February 5

Reflective Writing and Fierce Editing for Messaging Components in Instructional Design

“There are two goals in the experiential learning process. One is to learn the specifics of a particular subject, and the other is to learn about one’s own learning process.” ~ Dr. David A. Kolb, 1983, 2025
    Authentic Reflection occurs experientially and cyclically with a reflective observation (Kolb,1983). Kolb’s Learning Cycle describes a continuum of activities that proceed metacognitively as individuals construct schemas related to their experiences. 
According to Kolb, a four-stage cycle catalyzed these two goals: 
  1. Concrete Experience: Engaging in an activity or task.
  2. Reflective Observation: Stepping back to reflect on the experience and identifying discrepancies between understanding and reality.
  3. Abstract Conceptualization: Making sense of the experience by drawing conclusions and developing theories.
  4. Active Experimentation: Testing these new theories in future situations 

     Many authentic learning experiences and assignments include peer review and editing collaboration. One learning artifact from authentic learning experiences of editing and peer review collaboration is a Reflective Writing assignment. A Learning Framework that supports collaborative peer review and editing is Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (1983).    

“Whether we focus on problematic experiences or positive ones, reflecting on them will provide us with opportunities for growth and development” ~ Barbara Bassot, The Reflective Journal

      Reflective Writing contributes sense and meaning in the Experiential Learning process (Kolb, 1983; University of Texas at Arlington Libraries, 2021). Reflective Writing includes both reflection during editing *and* reflection after Peer or Supervisor Review. Reflective writing is beneficial because it increases self-awareness, enhances learning and development, improves problem-solving skills, and contributes to both personal and professional growth (Bailey and Scheherazade, 2022; Bassot, 2016; University of Hull Library, 2024).

     Instructional Design centers on the vital task of messaging. Messaging in Instructional Design has multi-modal components, such as Reflective writing. The Messaging trajectory in Reflective writing is compromised without careful editing.

     Editing is the systematic process of reviewing and refining a manuscript so that it meets standards of clarity, coherence, grammar, word usuage, and professional integrity. Unlike proofreading, which focuses on surface-level errors, editing serves as a bridge between the writer’s complex application of research evidence and the reader’s comprehension.  An effective editing process is often a hybrid approach which combines human intuition and mechanized grammar checkers. Combining human intuition with mechanized proofreading creates a system of “checks and balances” that is more comprehensive. The combinatory approach will increase error identification and feedback on organizational, grammatical, usage, presentation, and errors in presentation graphics.

The Strengths of AI vs. Human Editors
Dr. Helen Teague
Feature Human Academic Editors AI Editing Tools (e.g., MS COPILot, Claude 3.5, Gemini AI on Google Search)
Context Deeply understands the subtle intent and scholarly “nuance” of your research. Often misses the underlying logic of complex or niche academic arguments.
Fact-Checking Can verify the logic, citations, and intellectual validity of a claim. Prone to “hallucinations” or presenting false information as fact.
Ethics Ensures the work meets institutional integrity and professional standards. Cannot take responsibility for the work; may flag correct content as “incorrect.”
Speed A slower, deliberate deep-reading process focused on quality. Provides instantaneous scanning and feedback for long documents.
Consistency May occasionally overlook minor repetitive patterns due to fatigue. Perfect at catching objective, repetitive errors (e.g., specific punctuation rules).
Note on Process: This table was developed through a collaborative dialogue between Helen Teague, EdD. and Gemini AI on Google Search. While the AI assisted with structural reformatting and drafting, the conceptual framework, editing, and final verification were provided by the Dr. Teague to ensure academic accuracy and design flow.

     A best practice is to follow Spaced Practice when editing all varieties of your instructional design materials (including assignments). When reviewing your own work, separate the editing process from the actual messaging (i.e. writing). 

Here are some best practices for Spaced Practice when editing your writing for messaging, organization, and mechanics: 
  1. Always frame your work with a Title Page, Title Slide, and/or Title Screen (for videos). Always provide your name.
  2. Read aloud what you have written. 
  3. Start reading from the bottom of the document.
  4. Review each sentence separately.
  5. Scan the written document several times, looking for one specific type of error at a time.
  6. Keep a list of your frequent error patterns (Instructor Example: When I work very late at night, my dyslexia is more pronounced and one letter in a word will be omitted and especially vowels, are likely to be transposed. 
  7. As a UDL affordance, omit contractions, idioms, colloquialisms, and informal speech. 
  8. Write and Wait: Organize your time to provide a break between composition, designing, and editing. 
  9. View presentation graphics on full screen.
  10. If presenting your work in a Professional Development session, view the presentation in the presentation room and screen.
  11. Provide attribution for images, including images of your own design. 
  12. For Visual presentation at Professional Development sessions and conferences, provide handouts with your complete contact information (workplace, school, office). Be sure references are included and are up-to-date.
  13. Follow any Specifications from your Conference Guide, School District Guide, APA Style and Formatting Guide, and your various course Syllabi. In our class, the Instructor’s assessment notes are also provided for review and implementation.
  14. Continue editing even after posting or publishing.
  15. Follow the 321 rule of editing- The 321 rule is a backup strategy in editing and media production, ensuring data safety by maintaining three copies of your work in two different formats, with one of those copies stored off-site.

 

For Consideration: What item(s) on the preceeding list are new to you? What item(s) would you add?

 

                                                                      References

Bailey, James R, and Scheherazade R. (2022). Don’t underestimate the power of self-reflection. Harvard Business Review.

https://hbr.org/2022/03/dont-underestimate-the-power-of-self-reflection

Bassot, B. (2016). The reflective journal (2nd ed.). Red Globe Press.

      
Kolb, D. (1983). Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
       
Kolb, D. (2026). The Institute of Experiential Learning. What is Experiential Learning?
https://experientiallearninginstitute.org/what-is-experiential-learning/

Teague, H. (2026). Reflective writing and fierce editing as a messaging component in Instructional Design. 10-Rep Learning blog. https://4oops.edublogs.org/2026/02/05/reflective-writing-and-fierce-editing-as-a-messaging-component-in-instructional-de

University of Hull Library (2024). Library: Reflective writing: What Is reflection? https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/reflectivewriting/reflection1a

University of Texas at Arlington Libraries (2021). What Is reflection? A critical step in the Experiential Learning process.
https://libraries.uta.edu/news/what-reflection-critical-step-experiential-learning-process

Category: AI in Education, Learning Theories, Reflection, Writing | LEAVE A COMMENT
June 30

Learning Something New Video

This is my LSN video on Juicing in partial requirements for EDLT 770b course at Pepperdine University. No fruits or vegetables were hurt in the making of this video. (Note: Video Link retired)

Semiotic Vocabulary
Centrifugal Juicers: Centrifugal juicers are the most common type of juicer that you will find in department stores. They are often upright and cylindrical in shape. They extract juice from fruits and vegetables by grating them into tiny pieces, then using a sieve to “spin” the juice out of the pulp at high speeds (in a similar manner in which a salad spinner extracts the water from washed greens).
Masticating Juicers: Masticating (aka “single gear”) juicers use a screw-type auger to grind, crush and “chew” fruits, vegetables and leafy greens. It distributes the juice and extracts the pulp into separate containers.
Triturating Juicers: Triturating (or twin gear) juicers are high-end juicers and are considered to be the best ones on the market. They work similarly to a masticating juicer but the motor runs slower, which preserves maximum nutrients and promotes efficient juicing. They also have two, interlocking “screws” that grind, crush and “chew” produce in order to extract the juice.
Wheatgrass Juicers: If you want to juice wheatgrass, then you should get a dedicated wheatgrass juicer. Centrifugal juicers are not appropriate for extracting the juice from grasses, and masticating juicers are not the best option either. Wheatgrass juicers are specifically designed to do this job.
Citrus Juicers: Citrus juicers are specialized to extract juice from citrus fruits like oranges, grapefruit, lemons and limes. Obviously, they are not suitable for making green juices. Citrus fruits can be juiced in centrifugal, masticating and triturating juicers so it is not necessary to get a separate citrus juice extractor if you are getting one of these other units.

Sources:

Canole, D. (2011) Guide to Juicing Greens. Retrieved from http://www.mindbodygreen.com/0-5595/Guide-to-Juicing-Greens-Infographic.html

Foley, M. (2012). Beyond the Glass: Ways to Use Leftover Juice Pulp http://www.fitsugar.com/What-Do-Leftover-Juice-Pulp-21518042

Garland, D. K. (2002). Learning style characteristics of the online student: A study of learning styles, learner engagement and gender. Ann Arbor, University of Missouri – Columbia. 3074403: 121-121 p.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.

Juicing in the Kitchen: http://www.squidoo.com/juicing-in-the-kitchen

Kolb, A. and Kolb, D. A. K. (2010). “Learning to play, playing to learn: A case study of a ludic learning space.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 23(1): 26-50.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

LA Healthy Living Blog: http://www.lahealthyliving.com/1/post/2014/06/golden-turmeric-smoothie-pain-inflammation.html

My Whole Juice: http://mywholefoodlife.com/

Nutribullet Blog: http://nutribulletblog.com/

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.  (M.Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice : learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y., Cambridge University Press

Zull, J. (2002). The Art of the Changing Brain. Stylus Publishing. Retrieved from: http://jimmytorresecuador.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/64302662/The%20Art%20of%20Changing%20the%20Brain.pdf

Music by Chris Zabriskie – http://freemusicarchive.org/music/chris_zabriskie/

Category: Doctoral Assignments, Post Feed | LEAVE A COMMENT