By Camilo Tabinas
| December 19th 2019 10:07 PM | Print
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 requires 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 with 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.
The following were secured:
A. From Educational Agencies (CHED for example)
Standards and Specifications on Curriculum and Instruction (for syllabus
requirements, and list of strategies in teaching, and instructional
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 on 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
Assessment methods and techniques.
List of references including relevant articles for the topics covered in
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.)
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
Write the LSBO’s for the course and propose students’ activities. (see previous article here in Science 2.0 or check my book, "Developing a Learning Styles-Based Instructional Design)"
The following outputs were finalized: