In the video “Instructional Design:
Historical and Contemporary Perspectives,” Dr. Charles Reigeluth and Dr. Ana
Donaldson point out how there is a lack of common language and terminology
within the field of instructional design. As I explore resources
related to ADDIE and Dick & Carey instructional design models, I am confronted
by many conflicting terms and data. While some researchers indicate that ADDIE
germinated—somewhat vaguely-- in the 1970’s in the United States armed forces
(Molenda, 2003 ; Baturay, 2008), others (Cowell, Hopkins, McWhorter & Jorden, 2006) cite Educational
Psychologist, Robert Gagne, as ADDIE’s “father” (p.1). Even more confounding is
Molenda’s (2003) assertion that ADDIE is not really a model but rather a
“colloquial label for a systematic approach to instructional development” and
authors are simply imbuing the acronym with their own “narrative descriptions
of each step” (p.13).
As I perused different websites for
information about ADDIE, I did observe how some sources were leaner than others.
Notice how elaborate ADDIE is on Don Clark's website (http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat.html)
versus how shallow it is on this site (http://www.learning-theories.com/addie-model.html).
While I am irritated by the stark contrast between these two authors/websites
since I’m trying to build foundational knowledge about ADDIE, I recognize and
appreciate how Don Clark is shaping ADDIE's generic form into something more
substantial and useful for his professional needs.
Don Clark
is not the only instructional designer to modify ADDIE; in fact, many
instructional design models stem from it. In the 1960’s, Walter Dick and Lou
Carey based their nine step “Dick & Carey” model on ADDIE. (Dick and Carey
expanded the model to ten steps in 2001.) Both are systems-oriented approaches
to designing instruction that are applicable to any subject area and easily
implemented by novices or experts (Cowell, Hopkins, McWhorter & Jorden, 2006; Baturay,
2008; Gustafson & Branch, 1997). While ADDIE is comprised of only five phases:
analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation, the Dick and
Carey model is much more elaborate and dissects ADDIE’s steps even further. For
example, the analysis phase spans Dick & Carey’s steps 1 (instructional
goals) and 3 (learner’s entry behavior and characteristics). (See all ten steps below.) Addie’s
implementation phase does not really parallel any step in the Dick & Carey
model, which makes me think that the instructional design team may not
necessarily be delivering the training. In other words, the design team creates
the course or unit but does not implement it. Gustafson & Branch (1997)
corroborate my thinking since they categorize the Dick & Carey model as a systems-oriented approach, which is
typically developed by a team and distributed or disseminated.
Some
researchers have criticized both models for being too rigid or time consuming (Kruse,
2009; Cowell, Hopkins, McWhorter
& Jorden, 2006), while others (Reigeluth) highlight ADDIE’s or Dick &
Carey’s (Baturay, 2008) recursive capabilities throughout the design process. The lack of an implementation phase in the
Dick & Carey model would be unacceptable for a classroom teacher designing
and facilitating her own plan; however, it would be appropriate for a
consulting firm that designs an instructional module and distributes it to a
client.
The ADDIE model lends itself to any
context, provided that a problem exists and there is a real need for training.
Some argue, however, that ADDIE is biased toward instruction (Rossett). The
Dick & Carey model is suitable for corporate training projects, government
contexts, and military settings (Gustafson & Branch,
1997).
ADDIE:
Analyze- identify the learning problem and the gap between learners' current performance and the desired outcome; gather information about timelines, contraints (time, money; technology), delivery options, and learners (demographics, prior knowledge, unique characteristics, attitudes, educational background.)
Design- this is what Dr. Charles Reigeluth calls the "blueprint" for the instructional plan and recommends using a recursive analyze-design-analyze-design-analyze-design type cycle to identify the overall instructional strategy, learning objectives, content, scope and sequence, units or chunks of instruction with corresponding strategies; this is the point designers create the user interface as well as storyboards and prototypes.
Development-the creation all all learning materials and selection of media.
Implementation: delivering intruction to learners.
Evaluation- comprised of formative (just as we check the oil in a car we must continually do mini-checks to gauge learners' comprehension) and summative assessment instruments (the final benchmark that learners' must be able to demonstrate.) The summative assessment should be created after designing the learning objectives, and Dr. Reigeluth suggests that formative evaluations should occur at every step in the ADDIE process.
Dick & Carey:
1. Assess Needs to Identify Goals- what is the desired outcome and what is the GAP between learners' current abilities and the desired outcome.
2. Conduct Instructional Analysis-(task analysis) break down of each individual step required to perform the desired outcome.
Note: steps two and three should be done simultaneously!!
3. Analyze Leaners and Contexts-- identify learners' characteristics and entry behaviors
4. Write MEASURABLE performance objectives- Cowell, Hopkins, McWhorter & Jorden (2006) suggest "identifying specific skills to be learned, conditions under which they must be performed, and the criteria used to measure learners' successful performance" (p.463).
5. Develop assessment instruments
6. Develop instructional strategies
7. Develop and/or select instructional materials
8. Design and Conduct formative evaluations of instruction
9. Revise instruction-- this step was added to the model in 2001
10.Design and Conduct Summative evaluation
References:
Cowell, C, Hopkins, P. C., McWhorter, R., & Jorden, D. L. (2006). Alternative Training Models. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 8(4), 460–475.
Kruse, K. (2009) Introduction
to Instructional Design and the ADDIE model. Retrieved on 8 May 2012 from http://www.transformativedesigns.com/id_systems.html
Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2012, May). ADDIE Model at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved on 7 May 2012 from http://www.learning-theories.com/addie-model.html
Molenda, M.(2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance improvement 42(5), 34-36.
Ryder, M. (2009) Instructional Design Models. Retrieved on 6 May 2012 from University of Colorado at Denver School of Education: http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html