Bates (2014) criticizes the inflexibility of the ADDIE model in his blog post with its frontloaded focus on design development without exact guidelines on instructor-student interactions and learning transfer during course delivery to force the instructors to go outside of the model. Bates described that the model allows for a systematic approach to defined learning objectives with a structured content within a cognitively controlled workload for both instructor and student and works best on large and complex projects. It can be used on projects with any size, but in the case of small student numbers and simple and/or traditional classroom design, it becomes expensive.
Bates main criticisms, lye in the cascading or so-called waterfall design where the phases depend on the results of the preceding one, assuming that the deliverable of the previous stage is complete and accurate which makes it time and human resource consuming. That worked well in a classroom-oriented environment, however, in the online sphere it isn’t flexible enough to meet more complicated and layered learning requirements. In an ever-changing world, the original goals many times shift by the time the design reaches the last steps. When assumptions made in the analysis phase are incorrect, they lead to the incorrectly targeted design, development and implementation. We may only find this out at the evaluation phase, as opposed to using an iterative or agile model in the development, which I feel are more efficient in a constantly changing environment such as web and software development field as they offer early detection and correction of problems.
The ADDIE model has been useful and appropriate in a behaviourist approach and learning strategy and I believe the principles of ADDIE can still apply in some circumstances to instructional design, depending on the goal of the instruction. There are many models and theories in instructional design that have been modified and adjusted to the changing advancements in technology. Surprisingly Bates criticized ADDIE without providing a new model or a mix of models for instructional designers to consider, although in his 2015 Teaching in a Digital Age book he describes several additional models.
Illustrations are created by the author.
References
Bates, A. W. (2014, September 9). Is the ADDIE model appropriate for teaching in a digital age? [Blog post]
Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. BC Campus.
As you explored several points from Bates’ blogpost, I paused to consider:
In an ever-changing world, the original goals many times shift by the time the design reaches the last steps, and when assumptions made in the analysis phase are incorrect, they lead to the incorrectly targeted design and thus to development and implementation of a solution that aims at the wrong target. And we may only find this out at the evaluation phase, at the end of the project as oppose to using an iterative or agile model in the development, which I feel are more efficient for e-learning development or in constantly changing environment such as mine (web and software development) as they offer early detection and correction of problems.
To me, you beautifully illustrate how often by using the tools or systems developed and tested in the early 1970s, we may miss our assumed targets from even the best analysis at the beginning of a project. Sadder still are the projects that neither start nor reach their full potential because, as you mentioned, the cost of analysis in the beginning becomes too great.
You mention iterative or agile models. I wonder, from your professional practice or learning experiences, might you offer an example, model, concept, or theory that you sense would address our ever-changing world while developing an online learning environment?
Short note: I shortened the post to max 350 wordcount to comply with the created assessment framework. The content and general information in the post have not been altered.
Agile is a project management methodology which uses short development cycles and was designed originally for the software industry. Nowadays many industries use agile when developing products and services. The method reduces complexity by breaking down a several-months-long cycle of building requirements for a large software/website, building the entire product and then testing to find numerous issues. Instead, small segments/functionalities of the product are specified, developed and tested in well-manageable, two- to four-week cycles (sprints). It is an iterative process that gives the opportunity to use collaboration, feedback and iterations to streamline the design and development process even when the deliverable is a moving target.
A development process does not have to be 100% agile; can be combined with other methodologies such as waterfall to create a hybrid solution. Waterfall could be used to handle one or more phases such as planning where we do not require rapid or repetitive steps.
A good read I found on how agile is the fresh approach to learning design that can take the ADDIE model to a new level: Huhn, J. (2013). What Is Agile Learning Design? | Bottom-Line Performance. Retrieved from http://www.bottomlineperformance.com/what-is-agile-learning-design/
I actually just posted my own blog post based on the writing and it’s interesting that we both came to similar conclusions.
I definitely think that agile method of producing a working prototype and improving it in sprints is likely a way to prevent the irrelevance of a product that has taken months to develop. Creating each outcome and learning objective as part of the project backlog and determining how many elements can fit into each sprint is a great way to determine what can be included in a course and also to ensure that the course remains relevant.
Working with software developers as both SMEs and instructors I have had the opportunity to work with experts in the field of agile to try to make it work in instructional design. It’s not always been the smoothest process but it’s been very interesting in trying to make it work. We have often found that the elements blocking the process are typically the tools like the LMS that our institute is locked into that sometimes prevent the quick iteration of courses.
This was an interesting article on Agile instructional design from Niebart (2013) that included and interesting case study as well: https://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/1262/agile-instructional-design-the-big-questions
Neibert, J. (n.d.). Agile Instructional Design: The Big Questions. Retrieved from https://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/1262/agile-instructional-design-the-big-questions
Thank you, Jeff, for your comment. I found the same article on Learning Solution Mag by Niebert as well, when I started to look into agile in instructional design.
Did you find it interesting that AGILE instructional design (ATD) is not entirely the same what people use in software development as an agile project management method? According to Conrad Gottfredson, who defined ATD and is cited in the Niebert (2013) article, it is “built upon similar values and represents five core methodology areas—align, get set, iterate & implement, leverage, and evaluate.” I did appreciate the illustration in his article, to compare it with the agile scrum model what is used in software/app development.