All Posts

Introduction: Learning as a Professional Conversation As I moved through Modules 1–9, I found myself thinking about instructional design less as a set of technical decisions and more as an ongoing conversation, between research and practice, between teachers and learners, and between who we are and who we aspire to be as educators. The course readings, action research, interview data, and multimedia analyses challenged me to reconsider how curriculum becomes equitable, rigoro

Designing for clarity Module 1 pushed me to examine the internal structure of lessons with far more intentionality. I began to recognize that objectives, checks for understanding, scaffolds, and practice structures are not procedural formalities; they are equity levers that either open or close access to rigorous thinking. When these elements lack clarity, multilingual learners and students with processing needs often lose the cognitive thread of a lesson. But when learning g

Module 2 reframed how I view student diversity by shifting my lens from categorical labels to individual learner profiles. Instead of grouping students as ELL, SWD, or gifted, I learned to examine linguistic repertoires, cultural communication patterns, background knowledge, processing needs, and sources of motivation. This more nuanced understanding illuminated why universal accommodations are essential. They proactively reduce barriers for entire groups before differentiati

Module 3 was transformative in helping me see that literacy is inseparable from disciplinary learning, especially in science. Shanahan and Shanahan (2012) argue that disciplinary literacy is not generic reading and writing; it is discipline-specific inquiry and communication. In chemistry and anatomy, students cannot model phenomena, construct explanations, or evaluate claims without tools such as guided annotation, contextual vocabulary routines, CER writing, mentor texts, a