Welcome to My Digital Portfolio
Hello, I'm Tenneh C. Freeman
Welcome! I'm so glad you're here. This portfolio documents my journey through the Master of Education in Learning Design & Technology program at the University of Maryland Global Campus.
I bring ten years of Special Education, structured literacy, and dyslexia intervention experience into every design decision — believing deeply that great learning experiences are built on access, equity, and cultural resonance.
"It is not wrong to go back for what you forgot."
— Sankofa · West Africa
Professional Biography
Tenneh C. Freeman is a Texas-certified Special Education teacher and Reading By Design dyslexia intervention specialist currently serving students at Alvin ISD.
She holds Texas Educator Certificates in Special Education (Grades 7–12), Generalist (Grades 4–8), and Social Studies (Grades 7–12), with specialized credentials in the Science of Reading and Orton-Gillingham structured literacy methodology. She is currently completing her M.Ed. in Learning Design & Technology at UMGC.
Her design practice is grounded in cultural responsiveness — informed by deep personal and professional ties to Liberia, West Africa — and a commitment to building learning experiences that are accessible, equitable, and joyful for every learner.
Certifications
- ▸Special Education (Grades 7–12)
- ▸Generalist (Grades 4–8)
- ▸Social Studies (Grades 7–12)
- ▸Reading By Design — Dyslexia Specialist
- ▸Science of Reading
- ▸Orton-Gillingham / Structured Literacy
Skills
Learning Theory
Foundational learning theories — behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism — and how each shapes effective learning design.
Introduction, Copyright & Creative Commons
Exploring copyright, fair use, and Creative Commons licensing as core competencies for instructional designers.
Copyright & Creative Commons
Foundational assignment on IP, fair use, and CC licensing.
View PDF ↗Behaviorism in Learning & Design
Classical and operant conditioning applied to structured literacy and co-teaching models.
Behaviorism, Dyslexia & Co-Teaching
Reflective piece on behaviorist theory in SpEd.
View PDF ↗Cognitivism in Education
How the mind processes, stores, and retrieves information — applied through multimedia video with full accessibility.
Cognitivism Visual Guide
Multimedia guide with full accessibility support.
Watch Video ↗Constructivism & Active Learning
How learners build knowledge through active experience, social interaction, and scaffolded discovery.
Constructivism Learning Scenario
Vygotsky's ZPD applied to secondary literacy.
View PDF ↗Decoding the Code
Interactive HTML5 course with quizzes and scaffolding.
Open Course ↗Authors of Meaning
A pop-up book on Constructivism — Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner rise off a hand-painted watercolor spread as each page opens. Self-contained; the interaction rehearses the theory it explains.
Open the pop-up book ↗Connectivism & Digital Networks
Siemens' theory of learning in the digital age — networked knowledge and digital tools in modern learning.
Connectivism Project
Interactive graphic novel that teaches Connectivism — a live knowledge network builds behind the panels as you read, and you can sever nodes to watch a learner’s capacity to know collapse.
Open Project ↗PLN & Professional Learning Plan
Personal Learning Network selection and plan.
View Prezi ↗PLN Selection & Professional Learning Plan
Written assignment grounding the PLN Prezi in connectivist theory and structured literacy practice.
View PDF ↗Andragogy
Knowles' theory of adult learning, grounded in my own Region 4 Dyslexia Certificate as a formal adult learning experience.
Andragogy & Adult Learning
Interactive discussion analyzing Knowles' six andragogy principles through the lens of the Region 4 Dyslexia Certificate.
Open Discussion ↗Assessment and Learning Models
6 Syllable Wonderland — a gamified structured literacy intervention pairing a learning-theory infographic with a scenario-based environment where six guardians teach each syllable type, gate progress behind checks for understanding, then assess it through a sort-based challenge with formative feedback loops.
Decoder's Quest Infographic
Single-page infographic covering the gamification model, the learning scenario, formative and authentic assessments, and the three learning theories that make game-based instruction work.
View PDF ↗6 Syllable Wonderland
An illustrated, fully animated Alice in Wonderland environment covering the six syllable types in Orton-Gillingham sequence — closed, open, silent e, vowel team, r-controlled, and consonant-le. Each guardian appears as a living, floating character over a drifting storybook scene and teaches one rule through scenario narration and color-coded word maps, then gates progress behind three checks for understanding with in-character corrective feedback before releasing the learner into a sort-and-classify assessment. Closes with a personalized completion certificate.
Launch ↗Minicourse Idea & Learning Theory Connection
Pulling seven weeks of learning theory together into an early concept for Decoding the Code, the structured literacy PD minicourse for secondary content-area teachers. Revisited as the opening entry of the IDD capstone.
Minicourse Idea & Learning Theory Connection
Minicourse overview plus strengths, limitations, and design applications of Andragogy and Cognitive Load Theory, with APA 7 references.
Open Discussion ↗Inside the Teacher-Ready Toolkit
The three classroom-tested structured literacy strategies at the heart of Decoding the Code — syllable division, morphology mapping, and explicit vocabulary preview — each with step-by-step implementation and a nine-week rollout timeline.
Open Page ↗Portfolio Check & Course Reflection
A capstone look back across all five learning theories — the theory that challenged me most, the one that reshaped my design practice, the skills this course built, and my professional development plan heading into full minicourse development.
Open Page ↗Instructional Design Models
A comparative study of major instructional design models — ADDIE, Dick and Carey, UbD, Rapid ID, and SAM — applied to structured learning design.
Introduction: History, Ethics, Accessibility, and Artificial Intelligence
Introduction: History, Ethics, Accessibility & AI
Foundational slide deck covering the history of instructional design, ethical practice, accessibility, and the role of AI in the field.
View Slides ↗ADDIE Design Model
The ADDIE model applied to Decoding the Code, with a full learner profile of the practicing 6–12 educators who will take it.
ADDIE & Target Audience Infographic
Single-page infographic covering ADDIE phases, implications, strengths and limitations, and the full learner profile.
View PDF ↗Dick and Carey Design Model
The Dick and Carey systems-design model applied to Decoding the Code, with finalized course type and modality decisions for the minicourse. Artifacts for this unit live in the IDD.
Understanding by Design (UbD)
The Understanding by Design backward-design model applied to Decoding the Code — an overview of all three stages, implications for learning design, and a strengths-and-limitations analysis tied to the minicourse. The six Course Learning Outcomes drafted here carry into the IDD.
Understanding by Design & Course Learning Outcomes
UbD overview with all three stages in plain language, implications for learning design, strengths and limitations applied to the minicourse, and the six draft Course Learning Outcomes, with APA 7 references.
Open Page ↗Course Learning Outcomes & Reflection
LDTC 605 Unit 4 assignment with the six finalized Course Learning Outcomes and a 416-word reflection on IDD alignment, learner differentiation, and feedback mechanisms, with APA 7 references.
Download Doc ↗Rapid Instructional Design
The Rapid Instructional Design model applied to Decoding the Code — a five-stage overview, strengths and limitations for a self-paced PD build, and six learning activities each mapped to a Course Learning Outcome and differentiated with UDL.
Rapid ID & Six Learning Activities
Rapid Instructional Design overview with its five stages, strengths and limitations tied to the minicourse, and six CLO-aligned learning activities with APA 7 references.
Open Page ↗Learning Activities & Reflection
LDTC 605 Unit 5 assignment with six learning activities mapped to the Course Learning Outcomes and a reflection on alignment, VARK differentiation, and engagement, with APA 7 references.
Download Doc ↗Escape the 6: Six Components of Structured Literacy
A scenario-based escape room for CLO 1 — six locks, six components. Diagnose each student’s breakdown from the evidence to open the door. Mastery gates, guided hints, and a non-punitive clock (UDL 7.3). Voice-guided — Agent Freeman narrates each lock.
Successive Approximation Model (SAM)
The Successive Approximation Model applied to Decoding the Code — an interactive walk-through of one full SAM cycle, a discussion infographic covering the model and my IDD choice, and the graded iteration that answers the instructor’s Unit 5 feedback. Across all three: UbD fixes the outcome, SAM iterates everything else.
The Successive Approximation Model
SAM’s three phases in plain English, its implications for design, strengths and limits for my minicourse, and the UbD-paired model choice for the Instructional Design Document. APA 7 sources.
Open the infographic ↗SAM Cycle Simulation
Run one full SAM cycle: lock the outcome in the Savvy Start, then iterate three design loops and Alpha→Beta→Gold development. Mastery-gated, voice-guided by Tenneh (your SAM trainer), with learner telemetry and a reflection capture that pools to a cohort sheet.
Run the simulation ↗Unit 5 Review → Unit 6 Iteration
The graded iteration answering the instructor’s Unit 5 feedback: subjective “works” language rewritten as observable look-fors, criterion checklists for Activities 3–6, and a final unassisted Cold Read. Outcomes fixed, evidence tightened.
Read the iteration ↗Learning Objectives and Bloom’s Taxonomy
The six Course Learning Outcomes for Decoding the Code, sharpened from the Unit 4 drafts and mapped to Bloom’s revised taxonomy — plus an interactive climb where each outcome is a star you light by clearing a short mastery check.
Learning Objectives & Bloom's Taxonomy
Outcomes vs. objectives, Bloom's revised taxonomy, the six revised Course Learning Outcomes each tagged to a Bloom level, and what changed since Unit 4 — with APA 7 references.
Open Page ↗Decoding the Code: The Climb
A mastery-gated constellation of the six outcomes — a different game for each CLO (drag-match, spin-the-wheel diagnostic, root builder, scaffold sequence, tool match, goal cloze). Clearing each one lights a star and warms the sky from night to dawn. Every panel is narrated, with a sound toggle if you would rather read.
Start the climb ↗Learning Objectives, Bloom's & IDD Alignment
LDTC 605 Unit 7 assignment — the six revised outcomes, Bloom's alignment, a sample objective-to-assessment map, and the SME review note, with APA 7 references.
Download Doc ↗Sequencing, Assessment, and Alignment
Seven assessment strategies for Module 3 of Decoding the Code, sequenced in the order teachers meet them and aligned back through the learning activity to the objective each one proves.
Minicourse Assessment Strategies
The seven strategies in sequence with what each one collects, the full alignment table from assessment to activity to objective to CLO, and an honest read on what holds and what still needs cohort data.
Open Page ↗Built In, Not Bolted On
A six-station simulation for core content teachers. Start with the retrofit math — 165 minutes of modification against 40 minutes of shared planning — then rebuild one biology assessment so the differentiation is structural. Ends with an honest audit of what is genuinely still individual.
Run the simulation ↗Digital Media Design
Digital media artifacts grounded in accessibility, UDL, and evidence-based instructional design.
Multimedia Introduction
Meet Tenneh C. Freeman
Interactive character-sheet introduction with embedded Firefly intro video, background, experience, interests, and Decoding the Code overview.
Open Introduction ↗Multimedia Introduction
Introductory multimedia learning artifact.
Open Project ↗Firefly Intro Video
Combined 9:16 intro built from two Adobe Firefly clips — a landscape classroom establishing shot (blurred-fill padded to portrait) and a talking-head close-up, joined with ffmpeg.
Watch Video ↗OER Evaluation & Digital Media Checklist
A reusable checklist for judging an OER’s license, accessibility, and CLO fit, plus a completed evaluation of a CC BY-NC syllable-type resource aligned to CLO 1.
Open Page ↗Digital Document
A text-based quick-reference handout on the six syllable types, an audio description for accessibility, and a self-evaluation using the Digital Media Checklist from Unit 1.
The 6 Syllable Types at a Glance
Single-page quick-reference for Grades 6–12 content-area teachers. Six color-coded cards with definitions, letter patterns, example words, and teaching tips. Designed with CRAP visual design principles and Sankofa brand standards.
View PDF ↗Audio Description — 6 Syllable Types
A 3:37 narrated audio description of the digital document for learners with visual impairments. Covers layout, all six syllable types with examples, and the statistics section. Recorded in my own voice using a voice clone, refined from peer feedback favoring a personal narrator over a synthetic one.
Listen to Audio ↗Digital Media Checklist — Unit 2
The Unit 1 Digital Media Checklist applied to evaluate the 6 Syllable Types handout across four areas: purpose alignment, CRAP principles, multimedia and accessibility, and technical quality.
View PDF ↗Digital Image
A Welcome and Meet Your Instructor announcement for Decoding the Code, integrating an original hand-painted Sankofa bird logo into a two-column branded layout. Designed with CRAP visual design principles using Sankofa brand tokens, evaluated against the Digital Media Checklist from Unit 1.
Welcome to Decoding the Code
A one-page Welcome and Meet Your Instructor announcement integrating the original hand-painted Sankofa bird logo. Two-column layout applying Contrast, Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity with locked Sankofa brand tokens. CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Original artwork by Tenneh C. Freeman.
View PDF ↗Digital Media Checklist — Unit 3
The Unit 1 Digital Media Checklist applied to evaluate the Welcome Announcement across four sections: purpose and audience alignment, CRAP visual design principles, multimedia and accessibility (including WCAG 2.1 alt text), and technical quality and licensing.
View PDF ↗
Sankofa Bird — Course Logo
The primary image in the Unit 3 announcement. Original hand-painted mixed-media artwork by Tenneh C. Freeman. The Sankofa symbol — a bird retrieving an egg it left behind — is the conceptual anchor of Decoding the Code: structured literacy recovers foundational knowledge adolescent readers missed. Not stock art; not AI-generated.
UX/UI Design
User experience and interface design for learner-centered digital environments.
Instructional Design Document
Capstone synthesis from LDTC 600, 605, and 610. Working draft of the design specification for Decoding the Code — a structured literacy minicourse for secondary educators.
Course Title & Course Overview
The two elements that open the Instructional Design Document — what the minicourse is called, and what it does in one paragraph.
Decoding the Code
Structured Literacy for Content-Area Teachers, Grades 6–12
Decoding the Code is a self-paced online minicourse that gives Grades 6–12 content-area teachers the structured-literacy tools their certification programs left out. Across four short modules, teachers learn the six components of structured literacy, practice reading student work to locate whether a breakdown sits at decoding, fluency, or comprehension, and build morphology and vocabulary routines that plug into the lessons they already teach. The course ends with a Teacher-Ready Toolkit of three classroom-tested strategies and a nine-week rollout plan. Every module keeps the same promise: add the literacy scaffold without lowering the rigor of the content.
Minicourse Idea, Knowledge Gap & UDL Reflection
The minicourse vision, the learning gap in secondary structured literacy instruction, and the UDL framework that anchors every design decision in this capstone.
Minicourse Idea, Knowledge Gap & UDL Reflection
Foundational IDD artifact introducing Decoding the Code — the minicourse vision, learning gap, and UDL reflection.
View Slides ↗Target Audience & Learner Profile
The full learner profile for Decoding the Code, built around three composite personas — Marcus, Rosa, and David — who represent the range of 6–12 content-area teachers the minicourse is designed to serve. The profile drives every downstream design decision in the IDD, from course type to modality to assessment.
Target Audience, Learner Profile & Reflection
Finalized learner profile with three composite personas (Marcus, Rosa, David), differentiated enrichment pathways, and a reflection on technology, cultural relevance, and iterative feedback.
Download Doc ↗Dick & Carey
The Dick and Carey systems-design model applied to Decoding the Code, producing finalized course type and modality decisions for the minicourse plus a 484-word reflection on diverse learner needs, learner barriers, and the ADDIE versus Dick and Carey decision.
Course Type
Decoding the Code will be delivered as a self-paced asynchronous professional development minicourse built for practicing 6–12 content-area teachers in general education, special education, and ELAR, social studies, and science classrooms. The course runs across four short modules — Reading Brain, Adolescent Reader Profiles, Structured Literacy Moves for Secondary Settings, and Implementation in Your Subject Area — and finishes with a Teacher-Ready Toolkit of three classroom-tested structured literacy strategies — syllable division, morphology mapping, and explicit vocabulary preview — each with step-by-step implementation guides and a nine-week rollout plan teachers can follow at their own pace.
A minicourse is the right format because the learning gap is specific and bounded. Secondary teachers need foundational structured literacy knowledge translated into age-respectful classroom moves, not a full reading specialist certification. Short focused professional development respects what the audience can realistically absorb and apply between Monday and Friday, and it matches the way most districts already deliver continuing education credit (International Dyslexia Association, 2020; Texas Education Agency, 2024).
Course Modality
The minicourse runs fully online and asynchronously, hosted in Articulate Rise or a Canvas instance, with one optional 30-minute live coaching call per module. Every concept is delivered in at least two modalities — captioned video, downloadable transcript, and a visual organizer — and the culminating performance task offers three submission formats: a written lesson plan, an annotated lesson video, or a recorded think-aloud. This design honors all three UDL principles directly — optional coaching for engagement, multimodal content for representation, and three submission formats for action and expression (CAST, 2018).
This modality is the only one that reaches secondary teachers nationwide while respecting the actual working conditions of a classroom educator who teaches six class periods, runs two duty stations, and has no consistent block of time. It also models Universal Design for Learning for the very educators who will go on to design instruction for students with dyslexia.
Dick and Carey, Course Type & Modality
Single-page infographic covering the ten steps of the Dick and Carey Model, implications for instructional design, strengths and limitations applied to the minicourse, and finalized course type and modality.
View Infographic ↗Course Type, Modality & Reflection
LDTC 605 Unit 3 assignment with finalized course type and modality, the 484-word reflection, and APA 7 references.
Download Doc ↗Course Learning Outcomes
Draft Course Learning Outcomes for Decoding the Code, written for the 6–12 content-area teachers who take the minicourse and mapped to the six components of structured literacy. Each outcome closes a piece of the learning gap named in this IDD.
- Identify the six components of structured literacy — phonology, sound-symbol association, syllable instruction, morphology, syntax, and semantics — and explain how each supports reading in adolescent learners.
- Analyze samples of student reading and writing to locate where a decoding, fluency, or comprehension breakdown is happening.
- Apply morphology-based strategies — roots, prefixes, and suffixes — to teach the academic vocabulary specific to their content area.
- Design a content-area lesson component that carries explicit, multisensory literacy support without lowering the rigor of the material.
- Select assistive technologies and accommodations — text-to-speech, decodable digital text, specialized fonts, audio scaffolds — matched to a specific student profile.
- Evaluate their own instruction against structured-literacy principles and set one measurable goal for their classroom.
UbD & Course Learning Outcomes
The full Unit 4 discussion page — UbD overview, implications, strengths and limitations for the minicourse, and these outcomes in context.
Open Page ↗Course Learning Outcomes & Reflection
LDTC 605 Unit 4 assignment with the six outcomes and a 416-word reflection on alignment, differentiation, and feedback mechanisms.
Download Doc ↗Decoding the Code: Six Learning Activities
Each one closes part of the learning gap named in this IDD — secondary content-area teachers who can tell a student is struggling but do not yet have structured-literacy tools — and each maps to a Course Learning Outcome drafted in Unit 4. These are brainstormed overviews, not fully designed lessons.
Escape the 6: Six Components of Structured Literacy
Short explainer segments introduce the six components of structured literacy — phonology, sound–symbol association, syllable instruction, morphology, syntax, and semantics — and the tell that gives each one away. Teachers then enter a timed escape room where six locks each hold a piece of real student evidence; naming the component behind the breakdown is what opens the lock. Mastery gates and guided hints mean a wrong call earns coaching, not a score. This builds the shared vocabulary every later activity depends on.
Readers of the Ark: Diagnostic Lab
Teachers work through de-identified samples of adolescent reading and writing and decide whether the breakdown is decoding, fluency, or comprehension. Each choice opens a short feedback branch that explains what the evidence shows. Teachers are enabled to spot where a reader is actually stuck instead of guessing.
Area Code: Morphology in My Subject Area
Each teacher pulls five to eight academic terms from their own content area and breaks them into roots, prefixes, and suffixes. They then draft a short word-study routine they could run in their own class next week. The activity turns morphology from a reading-teacher idea into a content-area vocabulary tool.
Lit Bit: Literacy-Embedded Lesson Build
Working from a template and a worked example, teachers design one lesson component that carries explicit, multisensory literacy support without lowering the rigor of the content. This is the course’s culminating artifact — proof a teacher can build the thing, not just name it.
Tech Elect: Assistive Tech Match
Teachers move through three student profiles and match assistive technologies and accommodations — text-to-speech, decodable digital text, specialized fonts, audio scaffolds — to each learner’s specific need. A case-based decision path gives feedback at each fork, keeping tool choice tied to a real student rather than a generic checklist.
Self-Audit and One Goal
Teachers use a structured-literacy self-audit checklist to look honestly at their own instruction, then set one measurable classroom goal. It connects to the three tracks — Marcus sets a foundation goal, Rosa a framework goal, David an intervention goal — closing the course on the teacher’s own next step.
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. https://udlguidelines.cast.org
Piskurich, G. M. (2015). Rapid instructional design: Learning ID fast and right (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Successive Approximation Model (SAM)
The instructional design model for Decoding the Code was chosen here — the Successive Approximation Model as the build engine, paired with Understanding by Design so the outcomes stay fixed while the design iterates. The full rationale, and why the alternatives were set aside, is written up in Element 10 below. These three artifacts are the working evidence: the model explained, one full SAM cycle run as a simulation, and the graded iteration that answered the instructor’s Unit 5 feedback.
The Successive Approximation Model
SAM’s three phases in plain English, its implications for design, strengths and limits for my minicourse, and the UbD-paired model choice for the Instructional Design Document. APA 7 sources.
Open the infographic ↗SAM Cycle Simulation
Run one full SAM cycle: lock the outcome in the Savvy Start, then iterate three design loops and Alpha→Beta→Gold development. Mastery-gated, voice-guided by Tenneh (your SAM trainer), with learner telemetry and a reflection capture that pools to a cohort sheet.
Run the simulation ↗Unit 5 Review → Unit 6 Iteration
The graded iteration answering the instructor’s Unit 5 feedback: subjective “works” language rewritten as observable look-fors, criterion checklists for Activities 3–6, and a final unassisted Cold Read. Outcomes fixed, evidence tightened.
Read the iteration ↗Course Learning Outcomes, Revised & Bloom’s Alignment
The six outcomes drafted in Unit 4, revised for Unit 7. Understanding by Design keeps the outcome fixed while the wording iterates — so these supersede the draft above without moving the target. Each now leads with a single verb mapped to a Bloom level, which sets the activity and the evidence for that outcome.
- Explain the six components of structured literacy — phonology, sound–symbol association, syllable instruction, morphology, syntax, and semantics — and how each supports reading development in adolescent learners. [Understand]
- Analyze samples of student reading and writing to pinpoint whether a breakdown is occurring at decoding, fluency, or comprehension. [Analyze]
- Apply morphology-based strategies — roots, prefixes, and suffixes — to teach the academic vocabulary specific to their content area. [Apply]
- Design a content-area lesson component that carries explicit, multisensory literacy support without lowering the rigor of the material. [Create]
- Select assistive technologies and accommodations — text-to-speech, decodable digital text, specialized fonts, audio scaffolds — matched to a specific student profile. [Evaluate]
- Evaluate their own instruction against structured-literacy principles and set one measurable goal for their classroom practice. [Metacognition]
UbD, Bloom's & the Revised CLOs
The full Unit 7 discussion page — outcomes vs. objectives, Bloom's revised taxonomy, the six revised outcomes in context, and the revision rationale.
Open Page ↗Learning Objectives & Bloom's Alignment
LDTC 605 Unit 7 assignment with the six revised outcomes, Bloom's alignment, a sample objective-to-assessment map, and the SME review note.
Download Doc ↗Module Objectives, Learning Activities & Assessment Strategies
One fully outlined module for Decoding the Code — objectives in delivery sequence, activities aligned to those objectives, and assessment strategies aligned to those activities. This closes the alignment chain the IDD has been building since Unit 4.
Morphology for Content-Area Vocabulary
Five module learning objectives, sequenced in delivery order and each aligned to a course learning outcome.
- 1Define morpheme, base, root, prefix, and suffix, and classify the parts of a given set of academic words. CLO 1 · Understand
- 2Examine samples of student writing from their content area to identify morphological error patterns. CLO 2 · Analyze
- 3Construct a morpheme matrix for one high-value root that generates at least eight content-area words. CLO 3 · Apply
- 4Apply an explicit, multisensory morpheme-mapping routine to pre-teach one week of academic vocabulary. CLO 3 & 4 · Apply
- 5Design a 10-minute morphology mini-routine that plugs into an existing content lesson without cutting its rigor. CLO 4 · Create
- Interactive Word-Part Sort — sort academic words into base plus affixes with feedback on each drop. (Objective 1)
- Student-Work Autopsy — tag morphological error patterns and name the instruction each calls for. (Objective 2)
- Matrix Lab — build a morpheme matrix for a root from their own subject. (Objective 3)
- Routine Script + Practice — script and record the four-step mapping routine. (Objectives 3, 4)
- Mini-Routine Build — design a 10-minute routine for a real upcoming lesson. (Objective 5)
- Discussion Forum — post the chosen root and respond to two peers. (Objectives 3, 5)
- Mastery Gate — application check that must pass before Module 4 unlocks. (Objectives 1, 3, 4)
Each strategy traces back through one learning activity to the objective it proves, and from there to a course learning outcome.
| # | Assessment strategy | Type | Learning activity | Objective | CLO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Word-part sort check | Formative | Interactive Word-Part Sort | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | Error-pattern tagging with rationale | Formative | Student-Work Autopsy | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | Morpheme matrix artifact | Formative | Matrix Lab | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | Recorded routine performance check | Formative | Routine Script + Practice | 3, 4 | 3, 4 |
| 5 | Structured peer review | Formative | Discussion Forum | 3, 5 | 3, 4 |
| 6 | Mini-routine build performance task | Summative | Mini-Routine Build | 5 | 4 |
| 7 | Module mastery gate | Summative | Mastery Gate | 1, 3, 4 | 1, 3 |
Minicourse Assessment Strategies
The full Unit 8 page — the seven strategies in sequence with what each collects, the complete alignment table, and what holds versus what I am still watching.
Open Page ↗Built In, Not Bolted On
A six-station simulation for core content teachers. Start with the retrofit math — 165 minutes of modification against 40 minutes of shared planning — then rebuild one biology assessment so the differentiation is structural. Ends with an honest audit of what is genuinely still individual.
Run the simulation ↗Digital Image
The Unit 3 deliverable adds the first visual design artifact to the IDD media repository: a Welcome and Meet Your Instructor announcement for Decoding the Code. The primary image is the original hand-painted Sankofa bird logo — not stock art or AI-generated — integrated into a two-column layout using CRAP visual design principles and locked Sankofa brand tokens.
Welcome to Decoding the Code
One-page Welcome and Meet Your Instructor announcement applying Contrast, Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity. Sankofa bird logo embedded at full header scale and footer signature scale. CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Original artwork by Tenneh C. Freeman.
View PDF ↗Digital Media Checklist — Unit 3
All criteria in Sections A–D marked MET. Self-identified refinement: white space at bottom of PDF could be filled with a motivational pull-quote bar in a future iteration.
View PDF ↗Digital Media Resources
Open educational resources and digital media evaluated for use in Decoding the Code. Each entry records the resource, its license, the CLO it supports, and the evaluation outcome.
| Resource | Author | License | CLO | Evaluation | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word Lists by Syllable Type (Orton-Gillingham) | Susan Jones Teaching | CC BY-NC | CLO 1 | Passed Sections A–E of the Digital Media Checklist. Accurate syllable-type categorization aligned to Orton-Gillingham methodology. CC BY-NC license permits non-commercial PD use with attribution. Accessible as a printable PDF; no alt-text concerns for a text-only word list. | Adopt |
| The 6 Syllable Types at a Glance (Handout) | Tenneh C. Freeman | CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 | CLO 1 | Original quick-reference handout covering all six syllable types. Designed with CRAP visual principles and Sankofa brand standards. Includes audio description for accessibility (3:37 MP3, personal voice clone). | Original |
| Decoding the Code: Welcome & Meet Your Instructor Announcement | Tenneh C. Freeman | CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 | CLO 1–6 | One-page instructor announcement integrating the original hand-painted Sankofa bird logo. Two-column layout applying CRAP visual design principles. Primary image is original artwork — not stock or AI-generated. WCAG 2.1 alt text on all images. Evaluated against Digital Media Checklist Unit 3. LDTC 610 · Unit 3. | Original |
Subject Matter Expert & Resources
The people and sources that keep this course accurate. I am the structured-literacy expert here, but a literacy specialist is not a chemistry or civics expert — so the review structure builds in the people who are.
Tenneh C. Freeman
Texas-certified in Special Education (7–12), Generalist (4–8), and Social Studies (7–12); Reading by Design Dyslexia Intervention Specialist; Orton-Gillingham trained. I own the structured-literacy content and the instructional design of the course.
Science & social studies colleagues
They pressure-test that the morphology examples and lesson components fit real content and do not lower rigor. They keep the subject-area examples authentic where my own expertise thins out.
Dyslexia coordinator or literacy specialist
Checks the course against the state dyslexia handbook and current Science of Reading guidance. Their sign-off keeps the course defensible to the districts that mandate this professional development.
Assistive technology specialist
Confirms the tools named in CLO 5 are current and correctly matched to student profiles. Assistive technology changes fast, and the recommendations have to be right on the day a teacher uses them.
Dick, Carey, & Carey (2015), The systematic design of instruction · Wiggins & McTighe (2005), Understanding by design · Anderson & Krathwohl (2001), A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing · Allen (2012), Leaving ADDIE for SAM · CAST (2018), UDL guidelines 2.2 · Black & Wiliam (1998), Assessment and classroom learning · Guskey (2010), Lessons of mastery learning.
Instructional Design Model
The model driving development of Decoding the Code, and why it is paired rather than used alone.
SAM, held in place by UbD
The Successive Approximation Model is the build engine. Its three phases — Preparation, Iterative Design, Iterative Development — suit a course whose value depends on whether the routines survive contact with a real classroom. What SAM does that the alternatives do not is make continuous feedback and rapid prototyping the central mechanism rather than one activity among several. I cannot know from a blueprint whether a teacher can run a morpheme routine in ten minutes; I find out by prototyping it, watching a teacher use it, and revising.
The risk SAM carries is drift. Rapid prototyping can quietly let the build start steering the outcomes. Understanding by Design is the guard: outcomes are fixed in Stage 1 and everything downstream iterates against them. UbD names the target; SAM iterates the route.
- ADDIE — ADDIE does include formative evaluation, and treating it as a one-way line that saves all judgement for the end misreads the model. The real difference is where the feedback sits. In ADDIE, formative evaluation is a step carried out inside the phases; in SAM, the prototype-review-revise loop is the process itself. For a course whose value depends on whether a ten-minute routine survives a real class period, I want continuous feedback and rapid prototyping to be the structure rather than a checkpoint within it.
- Dick and Carey — the analysis rigor is genuinely useful and shaped the course type and modality decisions in this IDD, but the full ten-step systems approach carries more front-loaded documentation than a four-module minicourse can justify.
- Rapid ID — the speed is attractive and the Unit 5 activity brainstorm used it, but on its own it does not protect the alignment chain this course depends on.
SAM plus UbD keeps the iteration without giving up the target. The assessment strategies in the block above are the practical proof — they were written against fixed outcomes, and the mastery-gate threshold is explicitly flagged as a hypothesis for the first cohort to settle.
Learning Theory
Two theories drive the design of every learning activity in this minicourse. Andragogy (Knowles) is the reason the course is problem-centred and built on what teachers already carry into it — adult learners need the work to be immediately usable, so every module ends in something that goes back to a real classroom. Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller) is the reason instruction is explicit and sequenced in small steps rather than discovery-based: teachers learning an unfamiliar routine while also managing subject content cannot spare working memory for figuring out the routine itself. The two together explain the structure of the assessment strategies above — low-stakes practice first, load reduced through worked examples and single-point rubrics, and the culminating task anchored to a lesson the teacher already has to teach.
Minicourse Idea & Learning Theory Connection
Minicourse overview plus strengths, limitations, and design applications of Andragogy and Cognitive Load Theory, with APA 7 references.
Open Discussion ↗