For this activity we were reading Bates (2014) and Thomas (2010). The short Bates reading mainly argues that the ADDIE instructional design model is too inflexible to be appropriate for teaching in the digital age, while Thomas is a long reading that covers a lot of ground.
Thomas (2010) points out that instructional design is not clearly defined in the literature and therefore it may be difficult to redefine something that has for decades not been clearly defined.
For instructional designers who claim to follow the ADDIE instructional design model, how many can really say that they have an evaluation phase where they make sure the instructional materials achieved the desired goals? I suspect that evaluation is often minimal or absent.
Rapid prototyping sounds interesting, but who has time for this? What would an interactive process look like? What sort of testing is done, and how can it be done quickly enough for the entire process to be considered iterative? Presumably there would need to be at least several iterations for it to be iterative. Iterative designs seem to be popular in product design or modern software design, but I have difficulty imagining this working in most instructional design environments. What do you think?
Participatory design is another one I have difficulty imagining working in most environments.
Reigeluth’s Elaboration Theory, according to Thomas (2010), indicates that instruction should go from abstract-to-concrete for optimal learning, but does not explain what this would mean. What does this mean? Perhaps this is simply presenting the theory of a new idea before referring to examples? If so, I believe I’m someone who tends to learn better starting with examples.
I find that Gagne’s nine events really resonate with me. For example, Thomas (2010) states that according to Gagne’s nine events that instruction should “explain how meeting the objective is useful to the students in terms of real-world applications” (p. 194). I think it really helps fuel learners’ intrinsic motivation to know that the learning will be relevant and useful to them. What do you think of Gagne’s nine events?
References
Bates, T. (2014, September 9). Is the ADDIE model appropriate for teaching in a digital age? [Blog post]
Thomas, P. Y. (2010). Learning and instructional systems design. In Towards developing a web-based blended learning environment at the University of Botswana. (Doctoral dissertation).
I’d like to provide one experiential answer to a couple of your questions, both in relation to the years I worked as a freelance content developer for Adobe. With regards to application of the ADDIE model, although it wasn’t specifically identified as such, we did indeed follow the basic path from analysis to evaluation, which was completed on a quarterly basis. I suppose because we produced multiple iterations of the work on an ongoing basis it could be defined as rapid prototyping, although we didn’t use an iterative naming convention, for example, which would differentiate the content I developed from that produced by the actual engineering staff.
Hi Donna,
You said that you “produced multiple iterations of the work on an ongoing basis”. Were multiple iterations of instructional materials created before being used in courses (if so, why?) or were the materials iterated on while also used in courses?
Thanks for your comment!
The material was both in use and in iteration. My experience was a bit unorthodox as I worked within the Acrobat communications/marketing group. I would produce, say, 20 pieces of content in a quarter, which would then be posted and tracked with Adobe’s bleeding-edge analytics. Next quarter, for the next batch I may produce content on another set of topics, repurpose content from the prior quarter (or quarters) in new ways, or generate different types of content altogether. I was primarily a designer/developer and not responsible for the “A” and “E” components of the ADDIE model (assuming it were in use). One thing I enjoyed was how many ways the same content could be presented. For example, I may have a written tutorial with downloadable practice files, a couple of infographics showing an abbreviated step-by-step process, a video showing the highlights of a topic, and an interactive tutorial with demo and practice content done in Captivate.
Hi Jason,
With regards to the evaluation piece, in my role as a research analyst at a school board, part of my portfolio involves evaluating the effectiveness of programs. While I’m not typically involved in course development or specifically the evaluation of any certain course, I’ve found that there are many people involved in the whole process from Analyze to Evaluate (if ADDIE is the model that was chosen). This is why I believe that instructional design should be a team process because it really is more than one person can handle.
George
Hi George,
Thanks for your comment!
Is this program-level evaluation sufficient to help an instructional designer who is wondering if the instructional methods he or she developed for activities in a course were effective?
I would say in a holistic sense yes, because good evaluation should be looking at all components that make a course successful (i.e., not just academic achievement). A drawback is that this all takes time and an instructional designer may not have the luxury of waiting for a full review.
Enjoying your post and the responses it has provoked … especially your comment “Rapid prototyping sounds interesting, but who has time for this? What would an interactive process look like? What sort of testing is done, and how can it be done quickly enough for the entire process to be considered iterative?” As a partial response, I think design thinking offers a potential solution by focusing on problem finding rather than problem solving and by identify constraints as part of the design challenge. At hand, in my opinion, is the issue of re-thinking the ID process not adding another component.
As we move through this course, the significant question we are wrestling with is innovation in the design of learning environments … this question requires us to put all the pieces of our practice on the table and reflect on them critically and creatively.