FIER Procedural Flow FIER I.D. follows procedural stages. Each phase of FIER is divided into three stages; preparatory, progressive, and concluding stage. Materials Needed (Preparation Stage) Activity ( Progress Stage) Final Outputs ( Concluding Stage) Though the procedural flow of stages is linear, the FIER procedural flow of its phases is cyclical. The flow revolves around the 5-Step, 5-Cycle Teaching Model (for discussion, google search my article, "Teaching styles and instructional flows in chemistry course: A Pattern for 5-Step, 5-Cycle Teaching model"). Implementation of this teaching model eventually implements the formulated course syllabus and the teaching plan. In the process, cyclical twists may happen, that is, formulation, (re)implementation, evaluation, and revision can be done throughout the process making each phase a continuous process. During the implementation of the teaching model, continuous evaluation can be done that may reveal weaknesses that will trigger revision, formulation, and re-implementation. Examples of these weaknesses are: outcomes need to be added, instructional materials need to be updated, objectives need to be reformulated to suit the needs, and teaching styles and strategies need to be adjusted. Identifying weaknesses requires evaluation, making corrections requires revision and reformulation, testing if the correction works require implementation, and goes the cycles. FIER instructional design has four (4) phases as follows: Phase I is the formulation of the teaching plan and syllabus of the course in consideration of the students learning styles; Phase 2 is the implementation of the formulated teaching plan and syllabus; Phase 3 is the evaluation of the formulated teaching plan and syllabus through summative and formative assessment, item analysis, learning style profile, and classroom observations; and Phase 4 the revision/review of the formulated teaching plan and syllabus using the results in Phase 3. Review is required to monitor and complete the cycle; revision is done only when needed. The details of every phase are as follows: PHASE 1 Formulation of Teaching Plan& Syllabus. Preparation Stage: The following were secured: A. From Educational Agencies (CHED for example)  Standards and Specifications on Curriculum and Instruction (for syllabus requirements, and a list of strategies in teaching, and instructional materials required). B. From School College/Department concern  Approved standards and grading system.  Approved vision, mission, and goals  Approved templates for syllabus and teaching plan.  Recommendations from the department concern what else to include in the syllabus in the interest of the department concern such as objectives, topics, and assessment methods. The department concern refers to the department offering the curricular program in which their students are enrolled in the course concern. C. From Library and Web  List of methods, strategies, and techniques in delivering the topics of the course.  Assessment methods and techniques.  List of references including relevant articles for the topics covered in  the course.  Theories and educational principles relevant to the course specifications.  Taxonomies of learning (e.g. significant learning by Fink, behavioral objectives by Bloom, revised Bloom’s taxonomy by Anderson, expanded Bloom’s framework by Marzano, SOLO, Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes by Biggs and Collis, etc.) Progress Stage: The following were done in accordance with the CHED’s aims and course specifications:  Formulate the topic outline. This includes:  -determining the coverage of the course,  -selection and sequencing of topics for the course.  Decide what taxonomy to use for writing learning outcomes or objectives.  Write LSBO’s for the course and propose students’ activities. (see the previous article here in Science 2.0 or check my book, "Developing a Learning Styles-Based Instructional Design)" Concluding Stage: The following outputs were finalized:
 Syllabus using the approved school template  Teaching Plan (using the 5-Step-4-Cycle Teaching Model)  Rubrics for students’ activities and assessment tools PHASE 2 Implementation of the Syllabus and teaching Plan This phase is the trying out of the syllabus, rubrics of students’ activities, and the Five-Step Four-Cycle classroom teaching model in the teaching plan formulated in Phase 1. Similar to ADDIE, it includes the profile of the learners in its analysis stage, outcomes and assessments in its design stage, logistics in its development stage, and trying out in its implementation stage. This phase includes the following: Preparation Stage: The following were prepared/secured:  Schedule with dates on when to take up each topic in the syllabus,  when quizzes and major examinations happen, and the deadlines of projects and assignments.  Materials for  For lecture and demonstration such as power point slides, acetate transparencies, Pictures, apparatuses, chemicals, reading materials,textbook, audio-videos, etc.  For students’ activities: articles, flashcards, articles, etc.  For Diagnostic test  For Assessments: Rubrics, Scoring Sheets, Activity Sheets, etc.  Checklist for learning styles being catered by actual teaching styles  Copies of Felder- Soloman’s Index of Learning Style (ILS) questionnaire and scoring sheet  Faculty Profile  Class list that includes information on the number of students officially enrolled, & program enrolled. Progress Stage: The following were done:  Decide who will teach.  Do microteaching in the presence of other faculty members who will teach the course  Administer the ILS  Do Actual classroom teaching – take note of any difficulties encountered in the use of the syllabus and teaching plan. In the first meeting of actual teaching do the following:  Administer diagnostic test  Administer the Felder Soloman’s Index of Learning Style (ILS) and let the students score their own ILS answers.  Distribute copies of the article, Learning Styles and Strategies by Felder & Soloman (See Appendix F) and let students discuss among themselves the article in relation to their respective learning styles.  Confirm the actual attendance with the official class list.  If group activities, determine the number of groups possible and seating arrangement for easy movement when students go into groups. Concluding Stage: The following outputs were finalized:  Overall learning style profile of the students  Summary of the comments and recommendation from fellow faculty members PHASE 3 Evaluation. Evaluation in here, the I.D. focuses not only on the students but also on the teachers and the instructional design itself. Evaluation is done primarily to see if the goals and objectives are being met and are aligned with the vision and mission, and to see whether the teaching and learning styles match. Thus, in the process, the parts of the design that need revision can be seen. Meeting the objectives of the syllabus can be manifested by the levels of achievement of the students on summative and formative assessments. Summative assessments are subjected further to item analysis in order to identify difficult topics. Matching the teaching and learning styles can be manifested by a comparative analysis of the learning style profile of the students through ISL, and the teaching style profile of actual teaching through classroom observations with a checklist on the learning styles being catered to. Consequently, initial decisions are made as to which parts of the I.D. need to be revised, thus advancing to the 4th Phase of this I.D. The following are the details of Phase 3: Preparation Stage: The following were prepared/secured:  Previous departmental examination test papers.  Copies of departmental examination  Learning style profile of the students Progress Stage: The following were done:  Match learning style profile of the students with the identified actual teaching styles observed per section.  Determine the level of achievements of students in D.E per section.  Item analysis the checked and scored departmental examination test papers. Concluding Stage: The following outputs were finalized:  Overall learning style profile of the students;  Overall levels of achievement of the students in the D.E.;  List of select topic for classroom observations (from the difficult topics identified by item analysis);  Overall teaching style profile (from classroom observations);  Final grades of the students; and  Identified parts of the teaching plan and syllabus that need revision PHASE 4 Revision/Review  Using the results/information from Phase 3, the teaching plan and syllabus are updated, implemented, and goes the cycle. Is there a need for revision?  Yes  No