some more thoughts about my model....

I've been thinking about my model this past week as I've been sharing it with others and trying to explain it to them. A lot of people have commented that they like the overall model because of its simplicity and the fact that the name helps make the parts easier to remember. I still wonder about the evaluation aspect of it, but keep going back to liking how I've depicted it here. I don't think evaluation should only inform the "input," but all parts of my model.

I've also been thinking about the pieces of my model and how they're represented. I still am happy with how they've turned out, as I think they've done a decent job of explaining contextual factors that need to be considered during the entire process. I shared my model with a senior doctoral student, and felt comfortable in my ability to explain it to her. She noted that the context is really important to my model, and that I was able to show parts that an outsider might not normally think of when creating a K-12 ELA curriculum. I also shared my model with someone with no interest in ID whatsoever, my husband. Although he wasn't able to offer the insight that my classmates might have on the product, he was able to tell me that the model made sense to him, and seems like a solid progression through the stages. (He also does not have any K-12 experience, so explanation of the context was also important here.)

Although it's still a novice model, I'm happy that I can share what I've created with an IDD&E student who's been in the program for years, someone completely outside of the field, and my classmates, and it seems to make sense to everyone. I like that my model is a simple depiction overall that can be fairly easily understood at first glance, and that a person's understanding of it seems to increase with explanation of each part. It makes sense to me; always good for it to make sense to others, too.