion of the instructor emphasizing certain elements in the learning process.  Third, the psychological reasons suggest that the advantage of using narration is to transmit and process information between the auditory (hearing the words) and visual (seeing the pictures).  Yet if both are used simultaneously, the visual channel will suppress the auditory channel.  Thus, leading to cognitive conflicts for the learner. This has led to Clark and Mayer’s cognitive theory of multimedia learning wherein verbal material can be analyzed through the auditory channel, while visual material is dissected through visual channels, using both at the same time and strengthening these two senses.

Fourth, the evidence for using spoken rather than printed text states that students who viewed animation along with narration were able to produce twice as many solutions to a problem, compared to students who viewed the same imagery but with written text as on-screen captions (Clark and Mayer, 2016, p. 122). Also, studies revealed students with varying styles of learning retained the concurrent narrations with imagery (Clark and Mayer, 2016, p. 124).  Fifth, the application of the modality principle is not warranted in all learning. It is another learning strategy to put forth as part of the educational process within the varying learning environments of both the traditional and virtual classrooms. Finally, there is still much to learn about the modality principle, but it is a bridge to lessen the overstimulation of the visual and enhance the learning process with the use of another dominant sensor, the auditory channel.


            The importance of this point is a reminder on how present-day students have had greater access to a vast amount of visual imagery. The speed of information is in a state of constant motion and stimulating.  This chapter provided insights on my teaching methods. For example, I would want to teach my students how to use both senses, separate of each other as well as together. One way would be to speak instruction by using few words as possible and build simple, cohesive sentences. As I finish speaking, I would again speak the instructions and have students repeat the direction. Finally, speak the instruction, have students repeat the direction, and reveal each image of what is to be accomplished.

Regarding the use of educational technology within distance learning or instructional design, I still would base my lessons on appeasing the learning differences of students. There are varying levels as to how a student will learn certain concepts (Clark and Mayer, 2016, p. 119).  For example, I am a kinesthetic type of learner.  I may hear the initial introduction of a concept, but when the visual is portrayed, then I begin the learning process.  If instructions are placed on a visual, I often will not read the text, instead I begin to interpret the information based on the image, then go back to the text for any questions or suggestions.   Unless I see how something is being done, I will often tune out the words and focus on something other than what is being spoken at the time.  It is not until I am able to focus on a visual and work on it directly, then my learning takes place.  This is not to say that I need all my learning done with visuals.  If there is some form of illustration within a teaching, then I can comprehend what is being taught, much like listening to a sermon.  If the message only focuses on the technical components, I will not acquire much in the way of knowledge.  I use many illustrations when I teach my students or fellow co-workers.  In distance learning, the same would apply—instruction, demonstration, application, and repeat until the concept has been learned. Christ used this technique much in the same when he was the teaching the disciples—the use of parables.

The ISD project has been unique to me.  I have admitted to my peers that it has been difficult to merely read what to do rather than see how it is done.  The great part about this is that my peers have unique qualities and strengths that enable me to understand and I hope I have done the same for them.  I feel a bit more empowered trying to accomplish this project from basically knowing absolutely nothing. If I had seen varying examples, maybe I would have done something similar, maybe better, or maybe not.  This project has been one to build my listening skills apart from my visual.

After graduation, I believe I would teach and build a distance program very much in the same manner that I have described above—read out the short instructions, have students read along again (ask questions), then demonstrate techniques.   There is a stigma in thinking that all things should be created in similar fashion.  Maybe it is a part of societal roles and their expectations for what should be done or not.  But the great thing is that God created us all differently and his design for each of us is unique.


Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Applying the Modality Principle. In E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning [4th ed.] (pp. 113-129). Wiley & Sons. San Francisco, CA.




EDUC 633: Assessment Video Blog


According to Dan Lips of the Heritage Foundation:

“The online learning revolution is already underway in the US. As many as 1 million children (roughly 2 percent of K-12 students) are participating in some form of online learning. Today, 27 states offer statewide virtual schools that allow students to take a class online, and 24 states and DC offer students the opportunity to attend a virtual school full-time (2010).

Technology alone has revolutionized learning.  Since the advent of the internet and later with social media, the technological world has increasingly engaged humanity.  With each new technical development, there is an increase to educate not only this present generation but to stimulate future ones in becoming experts in this rapid growth (Taylor and McNair, 2018).  Parents are enabling their young children with devices as they learn how to use apps even before beginning to walk.   Many parents are convinced that technology is stimulating to the child’s mind and that learning occurs soon after birth (Benavides-Varela and Gervain, 2017).

So, what are the challenges?  Although technology has enhanced learning, the question that is being raised–are students learning it well and responsibly?   The only way to determine this would be to assess the student.  This has created a monumental challenge.  Humanity is prone to a sinful nature; therefore, the temptation to cheat on a traditional assessment is not any different from that of an online one. In fact, the probability is higher given that the internet and other applications have made this virtually easy to do (Scafidi, 2016).

The effectiveness of current online and mobile assessments depends on whether they are formal or informal.   A variety of assessments are found online or as an application.   For example, there is the ever-popular multiple-choice assessment (Horton, 2011, pp. 228-229). Questions and answers must be easily understood, and time limits enforced.  Its effectiveness depends on how often this type of assessment is updated to prevent unethical conduct.    Next, there are applications where students can share what they know either by submitting samples of work whether written or in video form (Rotsaert, Panadero, and Schellens, 2018).  Again, effectiveness depends on the detailed explanation of what is expected from the student and the ethics behind their work.  Lastly, assessments can be collaborated between online and live teachers with interactive projects. Students perform a stated task and upload the results in either a video, written, or a combination of both and verified by the collaborating instructor.  This takes a bit of work, but it is beneficial for the student to learn and accomplish the concept correctly.

Though I somewhat ally myself with the behaviorism theory of learning, I stand on Proverbs 22:6 (English Standard Version) where a child should be trained in the way that he should go, so that when he is old he will not depart from his learning.   With each group of students that I encounter, I must teach step by step so that they will understand yet reinforcing my expectations in the learning process as the goal. This is the premise of Proverbs 22:6.

Based on the learning theory and in conjunction with online/mobile assessments, it is known that technology was created to make life easier. Yet like in all things it takes constant work and careful observation.  This is the congruency based on literature   Nothing was never meant to be easy.  We must test all things and be discerning in what we want future generations to learn. The tests that accompany each concept, whether it is learning a skill, a science, or even dealing with relationships—the result is to assess what has been learned and use its results in making something better.

In summary, there is a growing need to train educators to plan successful online lessons and even better assessments.  In a traditional educational model, a teacher will create a lesson and reuse the same assessment.  But educators must always be thinking ahead in terms of what a student should know, how will they learn it, and can they accomplish the goal.  In this way, teachers mold the learning process for the sake of their students.   Some things work for one group, others do not. This is the art of education.  It is a refinement process.  It is understandable that we want things to be easy, but it is when we let our guard down as educators, that is when the learning becomes mundane.  Yet, learning and assessment will always remain a refining process.



Benavides-Varela, S., & Gervain, J. (2017). Learning word order at birth: A NIRS study. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(C), 198-208. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2017.03.003

Horton, W. (2011). E-learning by design (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. ISBN: 9780470900024

Lips, D. (2010, January 12). How Online Learning Is Revolutionizing K-12 Education and Benefiting Students. Retrieved February 7, 2019, from

Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., & Schellens, T. (2018). Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: Its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(1), 75-99. doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0339-8

Scafidi, B. (2016). The dismal productivity trend for K-12 public schools and how to improve it. The Cato Journal, 36(1), 121.

Taylor, B. D., & McNair, D. E. (2018). Virtual school startups: Founder processes in American K-12 public virtual schools. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1) doi:10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3205

EDUC 633 Module 2: Behaviorism Learning Theory (BLT)


The unique distinction of the behaviorism learning theory (or BLT) is that it is applicable to the concept of learning based on a desired result as taught by the instructor.  The Bible clearly states in Proverbs 22:6 from the English Standard Version, “Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it.” 

BLT’s key strength is that it can learned through observed behavior. The more the behavior is repeated the more likely it is to be reproduced in others especially if there is a physical or verbal reward.  In balancing a high school student’s behavior, it is the teacher’s consistency within their method or style of teaching who will formulate positive behaviors in their students.  Inconsistency will only generate varying behaviors among students enrolled in their classrooms.  

Granted, the key strength can also be its own weakness. The model behavior can subtly be modified by the participant to meet their own individual need.   For example, the beginning of a school year for any high school student is introduced by at least a half-dozen or more teachers, all who come with various classroom management styles.  There will be no two teachers who are alike in their methods of teaching.  Each student will either fall into line with each of their teacher’s expectations of behavior or test the boundaries of each and make the behavior their very own.  

The BLT is then a paradox of its own making.  We want certain behaviors replicated, yet we also want a sense of individualism that comes with the onset of adolescence.  Yet are adolescents totally ready to embrace a sense of freedom without the knowledge of pitfalls that could arise?  These are teachable moments as in childhood.   Therefore, there should be some semblance of BLT with stated expectations, follow-up practices, consistent modeling, and encouraging reinforcement as stated in the Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (Spector, Merrill, Elen, and Bishop, 2014, p, 24).

In the formation of online course development which has evolved from distance learning  courses via the post office to now state-of-the-art web-based functions and applications, the underlying question would be do we want teens to learn certain behaviors through modeling in the online platform or should it a typical online class with joint collaboration of new ideas of what is to be expected?

In viewing both the strength and weakness of BLT, the theory has been viewed as an outdated form of learning in the online learning platform, according to Saari, (2019).  In an age of YouTube and social media platforms, there is the expectation that everyone knows how to use online technologies correctly, but have teens learned to master these respectfully?  This makes BLT significant in the development of distance education courses in that educators have just as much a responsibility to specify what is expected, demonstrate the expectation, have students practice the intended expectation as stated by Clark and Mayer (2016, p. 275), offer reassurance and support when things do not go exactly as planned, and share in the joy when the participant has successfully achieved the goal.  Therefore, it is by sheer will that the instructor reveals what is expected. For as online learners come from various backgrounds, culturally, socially, and intellectually that enables the students to become a positive role model, in similar fashion as Jesus did for his disciples.  


Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley & Sons.  ISBN: 9781119158660.

Saari, A. (2019). Out of the box: Behaviourism and the mangle of practice. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 109-121. doi:10.1080/01596306.2018.1549707

Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (4th ed.). London: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. ISBN: 9781461431848.