Having been given the opportunity to self-assess my ID competencies at three different points during my IDD&E studies so far, I sought to compare the three instances to look for patterns.

​

     It is not surprising to me that the two skill categories in which I self-assessed my competency with a "3," or, full competency did not change at all.  I entered this program feeling very confident in my skills as a communicator (#1: Communicate effectively in visual, oral, and written form) and collaborator (#21: Manage partnerships and collaborative relationships).  What was surprising to me is the decrease in competency from "3" to "2" for item #17: Evaluate instructional and non-instructional interventions.  There is a good explanation: I came into this program with unclear delineations between "assessment" and "evaluation."  My prior work as a Standardized Patient Educator (SPE) required me to achieve expert status in assessing learners' competencies, as well as (marginally, when time allowed) evaluating the success of the educational programs we delivered.  My understanding of program evaluation is much clearer now and I acknowledge that there is still much for me to learn as an evaluator.

​

     The vast majority of my competencies I would rate in the "2," or, practice experience level.  Each of my IDD&E courses so far has given me the knowledge and skills to understand each competency and at least one chance to practically apply those skills to a comprehensive imaginary or real ID project.  While I feel fairly confident in these skills, I believe I will not achieve full competency until I have many more opportunities in real-world contexts to practice.

​

     I identified two competencies in which I feel only a surface-level or informational knowledge level, rated as a "1."  These competencies, #13: Plan non-instructional interventions and #20: Apply business skills to managing the instructional design function, I believe, were not a focus of any of the IDD&E courses.  I expect that these skills will be built up the more I work on real-world instructional design projects.

​

     It is satisfying to look at the document, above (labeled "the PDF which compares all three instances and tracks areas of growth"), and see all of the competencies and performance statements with green shading, indicating an increase in self-assessment scores in that competency.  Areas in which a score decrease occurred, mostly in the 'Evaluation' section and shaded in red, are clear indicators that I need to build and refine my skills in those areas.  I have appreciated every opportunity for self-assessment that has been built into the IDD&E curriculum.  Honest self-assessment, I have learned from my time as a SPE, is critical to understanding one's own strengths and opportunities for improvement.  This longitudinal approach - using the same self-assessment form at three different stages in my studies - is an excellent method to track growth and see "the bigger picture" of the competencies of an instructional designer.  I believe it is every professional's responsibility to periodically self-assess and take active measures to improve and grow whenever possible.

​