Learning Journal Blog Post #3

I find that I’m hesitant in choosing the “perfect” needs/task analysis. I wonder how an ID professional feels confident that they’ve chosen the correct analysis. Although the different tools are all very similar, they each help you find something different. I understand that you can pick and choose segments from each, but it seems you’d do that for every assignment. My question is: Do ID professionals categorize the different approaches to make it easier for themselves? Basically, I wonder if they combine different approaches for one broad topic, like education, and use that tool only.

During the development of my project, I found myself second guessing the approaches I chose. Because of time constraints though, I had to choose what I thought “fit” and would give me the answers I need.

As a special education teacher, I found myself connecting to chapter 11. When writing IEPs, you must be data driven. The student’s Present Levels of Performance is the heart of the IEP. Without appropriate data, the IEP will not effectively reflect the student’s abilities and needs. Additionally, it’s important to know the best way to evaluate students. The information following the subtitle, A Change in Skill, on page 220, is very appropriate to assess a student’s skill when documenting progress quarterly.

Well, reading back on my first journal log showed me how little I understood the differences in philosophies. I can say with 100% certainty that my instructional philosophy is constructivism. To me, knowledge is about experiences, and learning is easier when you can connect the new material to previous experiences. My teaching style reflects this as well. Throughout my lessons I’m constantly revealing to the students how the new material connects to material that was covered in the past or even to my own personal experiences. This may also provide the students with a picture in their minds that reinforces the connection of the material.