WGU D173: Using Educational Technology for Teaching and Learning

What D173 is and why it belongs in your program

WGU D173, Using Educational Technology for Teaching and Learning, sits in the School of Education and asks a very practical question: can you fold digital tools into a lesson so that they genuinely improve how students learn, rather than just adding screens for the sake of screens? If you are enrolled in an elementary, secondary, or special education teacher-preparation program at WGU, this course is one of the building blocks that prepares you to design technology-supported instruction you can defend to a mentor, a principal, and eventually a room full of students.

Direct answer: D173 is a performance assessment, not a multiple-choice test, so you "pass" by submitting written tasks that a WGU evaluator scores against a rubric. Read the rubric first, choose one or two familiar tech tools, and in every paragraph connect the tool directly to a learning objective and to your students' needs. Applied, specific writing beats broad theory every time.

Because there is no timed exam to cram for, the work here is closer to lesson design than to memorization. You are being evaluated on judgment: whether you can match a tool to a standard, anticipate accessibility and equity issues, and reflect honestly on what worked. Those are the same skills you will use on your first day of student teaching, which is exactly why WGU structures the course this way.

What the performance tasks actually cover

D173 is built around a small set of submitted tasks rather than a single sitting. Public course materials and student-shared task descriptions consistently point to the same core themes. Expect to work with:

• Technology integration frameworks — the SAMR model (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition) is used in the tasks to classify how deeply a tool transforms an activity, so be ready to name where your chosen activity sits and justify that placement.
• Matching tools to instruction — selecting learning management systems, interactive media, formative-assessment apps, and productivity tools that fit a specific grade level, subject, and objective.
• Digital citizenship and ethics — addressing plagiarism, academic integrity, safe and responsible use, equitable access, and student data privacy in a K-12 setting.
• Accessibility and differentiation — planning for learners with diverse needs through supports such as captions, text-to-speech, and adjustable pacing.
• Communicating your plan — creating materials, sometimes a presentation or a letter to families, that explain to stakeholders how and why technology will be used in the classroom.
• Reflection and evaluation — judging whether a tool actually advanced the learning goal and what you would change next time.

For the current, authoritative task list and rubric, always defer to your official course page and the assessment portal inside your WGU student account rather than any third-party summary.

How hard it is and how long it takes

Many students report that D173 is one of the more approachable education courses precisely because it has no proctored test and the topic is intuitive for anyone who has used classroom technology. The difficulty is not conceptual; it is about following the rubric closely and writing with enough specificity. Students who struggle usually do so because they described a tool in general terms without tying it to a standard, an objective, and a named group of learners.

Time-to-complete varies widely with your writing speed and how much APA formatting slows you down. Some students move through the tasks in a week or two of focused evenings, while others spread the work across several weeks. Treat any timeline you read online as a rough gauge of consensus, not a promise, and plan around your own schedule and how quickly evaluations are returned.

A study and drafting plan that fits this course

Because D173 is submission-based, "studying" means drafting, self-checking, and revising. A structured approach keeps you from over-writing:

1. Reverse-engineer the rubric. Paste each rubric row into a document and turn it into a heading. When every rubric point has its own labeled paragraph, evaluators can find your evidence instantly and you are far less likely to leave a requirement unaddressed.
2. Use active recall on the frameworks. Without looking, write out the four SAMR levels and one classroom example of each. If you can do that from memory, you can classify your own activity confidently in the task.
3. Pick tools you can defend. Choose one or two widely used, well-documented platforms so your writing energy goes into pedagogy, not into explaining an obscure app. Depth on one strong choice reads better than a shallow tour of five.
4. Draft the "why" before the "what." For each tool, write the learning objective and the student need first, then describe the tool. This ordering forces the tool to serve instruction instead of the reverse.
5. Space your revision. Draft, step away for a day, then reread against the rubric with fresh eyes. Spaced review catches vague sentences and missing accessibility notes that you would miss in one sitting.
6. Self-test your citations. Confirm every standard or research claim you reference is cited in APA format, since formatting slips are a frequent reason tasks are returned for revision.

If you want to reinforce the assessment-design thinking that underpins this course, the companion guide to D184 Standards-Based Assessment pairs naturally with D173, and D090 The School as a Community of Care reinforces the equity and student-support lens you will apply here.

Common mistakes students make in D173

• Leading with the tool, not the goal. Writing "I will use this app" and then hunting for a reason. Evaluators want the objective first and the tool as the solution.
• Staying too general. Phrases like "engages students" without naming the grade, subject, objective, or specific learners. Specificity is what earns the mark.
• Skipping accessibility. Forgetting to address diverse needs is one of the easiest requirements to lose points on, and one of the easiest to fix with a sentence or two per tool.
• Thin ethics coverage. Mentioning plagiarism in passing rather than explaining concrete strategies for integrity, safe use, and privacy.
• APA and citation slips. Uncited standards or research, or inconsistent formatting, sending an otherwise strong task back for revision.
• Ignoring evaluator feedback. On a resubmission, address every returned comment explicitly instead of making small cosmetic edits.

D173 Readiness Checklist

• Can you state, from memory, the four SAMR levels and give a classroom example of each?
• Can you name a specific learning objective and standard your chosen technology supports?
• Can you explain, in one sentence per tool, how it improves learning rather than just adding technology?
• Can you describe concrete accessibility supports for learners with diverse needs?
• Can you lay out a plan for digital citizenship, integrity, and student data privacy?
• Can you point to the exact rubric row that each section of your task satisfies?
• Can you format your sources and standards correctly in APA?
• Can you reflect on how you would evaluate whether the technology actually worked?

D173 FAQ

Is D173 an objective assessment or a performance assessment?

D173 is assessed through a performance assessment. You submit written tasks that are scored against a rubric by a WGU evaluator; there is no proctored multiple-choice exam for this course.

How many competency units is D173 worth?

Competency-unit values are set in WGU's official catalog and can change between program versions, so confirm the exact figure on your degree plan and current course page rather than relying on a secondhand number.

What framework should I know going in?

The SAMR model comes up repeatedly as a way to describe how deeply a tool transforms a learning task. Being able to classify your activity as Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, or Redefinition, and to justify that placement, is a strong foundation for the tasks.

Do I need real classroom experience to complete it?

No. The tasks are designed around planning and reasoning, so you can complete them by designing well-justified, standards-aligned lessons even if you are still early in your program.

Why did my task get sent back for revision?

The most common reasons are writing that is too general, a missing rubric requirement such as accessibility, or citation and APA formatting issues. Address each evaluator comment directly and specifically on resubmission.

How can I make my submission stand out?

Tie every tool to a named objective and a specific group of learners, cover accessibility and ethics deliberately, and cite your standards properly. Applied, concrete writing that mirrors the rubric is what evaluators reward.

When you are ready to plan the rest of your term, browse the full library of WGU course guides or visit the School of Education hub for more subject-by-subject support. You can also confirm official program details on the WGU teaching degrees pages.