Instructional Design models & theories

Martin Ryder from the University of Colorado says the following concerning instructional design models and theories:

"Models, like myths and metaphors, help us to make sense of our world. Whether derived from whim or from serious research, a model offers its user a means of comprehending an otherwise incomprehensible problem. An instructional design model gives structure and meaning to an I.D. problem, enabling the would-be designer to negotiate her design task with a semblance of conscious understanding. Models help us to visualize the problem, to break it down into discrete, manageable units. The value of a specific model is determined within the context of use. Like any other instrument, a model assumes a specific intention of its user. A model should be judged by how it mediates the designer's intention, how well it can share a work load, and how effectively it shifts focus away from itself toward the object of the design activity." http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html

There have been multiple instructional design models that have been developed and implemented over the years. Below are just a few of today's most commonly applied and practiced instructional design models, theories, and methodologies:

ADDIE Model
Merrill's First Principles of Instruction
Kemp's Instructional Design Model
Gagne's Nine Events of Instruction
Bloom's Learning Taxonomy
Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels of Training Evaluation

ADDIE Model

The ADDIE instructional design model is the generic process traditionally used by instructional designers and training developers. The five phases—Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—represent a dynamic, flexible guideline for building effective training and performance support tools.

Analysis
In the analysis phase, the instructional problem is clarified, the instructional goals and objectives are established and the learning environment and learner's existing knowledge and skills are identified.

Design
The design phase deals with learning objectives, assessment instruments, exercises, content, subject matter analysis, lesson planning and media selection. The design phase should be systematic and specific.

Development
The development phase is where instructional designers and developers create and assemble the content assets that were blueprinted in the design phase. In this phase, storyboards are created, content is written and graphics are designed. If e learning is involved, programmers work to develop and/or integrate technologies.

Implementation
During the implementation phase, a procedure for training the facilitators and the learners is developed. The facilitators' training should cover the course curriculum, learning outcomes, method of delivery, and testing procedures.

Evaluation
The evaluation phase consists of two parts: formative and summative. Formative evaluation is present in each stage of the ADDIE process. Summative evaluation consists of tests designed for domain specific criterion-related referenced items and providing opportunities for feedback from the users which were identified.

It is an Instructional Systems Design (ISD) model. Most of the current instructional design models are spin-offs or variations of the ADDIE instructional design model; other models include the Dick & Carey and Kemp Instructional System Design (ISD) models. One commonly accepted improvement to this model is the use of rapid prototyping. This is the idea of receiving continual or formative feedback while instructional materials are being created. This model attempts to save time and money by catching problems while they are still easy to fix. Figure 1 below illustrates the ADDIE model:

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADDIE_Model

Figure 1 ADDIE Model, Diagram by: Steven J. McGriff,
Instructional Systems, College of Education, Penn State University

Merrill's First Principles of Instruction

Many current instructional design models suggest that the most effective learning environments are those that are problem-based and involve the student in four distinct phases of learning: (1) activation of prior experience, (2) demonstration of skills, (3) application of skills, and (4) integration or these skills into real world activities. Figure 2 below illustrates these five ideas. Much instructional practice concentrates primarily on phase 2 and ignores the other phases in this cycle of learning.

Figure 2 First Principles of Instruction Diagram

At the top level the instructional design prescriptions based on first principles are as follows:

• Learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
• Learning is facilitated when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is applied by the learner
• Learning is facilitated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner's world.
  
  Source: http://id2.usu.edu/Papers/5FirstPrinciples.PDF

Kemp's Instructional Design Model

The Jerold Kemp instructional design method and model defines nine different components of an instructional design and at the same time adopts a continuous implementation/evaluation model.

Kemp adopts a wide view, the oval shape of his model conveys that the design and development process is a continuous cycle that requires constant planning, design, development and assessment to insure effective instruction. The model is systemic and nonlinear and seems to encourage designers to work in all areas as appropriate (Steven McGriff).

The model is particularly useful for developing instructional programs that blend technology, pedagogy and content to deliver effective, inclusive (reliable) and efficient learning.

According to Steven McGriff's web page, Kemp identifies nine key elements:

1. Identify instructional problems, and specify goals for designing an instructional program.
2. Examine learner characteristics that should receive attention during planning.
3. Identify subject content, and analyze task components related to stated goals and purposes.
4. State instructional objectives for the learner.
5. Sequence content within each instructional unit for logical learning.
6. Design instructional strategies so that each learner can master the objectives.
7. Plan the instructional message and delivery.
8. Develop evaluation instruments to assess objectives.
9. Select resources to support instruction and learning activities.
   
   Source: http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Kemp_design_model

Figure 3 below illustrates the Kemp instructional design model:

Figure 3 Kemp Instructional Design Model

Gagne's 9 Events of Instruction

Just as Malcolm Knowles is widely regarded as the father of adult learning theory, Robert Gagne is considered to be the foremost researcher and contributor to the systematic approach to instructional design and training. Gagne and his followers are known as behaviorists, and their focus is on the outcomes - or behaviors - that result from training.

Gagne's book, The Conditions of Learning, first published in 1965, identified the mental conditions for learning. These were based on the information processing model of the mental events that occur when adults are presented with various stimuli. Gagne created a nine-step process called the events of instruction, which correlate to and address the conditions of learning. See the nine events of instruction below:

1. Gain attention
2. Inform learner of objectives
3. Stimulate recall of prior learning
4. Present stimulus material
5. Provide learner guidance
6. Elicit performance
7. Provide feedback
8. Assess performance
9. Enhance retention transfer

Source: http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_3.htm

Bloom's Learning Taxonomy

In 1956, Benjamin Bloom headed a group of educational psychologists who developed a classification of levels of intellectual behavior important in learning. Bloom found that over 95 % of the test questions students encounter require them to think only at the lowest possible level...the recall of information.

Bloom identified six levels within the cognitive domain, from the simple recall or recognition of facts, as the lowest level, through increasingly more complex and abstract mental levels, to the highest order which is classified as evaluation. Verb examples that represent intellectual activity on each level are listed here.

Figure 4 Kemp Instructional Design Model

1. Knowledge: arrange, define, duplicate, label, list, memorize, name, order, recognize, relate, recall, repeat, reproduce state.
2. Comprehension: classify, describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, indicate, locate, recognize, report, restate, review, select, translate,
3. Application: apply, choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, practice, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write.
4. Analysis: analyze, appraise, calculate, categorize, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test.
5. Synthesis: arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, write.
6. Evaluation: appraise, argue, assess, attach, choose compare, defend estimate, judge, predict, rate, core, select, support, value, evaluate.

Source: http://www.officeport.com/edu/blooms.htm

Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels of Training Evaluation

ASSESSING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS often entails using the four-level model developed by Donald Kirkpatrick (1994). According to this model, evaluation should always begin with level one, and then, as time and budget allows, should move sequentially through levels two, three, and four. Information from each prior level serves as a base for the next level's evaluation. Thus, each successive level represents a more precise measure of the effectiveness of the training program, but at the same time requires a more rigorous and time-consuming analysis.

Level 1 Evaluation - Reactions

Just as the word implies, evaluation at this level measures how participants in a training program react to it. It attempts to answer questions regarding the participants' perceptions - Did they like it? Was the material relevant to their work? This type of evaluation is often called a “smilesheet.” According to Kirkpatrick, every program should at least be evaluated at this level to provide for the improvement of a training program. In addition, the participants' reactions have important consequences for learning (level two). Although a positive reaction does not guarantee learning, a negative reaction almost certainly reduces its possibility.

Level 2 Evaluation - Learning

Assessing at this level moves the evaluation beyond learner satisfaction and attempts to assess the extent students have advanced in skills, knowledge, or attitude. Measurement at this level is more difficult and laborious than level one. Methods range from formal to informal testing to team assessment and self-assessment. If possible, participants take the test or assessment before the training (pretest) and after training (post test) to determine the amount of learning that has occurred.

Level 3 Evaluation - Transfer

This level measures the transfer that has occurred in learners' behavior due to the training program. Evaluating at this level attempts to answer the question - Are the newly acquired skills, knowledge, or attitude being used in the everyday environment of the learner? For many trainers this level represents the truest assessment of a program's effectiveness. However, measuring at this level is difficult as it is often impossible to predict when the change in behavior will occur, and thus requires important decisions in terms of when to evaluate, how often to evaluate, and how to evaluate.

Level 4 Evaluation- Results

Frequently thought of as the bottom line, this level measures the success of the program in terms that managers and executives can understand -increased production, improved quality, decreased costs, reduced frequency of accidents, increased sales, and even higher profits or return on investment. From a business and organizational perspective, this is the overall reason for a training program, yet level four results are not typically addressed. Determining results in financial terms is difficult to measure, and is hard to link directly with training.

Figure 5 Kirkpatrick's 4 Levels of Training Evaluation

Source: http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/k4levels/index.htm