1. Scheduling Sequence
Providing Feedback
and Spacing
1. After each response, feedback is 1. Sequencing reflects a scheduled
immediate. framework (e.g., Leitner system)
2. Includes knowledge-of-correct-
response feedback (e.g., including 2. Presentation of each item is
response accuracy verification, providing discrete and spaced.
correct answers, etc.)
3. Design provides for at least one
3. Elaborative feedback is available for intersession interval of anywhere
low certitude responses between one and thirty days (no
"cramming").
4. Periodic feedback relates tracked data
to learner goals (e.g.,
learning/achievement is definable
(either by designer or user, i.e. five
correct iterations)
5. Results of learning session are related
to learner goals.
2. Motivating and Managing Cognitive
Engaging Load
1. Design captures learners' 1. Design takes advantage of
interest (e.g., use simple verbal (text, narration, etc.) and
unexpected events like a loud non-verbal (photographs,
whistle or an upside-down word illustrations, diagrams, etc.)
in a visual, etc.). input channels
2. Design avoids cognitive
2. Design stimulates learners'
overload (e.g., text in close
inquiry (e.g., give mentally
spatial proximity to visuals to
stimulating problems that engage
avoid split attention cognitive
a deeper level of curiosity, etc.).
load concerns).
3. Design acknowledges and
3. Design maintains learners' adapts to limitations of audience
attention (e.g., utilize variation). (i.e. universal design and
accessibility)
4. Design makes learning 4. Design enables learner to
outcomes relevant to students efficiently "chunk" facts by
(e.g., connect content to learner identifying, connecting
goals, interests, learning styles, (grouping), and sequencing
etc.). information.
5. Design builds learner
confidence (e.g., providing
examples of acceptable
achievement).
6. Design promotes student
satisfaction (e.g., provides
recognition and evidence of
success, practical application,
etc.).
3. Determining Prior Maximizing Academic
Knowledge Learning Time (ALT)
1. Design determines learner's
prior knowledge and goals 1. Design ensures all instructional
(e.g., pre-assessment, activities support desired learning
iterations of a Leitner system, outcomes.
etc.)
2. Design facilitates open
content (e.g., user-generated
content, sharing of content 2. Design ensures waiting and
and results, user-user or user- transitional time is minimized.
population comparisons of
results, etc.)
3. Design provides low prior-
knowledge students with
response-contingent feedback
(e.g., system explains reasons
for correct/incorrect
responses)
4. Design provides high prior-
knowledge students with topic-
contingent feedback (e.g.,
system directs learners to find
the correct response or a path
to additional information).
4. Applied?
Providing Feedback
1. After each response, feedback is
immediate. Yes
2. Includes knowledge-of-correct-
response feedback (e.g., including
response accuracy verification, providing
correct answers, etc.) Yes
3. Elaborative feedback is available for
low certitude responses Yes
4. Periodic feedback relates tracked data
to learner goals (e.g.,
learning/achievement is definable (either
by designer or user, i.e. five correct
iterations) Partly
5. Results of learning session are related
to learner goals.
Only slightly
Scheduling Sequence and
Spacing
1. Sequencing reflects a scheduled
framework (e.g., Leitner system) Yes
2. Presentation of each item is discrete
and spaced. Yes/No
3. Design provides for at least one
intersession interval of anywhere
between one and thirty days (no
"cramming"). Yes
Motivating and Engaging
1. Design captures learners' interest (e.g.,
use simple unexpected events like a loud
whistle or an upside-down word in a
visual, etc.). Partly
2. Design stimulates learners' inquiry
(e.g., give mentally stimulating problems
that engage a deeper level of curiosity,
etc.). Partly
5. 3. Design maintains learners' attention
(e.g., utilize variation).
Hopefully
4. Design makes learning outcomes
relevant to students (e.g., connect
content to learner goals, interests,
learning styles, etc.). Yes
5. Design builds learner confidence (e.g.,
providing examples of acceptable
achievement). Yes
6. Design promotes student satisfaction
(e.g., provides recognition and evidence
of success, practical application, etc.).
Yes
Managing Cognitive Load
1. Design takes advantage of verbal (text,
narration, etc.) and non-verbal
(photographs, illustrations, diagrams,
etc.) input channels Yes
2. Design avoids cognitive overload (e.g.,
text in close spatial proximity to visuals
to avoid split attention cognitive load
concerns). Yes
3. Design acknowledges and adapts to
limitations of audience (i.e. universal
design and accessibility) Yes
4. Design enables learner to efficiently
"chunk" facts by identifying, connecting
(grouping), and sequencing information.
Partly
Determining Prior
Knowledge
1. Design determines learner's prior
knowledge and goals (e.g., pre-
assessment, iterations of a Leitner
system, etc.)
No
6. 2. Design facilitates open content (e.g.,
user-generated content, sharing of
content and results, user-user or user-
population comparisons of results, etc.)
Partly
3. Design provides low prior-knowledge
students with response-contingent
feedback (e.g., system explains reasons
for correct/incorrect responses)
At times
4. Design provides high prior-knowledge
students with topic-contingent feedback
(e.g., system directs learners to find the
correct response or a path to additional
information).
At times
Maximizing Academic
Learning Time (ALT)
1. Design ensures all instructional
activities support desired learning
outcomes. Yes, but…
2. Design ensures waiting and
transitional time is minimized.
No
7. Justification
Students are instructed to give immediate feedback; whether or not it really happens immediately is not always
controllable.
If flashcard is added to the correct pile, student knows immediately that it was correct. Quizzee knows it's
incorrect when they are given the correct answer and have to find the explanation as to why that is the correct
answer.
Designed for all incorrect answers on first two days of flashcard processes 1 and 2. At these times, students can--
and are expected to--access notes to find elaborative feedback.
Students can follow their improvement by how many rounds they have to go through each day. Also,
implementation and review activities keep them updated on progress.
Before launching into the teaching activity, I would talk with the students about why knowing these terms is so
important, but if a student doesn't care about having a clue in school, then it won't be related to that student's
goals. That said, when I make a point of the fact that they could potentially look like doofuses if they don't learn
them, then most students find that learning them is a goal. And I provide higher-level relevance for those with
higher-level learning goals.
The framework is not Leitner exactly, but it is specifically designed. Students separate cards into correct and
incorrect piles and repeat with incorrect pile until the incorrect pile is gone.
Each is discrete, but the spacing time is not controlled.
Activities are spaced by days in class over a two-week period.
The pictures and students' individual creativity is supposed to catch the learners' interest. Once they get used to
the sentences, however, they are unlikely to continue to be entertained by the same sentences aned pictures…
unless they're really, really good.
The flexibility of example creations, creating more examples during flashcard process 2, and being exposed to
different students' examples should all help with this.
8. Teenagers tend to get bored with repetition very quickly. That's why there are several different activities along
the learning process that not only accelerate in difficulty, but hopefully change often enough that they can gain
expertise and confidence while getting enough variety to keep their attention.
The introduction before teaching starts and implementation activity should both help students recognize how
learning the literary terms is relevant to their own learning experience.
Seeing their correct pile grow and incorrect pile shrink should help build their confidence. Also, the fact that
they should be speeding up each day should help. As they slowly build their versatility through the activities'
progression, they should also gain confidence. If they feel they want to progress at a faster rate, they can also
use their flashcards at home.
The progression of activities shows them their progress and implementation gives them practical application.
The flashcards utilize both words and illustrations.
The illustrations are placed right underneath the sentences they represent on the flashcards.
The audience will not have much technical access; this activity utilizes the students' own creativity and basic
classroom supplies. Also, each student is able to choose the examples that are most relevant to him or her and
draw illustrations that will best help him or her understand and remember the literary terms.
It allows students to chunk the flashcards as desired, but I don't know that it particularly enables them to do so
(other than when I chunk the terms for the teaching activity).
First, I'm aware of what the audience in general has as prior knowledge because of years of teaching freshmen in
our district and because we work with the 8th grade teachers from middle schools that feed into our high
school. Second, I know that there is some overlap of prior knowledge to the new terms and I specifically want
that to be the case to (1) help build confidence because they know something going in and (2) help students
build the new knowledge onto the framework of knowledge they already have (boosting understanding and
retention).
9. The design faciliates user-user collaboration within the class, but that's pretty much where it stops. Individual
students could choose to make their specific flashcards open courseware, but it's not built into the design
because that's more work than is feasible considering the constraints of the design situation.
During the first two parts of the flashcard processes, yes, this is provided. During the third parts, however, only
knowledge-of-correct answer feedback is given. This design was chosen to try to push students to stretch and
reach higher levels. If they don't see the process getting more difficult, they are more likely to get bored and
less likely to continue stretching themselves.
If students get the answer correct, then yes. However, if students get it incorrect, for the first two parts of the
flaschard processes they are going to be required to provide elaborative feedback. I designed it this way to try
to guarantee understanding of the terms, not simply memorization of which names connect to which pictures.
It's on purpose, in spite of the limitations to feedback.
All designed activities support them, but it's very possible there will be time in there where students are
engaged in activities that do not support learning.
This is the greatest weakness of the design. While I would be monitoring to help keep students on task and
productive, some groups will invariably finish before others, some will invariably be more distracted than others
and consequently take longer, and having something productive for students to do if they finish early but not
necessary for those that finish late is difficult (especially if it's individual work that they should be doing quietly
while the others and being vocal). There's no way that I can come up with to keep the process individualized in
the way it needs to be without facing these problems, however, so I'm figuring I'll live with this major weakness
in order to reap the benefits of the design's strengths.
