Instructional system design. Educational technology. Workplace learning and performance improvement. Program design. All terms to describe the creation of learning events, predominantly for adults. Guiding this process is the ADDIE model; it stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—the major phases or elements involved in creating a learning event. The model is somewhat sequential from an Analysis, Design, Development, and Implementation (or delivery) perspective; with Evaluation often depicted as an iterative component one should revisit at the end of each of the other phases. While ADDIE is one of the most-frequently cited models for instructional program design, interestingly Molenda’s (2003) research revealed that “there does not appear to be an original, authoritative version of the ADDIE model” (p. 3). Despite that fact, the ADDIE model has endured and become a standard for the industry.
Analysis
The Analysis phase most typically includes components of performance analysis, task analysis, goal analysis, and audience analysis. With audience analysis in particular you can identify what motivates the learners and thus devise ways to tap into their internal and external motivators per the primary assumptions of Knowles’ andragogical model (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). During the Analysis phase, humanism provides insight into the individual learner—which can be identified via target audience analysis and identifying the learners’ potential affective goals plus any motivational and/or environmental barriers that may impede the learner.
In practice, instructional program analysis can range from full curriculum needs assessments to course needs assessments. Rossett (1987) defines training needs assessment as “the systematic study of a problem or innovation, incorporating data and opinions from varied sources, in order to make effective decisions or recommendations about what should happen next” (p. 3). Techniques for needs analysis include review of existing materials, questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups. Additionally, one of the most critical things to remember about analysis is to not blindly accept someone’s proclamation of a performance problem. Mager & Pipe (1970) argue, “What people identify as ‘the problem’ often isn’t the problem at all. It is merely a symptom of the problem” (p. 2). Additionally, do not jump to the conclusion that training is the correct solution. The performance problem may not be a skill deficiency that can be solved via training, but rather something in the environment that either is an obstacle to performance or even rewards non-performance (Mager & Pipe, 1970).
Design
In the Design phase, the key task is to determine “the optimal instructional strategies, instructional sequencing, and instructional delivery media for the type of training objectives involved” (Clark, 1995, p. The Training System). One of the first and most important steps is to define the instructional objectives, or what it is the learner will be able to do after participating in the program. Elements of a well-prepared instructional objective include an observable behavior, conditions, and criteria (Mager, 1972). To not adopt a strictly cognitive or psychomotor focus in the design, it can be beneficial to also consider the different types of behavior introduced by Taba: values, attitudes, sensitivities, and feelings as well as knowledge, reflective thinking, and skills (as cited in Knowles et al., 2005, p. 128).
Once the objectives are defined, the next step is to sequence the instruction to build from easier to more difficult intellectual skills and strategies, e.g., from concrete concepts to rules and problem solving (Gagne & Briggs, 1978). Additionally, instructional strategies are defined; this can include the basic approaches of lecture, discussion, and case studies to more advanced techniques of accelerated learning, experiential learning, discovery learning, and goal based scenarios. Embedded in determining the instructional strategy is selecting the most appropriate delivery or media approach; some of the available options include self-paced instruction, classroom training, synchronous web conferences, asynchronous/recorded sessions, eLearning (with varying ranges of interactivity), and electronic performance support or job aids.
During the Design phase is where andragogy and other learning theories have significant influence. Behaviorism emphasizes that what is important is that the learner can actually display the behavior or perform. From this, comes the development of performance objectives that focus on observable behaviors, as well as performance gap analysis which identifies the differences between the current performance/observable behavior and what is desired. Andragogy is evident in the design of instructional programs that adhere to Knowles et al.’s (2005) principles, e.g., beginning a program with the rationale for why the learning is important; ensuring abundant opportunities for interaction and sharing of experience; and relating the learning to a challenge they are currently facing, and ideally having the learners use that problem to practice during the session. Behaviorism’s operant conditioning can be applied in the design of during and post-training activities that facilitate and reinforce the learning process. Cognitivism can be seen in such tools and techniques as advance organizers and discovery learning. Social cognitive theories contribute additional techniques with activities such as fish bowls and triads where learners observe and learn from each other. Constructionism contributes additional learning techniques with the facilitation of shared meaning, usage of dialogue, collaborative and cooperative learning, situated learning, and reflective practice.
Development
In the Development phase, the program’s design is translated into materials to be used by the facilitator and learners. The form of these materials will be determined by the delivery approach selected during the Design phase; however, they often include such deliverables as a facilitator’s guide, student workbook, visual presentation materials, and supporting job aids or reference materials. While the previous phases are typically completed by someone who specializes in adult education or instructional design (working in collaboration with subject matter experts), additional specialists may be required during the Development phase, e.g., information designers, media developers, and programmers.
Implementation
Implementation is typically considered the phase where the program is delivered. While this is certainly a critical phase, there are many items surrounding the actual learning event that need to be addressed when considering how to successfully implement an instructional program. In addition to delivery logistics, it is important to determine:
How will performance expectations be communicated to the audience and relevant others? Are there any conflicting expectations? How will the audience be held accountable for performance? What are the rewards for performing? What barriers to performance exist? What ongoing support will the learners, facilitators, or other stakeholders need? (Kucera, Hirsch, McBurney, & Hollister, 2004)
Here, behaviorism’s operant conditioning plays a role—such as when analysis reveals that a company’s rewards and recognition structure needs to be re-worked in order to ensure learning transfer. Andragogy becomes critical again during the implementation or delivery phase. The techniques that were envisioned in the design phase now need to be delivered by a skillful facilitator, most importantly ensuring abundant opportunities for interaction, sharing experience, and applying the learning to real-life problems. The facilitator also needs to ensure that the learning environment is comfortable from both a physical and interpersonal perspective (Knowles et al., 2005, pp. 118-120).
Evaluation
The Evaluation phase is one that should not wait until the end of the program design process; rather, it is something that needs to be considered throughout thereby enabling continuous improvement of the instructional program design process. From a learning perspective, “evaluation can tell us how to improve future programs,…determine whether a program should be continued or dropped,…[and] demonstrate that training has tangible, positive results” (Kirkpatrick, 1994, p. 20). The most well-known evaluation theory is Kirkpatrick’s (1994) four levels of evaluation including reaction (how did learners perceive the program), learning (what attitudes, skills, or knowledge did learners acquire), behavior (what behavior change occurred in the learner once back on the job), and results (what business impacts resulted from the learning).
Conclusion
Many theories play an important role throughout the instructional program design process. Knowles’s andragogy, Skinner’s behaviorism, Rogers’ humanism, and others all play important roles. Behaviorism acts as the bookends at the beginning and end of programs with performance objectives during Analysis and measurements during Evaluation. Humanism provides purpose to Analysis and Design with a student-centered approach and the goal of helping learners achieve self-actualization. The cognitivist and constructivist theories contribute various techniques and practices for how to Design and Develop a positive learning environment and experience. And andragogy provides guiding principles for how to Design and Implement effective programs for adult learners.
These and other theories and techniques have made valuable contributions to instructional program design and adult learning. Yet, the most important thing to remember as an adult learning practitioner is to carefully select which theories should be applied in a given situation depending on what is most appropriate for that particular adult audience’s learning needs and preferences. Thus the critical task lies in being able to Analyze the audience’s needs, desired behavior or attitudinal changes, and the context within which the learning is to happen—and then Designing, Developing, and Implementing via the theory(s) and technique(s) that will yield the best results (as measured via Evaluation).
References
Clark, D. (1995). Introduction to Instructional System Design. Retrieved November 29, 2007 from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat1.html
Gagne, R. & Briggs, L. (1978). Principles of instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kirkpatrick, D. (1994). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. (Original work published 1973)
Kucera, J., Hirsch, D., McBurney, A., & Hollister, R. (2004). Training Roadmap. (Available from Equity Office Properties, 2 North Riverside Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60606)
Mager, R. & Pipe, P. (1970). Analyzing performance problems. Belmont, CA: Fearon Pitman Publishers.
Mager, R. (1972). Preparing instructional objectives. Belmost, CA: Fearon Publishers.
Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5).
Rossett, A. (1987). Training needs assessment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
- Robin
Copyright Robin Donnan 2008. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.perfassocinc.com
