Back to portfolio

Endeavor Schools · Instructional Design Portfolio

Conscious Discipline:
Putting It Into Practice

Closing the gap between watching training videos
and applying a behavioral framework in a real classroom

ADDIEScenario-Based LearningKirkpatrick EvaluationBranching ScenariosSCORM 1.2 / LMSArticulate Storyline 360Cognitive Load TheoryAdult LearningEarly Childhood Education
Designer
Kimberly Richard-Rivera
Role
Curriculum Director & Sole Instructional Designer
Organization
Endeavor Schools — Academic Committee
Scope
4 modules · ~90 min · Multi-campus rollout

The problem

A behavioral framework deployed without a practice layer

Endeavor Schools adopted Conscious Discipline — a research-based behavioral framework developed by Dr. Becky Bailey — as the school-wide approach to classroom management and social-emotional learning. As Curriculum Director and the school's Academic Committee lead, I was responsible for the full implementation across our campus network.

Staff were assigned foundational video modules from the official Conscious Discipline website. The videos were high quality. But watching is not practicing. Early observation data told a clear story: staff could describe the concepts, but they couldn't apply them in the three seconds before they reacted.

I designed and built a four-module eLearning course to bridge that gap. The course assumed CD knowledge was in place and focused entirely on application: realistic classroom scenarios, branching decisions, structured reflection, and a personal practice artifact for every learner to take back into their classroom.

4eLearning modules
90minTotal course duration
16+Screens per module
5Design documents

Root cause

Declarative knowledge ≠ Procedural skill

Before designing anything, I conducted needs analysis through three channels: reviewing incident and behavior data from classrooms post-video-training, coaching conversations with lead teachers, and direct classroom observation during Morning Meetings and transition periods.

Core finding

The existing CD video content successfully built declarative knowledge — staff could define brain states, describe the BRAIN framework, and explain the School Family model. What it did not build was procedural knowledge — the ability to execute the framework under pressure, in a real classroom, with real children watching. These are different cognitive tasks that require different instructional approaches.

Critical design constraint

Conscious Discipline is proprietary intellectual property owned by Dr. Becky Bailey. The course I built could not re-teach CD content — it had to apply it. Every screen assumed knowledge and built practice. That constraint became the most important design decision in the project: it forced the course to be scenario-first from the very first screen.

Pattern 1
Reactive responses persisted. Teachers who scored well on post-video comprehension checks were still observed raising their voices, issuing public warnings, and using isolation corners during classroom observation periods.
Pattern 2
Concepts didn't transfer to language. When asked what they would say to a dysregulated child, teachers defaulted to pre-CD phrasing — even when they could articulate the CD-aligned approach in the abstract.
Pattern 3
Adult self-regulation was the missing layer. The most common breakdown wasn't a knowledge gap — it was the teacher's own nervous system. When staff were triggered, every framework they'd learned went offline. No training had addressed that.

Design process

ADDIE as a living process,
not a checklist

I used the ADDIE framework as structural backbone — but in practice it was iterative and overlapping. Each phase produced a discrete professional deliverable before the next phase began.

A
Analysis — what is actually broken?
Reviewed behavior incident data from classrooms post-video-training. Conducted coaching conversations with lead teachers across campuses. Observed Morning Meetings and transition periods across three classrooms. Identified the declarative vs. procedural knowledge distinction as the core finding. Documented audience characteristics: varying tech comfort, high emotional labor, many completing training on mobile outside school hours.
ObservationIncident data reviewCoaching conversationsAudience analysis
D
Design — from needs to structure
Wrote the full Training Design Document (TDD) before opening any authoring tool. Established four modules mapped to CD's major application areas. Selected scenario-based learning as the primary instructional approach — grounded in Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller), Situated Learning (Lave & Wenger), and Reflective Practice (Schön). Built the Kirkpatrick evaluation plan into the TDD before a single screen was drafted.
Training Design DocumentSBL approachLearning objectivesEvaluation planning
D
Development — screen by screen
Produced four complete storyboards — 16+ screens each — with full narration scripts, branching maps with three-option decision points, interaction specifications, and SME review checklists. Specified Articulate Storyline 360. WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility requirements documented at every interactive screen. Built the Personal Composure Plan in Module 4 as a downloadable, printable artifact for classroom use.
4 storyboardsNarration scriptsBranching mapsWCAG 2.1 AA spec
I
Implementation — phased rollout
Planned a soft launch with one campus for pilot data before full multi-campus rollout. Coordinated with school directors to embed course completion in the professional development calendar — tied to HR records, not treated as optional.
Pilot designSCORM 1.2LMS integrationDirector alignment
E
Evaluation — Kirkpatrick at all four levels
Designed a four-level evaluation plan before development began: L1 reaction survey, L2 knowledge check scores and branching accuracy data, L3 director observation checklist at 30 days, L4 incident report comparison at 90 days. The branching accuracy data shows which decision points most staff get wrong on first attempt — directly informing revision priorities.
L1 Reaction surveyL2 Branching dataL3 Observation checklistL4 Incident comparison

Skills & tools

Needs Analysis
Observation, data review, coaching interviews
Training Design Document
Full TDD with stakeholder sign-off structure
Storyboarding
Screen-by-screen with narration + branch maps
Articulate Storyline 360
Specified authoring environment
SCORM / LMS
SCORM 1.2, completion tracking, HR integration
Kirkpatrick Model
Four-level evaluation designed upfront
Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA)
Captions, keyboard nav, alt text specification
Adult Learning Theory
Sweller · Lave & Wenger · Schön

Curriculum architecture

Four modules. One integrated practice.

Each module is built around a single realistic classroom scenario. The learner enters the scenario before any framework is introduced — placed inside the moment before they understand why it matters.

Module 1
Brain State Awareness in the Classroom
"Jaylen won't hang up his backpack. Morning Meeting starts in 4 minutes. Three other children are watching."
Branching: 3-option decision at meltdown momentInteractive brain diagram (click-reveal, 3 states)Drag-and-drop: brain state identificationSelf-check: learner's own brain stateReflection prompt + application challenge
Module 2
Building the School Family
"Sofia is the new student sitting at the edge of Morning Meeting. Marcus looked at her — and looked away."
Comparative: punitive vs. School Family classroomBranching: 3-option belonging decision4-pillar interactive (Safety / Belonging / Contribution / EQ)Ritual match-up drag-and-dropParent conversation role-play + design activity
Module 3
Responding to Challenging Behavior
"Marcus just hit DeShawn over a block during center time. Everyone in the classroom is watching."
Skill deficit vs. defiance sorting activityBRAIN framework interactive walkthrough (5 steps)Guided BRAIN application — Marcus scenarioDeShawn extension — the invisible-child problemReactive phrase swap activity (5 pairs)
Module 4
Composure & Adult Self-Regulation
"Classroom in chaos. Parent at the door. Your assistant is calling your name. Your heart rate just spiked."
Trigger mapping — private self-assessment5 composure strategy flip cardsBranching: 10-second composure window decisionPersonal Composure Plan — 5-section artifactDownloadable PDF — designed to be laminated

Design rationale

Five decisions that made this
course work differently

Every choice below was a deliberate answer to something the needs analysis and audience data told me. None of these were defaults.

01
Scenario-first, concept-second
Every module drops the learner into a realistic classroom scenario before introducing any CD framework. Research on situated cognition (Lave & Wenger) shows that knowledge acquired in a specific context is far more likely to transfer to a similar context. By placing staff inside Jaylen's meltdown before explaining brain states, I created the emotional context that makes the framework stick. If a teacher felt the pull to react before learning why they shouldn't, the framework becomes a tool — not a fact to recall.
02
Three-option branching — not binary
Every branching scenario has three choices: correct, partial, and reactive — rather than the binary correct/incorrect pattern common in compliance training. The partial option is the most important one. Most teacher mistakes are not ignorant — they are incomplete. A teacher who removes a dysregulated child publicly isn't wrong to move the child; they've missed the composure step that would have made the removal less harmful. The partial branch honors that nuance and teaches into it.
03
A real artifact, not a quiz
Module 4 concludes with a Personal Composure Plan — a downloadable, printable document that lives in the teacher's apron pocket, not the LMS. This was a direct response to the needs analysis finding that adult self-regulation was the most critical and least-addressed skill gap. The artifact includes the teacher's own trigger words, early warning signs, go-to strategies, and anchor statement — built from self-reflection, not from a template.
04
Non-punitive assessment design
All knowledge checks allow unlimited retakes. Feedback is framed as coaching, not evaluation. The 80% passing threshold is achievable but meaningful. If we are asking staff to extend grace to dysregulated children, the training environment should model that same approach. Shame-based assessment is pedagogically inconsistent with the framework being taught.
05
Attending to the invisible child
Module 3 includes an extension scenario for DeShawn — the child who was hit — that most behavior training ignores. When Marcus hits DeShawn, all instructional attention typically follows Marcus. But DeShawn also has a brain state, also needs attuning, and is forming a belief about whether this classroom is safe. Every child in the room is inside the scenario, not just the loudest one.

Learning objectives

12 objectives — all measurable,
all application-level

Objectives were written before content, not extracted from it. Every objective is at the Apply level or higher — recall was already built by the CD video series this course complements.

#Learning ObjectiveBloom's Level
1.1Identify the three brain states (survival, emotional, executive) in children's observed classroom behaviorUnderstand
1.2Recognize their own brain state during a stressful classroom moment before responding to a childApply
1.3Select and apply at least one self-regulation strategy to return to executive brain before respondingApply
2.1Distinguish between a punitive classroom environment and a School Family model across the four pillars: Safety, Belonging, Contribution, Emotional IntelligenceAnalyze
2.2Apply at least two School Family rituals to create a visible belonging moment for a new or isolated studentApply
2.3Explain to a skeptical parent how School Family practices support academic learning through the brain science of safety and belongingEvaluate
2.4Design one original classroom ritual aligned to the School Family pillar they identify as weakest in their current practiceCreate
3.1Differentiate between behavior that communicates a skill deficit and behavior that represents willful defiance — and apply the correct instructional response to eachAnalyze
3.2Apply the BRAIN framework (Body, Regulate, Attune, Inquire, Noticing) in the correct sequence to a classroom behavior incidentApply
3.3Replace at least three reactive classroom phrases with CD-aligned language alternativesApply
4.1Identify personal triggers that move them from executive to emotional or survival brain in a classroom contextAnalyze
4.2Create a Personal Composure Plan identifying their triggers, early warning signs, go-to regulation strategy, and personal anchor statement for classroom useCreate

Storyboard sample · Module 1

Inside the eLearning design:
Brain State Awareness

The storyboard is the most detailed document in any eLearning project — a screen-by-screen specification that serves as both the development brief and the SME review document. Module 1 covers 16 screens across 5 content sections, with full narration scripts written for each.

Screens 1–3
Introduction
Hook + setup · 5 min
Screens 4–5
Branching Decision
Meltdown moment · 5 min
Screens 6–8
Core Content
Brain states · 7 min
Screens 9–13
Practice + Reflect
Strategies · 6 min
Screens 14–16
Assessment + Close
Check + transfer · 5 min

Sample screen specification — Screen 4: Branching Decision

Screen 4 of 16 · Module 1 Branching Decision
Visual / Animation

Freeze frame on Ms. Rivera looking at Jaylen, who is sitting on the floor by the cubbies, arms crossed. Three other children have turned to watch. Morning Meeting sounds in the background. Text fades in: "What do you do right now?"

Narration (Ms. Rivera VO)

"Jaylen's on the floor. Morning Meeting starts in four minutes. The other kids are watching. This is the moment that matters — not because of what Jaylen does next, but because of what you do first."

On-screen prompt

"Ms. Rivera has 4 minutes before Morning Meeting. Jaylen is on the floor. Three children are watching. Choose your response:"

A
✗ Reactive"Jaylen, I'm going to count to three. If your backpack isn't hung up, you'll sit at the table by yourself."
→ Screen 5AJaylen escalates. Crying intensifies. Group dysregulation begins. Feedback: "That response came from a stressed brain — let's look at what was happening for both of you."
B
✓ CD-AlignedYou crouch down to Jaylen's level, make quiet eye contact, and say softly: "I can see you're having a hard start. I'm right here. Let's breathe together for a second."
→ Screen 5BJaylen's body softens. The escalation stops. Feedback: "You noticed Jaylen's brain state and responded to the child, not the behavior."
C
~ PartialYou redirect the group to Morning Meeting and plan to return to Jaylen when things settle.
→ Screen 5CJaylen eventually wanders in but stays dysregulated. Feedback: "You managed the group — but Jaylen's need went unmet. Let's think about why that matters for the rest of the morning."

Evaluation framework

Kirkpatrick four levels —
designed before development began

The evaluation plan was built into the Training Design Document before a single screen was storyboarded — measurement criteria were defined upfront, not retrofitted after delivery.

L1
Reaction
"Did staff find the training relevant, realistic, and applicable to their day-to-day work?"
Tool: 5-question post-course Likert survey. Questions target scenario realism, relevance to actual classroom situations, perceived usefulness of the Composure Plan artifact, and overall experience rating.
Threshold: ≥80% rating "relevant" or "highly relevant" · Any item below 3.5/5.0 → content review before next cohort
L2
Learning
"Did staff demonstrate understanding of CD application, and which decision points revealed the deepest gaps?"
Tools: Knowledge check scores per module (tracked in LMS) and branching scenario decision accuracy rates. The branching data shows which decision points most staff get wrong on first attempt, identifying where follow-up coaching should focus.
80% pass rate on knowledge checks · <30% first-attempt failure on any single branching decision point
L3
Behavior
"Are staff applying CD strategies in real classroom interactions 30 days after completing the course?"
Tool: Director observation checklist administered 30 days post-completion. Checklist items aligned directly to the four module objectives — brain state recognition, ritual usage, BRAIN framework sequencing, composure strategy application.
Administered at 30-day mark · Results inform follow-up coaching focus per staff member
L4
Results
"Have incident rates decreased and co-regulation interactions increased in the 90 days following rollout?"
Tool: Incident report data comparison — pre-training baseline vs. 90 days post-completion. Expected indicators: reduction in physical behavior incidents, reduction in public isolation as a classroom management strategy, increase in documented co-regulation interactions.
Data pull at 90 days · Compared against 90-day pre-training baseline · Reported to Academic Committee

Full deliverable set

Five professional documents —
produced in sequence

Each document below is a standalone professional deliverable produced through the design process.

Phase 1–2 · Analyze & Design
Training Design Document (TDD)
Needs analysis, audience analysis, terminal goal, 12 learning objectives, instructional strategy grounded in Cognitive Load Theory and Situated Learning, assessment design, Kirkpatrick evaluation plan, 12-week project timeline, and roles & responsibilities. Reviewed by the Academic Committee before any storyboarding began.
Phase 3 · Develop
Module 1 Storyboard: Brain State Awareness
16 screens with full narration scripts, branching map with three-option decisions, interactive brain diagram specifications, drag-and-drop interaction design, open-text reflection prompt, formative quiz with answer rationale, and SME review checklist.
Phase 3 · Develop
Module 2 Storyboard: Building the School Family
17 screens including the split-screen comparative activity, four-pillar interactive, ritual match-up drag-and-drop, parent conversation role-play, and the Design Your Own Ritual application activity.
Phase 3 · Develop
Module 3 Storyboard: Responding to Challenging Behavior
17 screens including the skill deficit vs. defiance sorting activity, five-step BRAIN framework interactive walkthrough, guided BRAIN application with per-step decision points, DeShawn extension scenario, and the reactive phrase swap activity.
Phase 3 · Develop
Module 4 Storyboard: Composure & Self-Regulation
17 screens including the simultaneous chaos scenario, trigger mapping self-assessment, five composure strategy flip cards, branching composure window decision, and the Personal Composure Plan — a five-section downloadable PDF designed to be laminated and kept in the teacher's apron pocket.
Portfolio
Portfolio Case Study
Narrative case study covering the full ADDIE cycle, design rationale for each major decision, storyboard sample, and evaluation framework.

About the designer

Kimberly Richard-Rivera

KRR
Kimberly Richard-Rivera
Curriculum Director · Instructional Designer
MEd Education Technology & Instructional Design · WGU (in progress)
MS Management & Leadership · WGU, 2025
BA Social Science, Industrial-Organizational Psychology · University of Puerto Rico, 2019
Designed this course as the sole instructional designer — from needs analysis through storyboard, evaluation plan, and learner artifact — while serving as Curriculum Director across multiple campuses and completing a graduate degree
Full ADDIE cycle with discrete professional deliverables at every phase
Grounded in adult learning theory: Cognitive Load (Sweller), Situated Learning (Lave & Wenger), Reflective Practice (Schön)
Scenario-based learning architecture with three-option branching — correct, partial, and reactive — to honor the nuance of real teacher mistakes
Non-punitive, coaching-framed assessment design that is pedagogically consistent with the behavioral framework being taught
Four-level Kirkpatrick evaluation plan built into the design document before development began
Background in curriculum design, program implementation, organizational leadership, and IO Psychology — transferable to L&D and instructional design roles outside early childhood education

Design Framework
ADDIE · Kirkpatrick · Scenario-Based Learning · Bloom's Taxonomy · Adult Learning Theory
Learning Theory
Cognitive Load Theory · Situated Learning · Reflective Practice · Constructivism
Tools Specified
Articulate Storyline 360 · Rise 360 · SCORM 1.2 · LMS · WCAG 2.1 AA