SYSTEMS APPROACH TO DESIGNING INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL
Training Teachers to train and integrate Music into the Core Curriculum Final Group Project Reflective Piece Tamara Millette ID 806008118 8/22/2014
COURSE COORDINATOR: DR. CAMILLE DICKSON-DEANE FACILITATOR: DR. LEROY HILL
1
Reflective Piece
Training Teachers to teach and integrate Music into the Core Curriculum
The Garrisons decided to collaborate to achieve the final project for EDID6505. The key was that in creating a whole new instruction the team will be able to find a topic to which that all can contribute. The collaboration also meant that the project will be easier to get done even though there were so many more areas to development. Skype was used as the main form of communication and google docs was used for the preparation of the documents used in the project. Members of the team each put forward suggestions and we agreed to the topic to Instruction in digital archiving to be used in a library environment. As time passed, the progress of the project was limited with most people being concerned with the technicality of the subject and also whether we should be creating instruction on digital archiving general theory or on specific software application. Each of these areas required in-depth research but time was limited. A decision was then taken to change the topic to Music and Music Integration in primary level schools. Gathering Information for the Music and Music Integration was a lot easier and we had access to experts in the field and feedback from teachers in Trinidad and Tobago who are currently being trained to implement as similar programme. We work together via skype for the first few days to develop the overall course goal, the needs assessment analysis, the objectives and task selection work sheet . We then individually added to the contextual analysis in the google document. There was some disagreement to how we should go about the actual music 2
instruction either with the actual teaching of music with notes or letting the focus be on beats and sound for the instruction. The focus was eventually decided on as the latter. The group then broke into teams to develop the instruction for selected task. Albert and I agreed to pair and develop the instructional lesson for the singing task. Albert and I worked well as a team and focused our efforts on creating the lesson to include the development of the subtask objective, finding the best fit of instructional strategies to deliver the information, creating the power point based around Merrills first principles and creating assessment tools for the lesson. Group meetings were less regular. On many occasions during this exercise I actually had to refer back to the individual topics on the course page to aide in my recall of the topic. Albert and I worked well as a team for this effort. We communicated ideas and gave feedback on a daily basis. During this time we had to meet as a group almost hastily when we realized that we need to prepare a group presentation. Bringing all the information we had together for the presentation made us realize a number of things. 1. There seem to be some misinterpretation as to the role that the integration played (should it also be added to each lesson or as a separate topic) 2. We also lack uniformity in our presentation of our areas for the project. 3. We had not properly consulted the group project course guide to see what was required of us. 4. In a number of areas we had strayed from the format that was used when we created our mini project. I believe that these things were missed in our haste to complete the project. We were able to adjust our project to be more in line with the assignment and each others task areas. Working in the group and in particular with Albert allowed me to gain further knowledge in instructional design e.g. the understanding of the rubric and its relation to 3
performance objectives and assessment in general. The team was able to support each other and apply their strong areas to the project. I saw communication as the biggest issue for this time because of the number of miscommunicated ideas that flowed within the group. This could be attributed to the fact that the majority of member had dominant personality types and always wanted to be the one to get their point across. Not enough time was spent listen.