EDLD 5320
COVA Reflection

A Personal and Professional Journey Through Learning, Leadership, and Change
​
Throughout the Applied Digital Learning (ADL) program, the COVA framework, choice, ownership, voice, and authentic learning fundamentally reshaped how I understand learning, leadership, and change. This transformation did not happen quickly or comfortably. Instead, it emerged through moments of uncertainty, resistance, reflection, and ultimately growth. Rather than completing isolated academic tasks, I was required to engage in authentic work that directly intersected with my professional responsibilities, most notably through developing my Innovation Plan.
​
I first realized that I truly had choice, ownership, and voice during the early stages of developing my Innovation Plan. Unlike traditional coursework that often prioritizes compliance and instructor-driven outcomes, this project required me to identify a genuine problem of practice within my organization and take responsibility for addressing it. While this level of autonomy was empowering, it was also deeply uncomfortable. I had spent years operating within systems where success was defined by clear expectations, structured deliverables, and external validation. COVA disrupted that pattern by removing the safety net.
​
Reading A Failure of Nerve forced me to confront this discomfort directly. Friedman (2017) describes how leaders often struggle to remain self-differentiated in anxious systems, defaulting instead to seeking approval, quick fixes, or external reassurance. I recognized myself in this description. As I worked through my Innovation Plan, I often found myself wanting confirmation that my ideas were “right,” rather than trusting my professional judgment. This realization was humbling and, at times, unsettling, but it marked a turning point in how I approached both learning and leadership.
​
This internal tension was further challenged by Dweck’s (2006) work on the growth mindset. While I regularly encourage students and colleagues to embrace learning as a process, I became aware of areas where I still held fixed beliefs about my own capabilities, particularly when operating without clearly defined boundaries. The ADL program required me to sit with uncertainty, revise ideas publicly, and accept that meaningful learning involves risk. Over time, I began to reframe discomfort as evidence of growth rather than failure. I noticed this early on in EDLD 5302 and wrote a blog post titled "Reflections of Failure."
 
As I adjusted to this learning model, the principles of Creating Significant Learning Environments (CSLE) became increasingly meaningful. Designing learning experiences through Fink’s 3-Column Table required intentional alignment between learning goals, activities, and assessments. This process slowed me down and forced me to justify each design decision rather than relying on familiar instructional habits. 
​
​The integration of Understanding by Design (UbD) further strengthened this shift. Wiggins and McTighe’s (2005) backward design framework challenged me to begin with desired results and authentic evidence of learning before selecting content or tools. This approach directly influenced both my Innovation Plan and my broader instructional design philosophy, reinforcing the importance of purpose-driven learning design. See Aligning Outcome Assessment and Activities.
​
Technology integration also took on new meaning through the work of Roblyer and Hughes (2019). Rather than viewing educational technology as an add-on or efficiency tool, I began to see it as a means of transforming learning experiences. This perspective shaped how I designed digital learning environments in the ADL program and how I now approach technology use in my organization. I wrote "The Application of Artificial  Intelligence (AI) in Surgical Technology Education" after reflecting on a roundtable discussion I moderated at an educators' conference. 
 
Finding and sustaining my voice throughout this process was one of the most challenging aspects of the program. Writing and creating for an authentic audience, my organization and professional peers required vulnerability and clarity. Crucial Conversations provided a framework for navigating the difficult discussions inherent in proposing change, particularly when those changes challenge long-standing norms (Grenny et al., 2021). These principles influenced how I framed my Innovation Plan, shifting my approach from persuasion to dialogue.
See my blog post "A Guide for Transitioning Leadership Roles as a Surgical Technologist".
 
As my work progressed, I became increasingly aware that strong ideas alone are insufficient without intentional execution. The Four Disciplines of Execution offered a practical framework for translating vision into action through focus, accountability, and measurable progress (McChesney et al., 2016). This lens grounded my Innovation Plan in practicality and sustainability, guiding me in developing an Action Research Plan. 
​
Additionally, Influencer expanded my understanding of how change actually occurs within organizations. Grenny et al. (2013) emphasize that sustainable change requires addressing multiple sources of influence, including motivation, ability, and environmental support. This perspective reshaped how I conceptualized my Innovation Plan, not merely as a solution, but as a system of support designed to influence behavior and culture. Read "Why, How,  What".
​
Collectively, these experiences and readings reinforced the authenticity of my Innovation Plan and aided in helping me develop My Learning Philosophy. It was not created to satisfy a course requirement, but to address a real and persistent need within my professional context. Its continued refinement beyond individual courses reflects the core purpose of COVA-based learning, work that extends beyond academic evaluation and contributes meaningfully to organizational improvement.
 
As a result of the ADL program, my learning philosophy has shifted from an instructor-centered model focused on content delivery to a learner-centered approach grounded in agency, reflection, and authentic application. I now view learning as an active, iterative process that requires trust, intentional design, and the courage to lead change. Moving forward, I plan to apply the COVA framework within my organization by designing learning experiences that offer meaningful choice, foster ownership through authentic projects, and amplify learners' voices through reflective, multimodal expression.
 
The most important lesson I have learned through this process is that vulnerability is not a weakness in learning or leadership; it is a prerequisite for growth. The discomfort I experienced throughout the ADL program became the catalyst for deeper reflection, stronger conviction, and a clearer sense of purpose. What began as an academic journey ultimately became a personal and professional transformation, one that continues to shape how I learn, lead, and design learning environments that matter.
 
References
 
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
 
Friedman, E. H. (2017). A failure of nerve: Leadership in the age of the quick fix (10th anniversary rev.           ed.). Church Publishing.
 
Grenny, J., Patterson, K., Maxfield, D., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2013). Influencer: The new science of          leading change (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
 
Grenny, J., Patterson, K., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2021). Crucial conversations: Tools for talking                  when stakes are high (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
 
McChesney, C., Covey, S., & Huling, J. (2016). The four disciplines of execution: Achieving your wildly              important goals. Free Press.
 
Roblyer, M. D., & Hughes, J. E. (2019). Integrating educational technology into teaching: Transforming          learning across disciplines (8th ed.). Pearson.
 
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.