Friday, January 27, 2012

ADDIE Process - the Analysis Phase

This post is part 1 in a 5-part series on the Phases of the ADDIE Process of Instructional Design
Next post: Design >


One of the tools instructional designers use to create effective instructional materials is instructional design process. This is important because following a process can help ensure that there is greater quality to the finished product that is created.

In a previous post, I wrote a basic overview of the ADDIE Process for instructional design. Over the next few weeks, I am going to write a series of posts of each of the individual phases or steps in the ADDIE Process. These steps include Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate. In this post, we will focus on the Analysis phase.

Analysis
The purpose of the analysis phase is to orient yourself toward creating a successful learning experience for your learners. In this phase, you answer key, fundamental questions about the instruction you are designing. At a general level, this includes the following questions:
  1. Who are we designing this instruction for? Who are the learners? This question may seem obvious at first, but gathering information about your learners' background, cultures, prior relevant knowledge, age, time constraints, etc. will give you knowledge that will help you provide effective instruction for that group.
  2. What specifically do we want our learners to know and do? Most often, instructional designers will work to create a series of instructional or learning objectives. These objectives should state very clearly what the student will be able to do by the time they finish learning. If these objectives are not clear, then it is difficult to know if the instruction is successful.
  3. How will we evaluate student learning? Knowing how you plan to evaluate learning will guide the manner in which you design your instruction. 
  4. What is the learning context? Where will the students learn from the instruction? This is an important clarification because it affects the later phases of the instructional design process.
  5. What is the performance context? Where will students apply this knowledge in the future? Knowing how and where students will use their newly acquired knowledge will help you design instruction that can be applied more readily by the learner.
Remember, there is a lot to this phase of instruction, so I encourage you to learn more about how to perform it effectively. Click here to learn about the next Phase: Design. To learn more about the Analysis Phase, read the following:
  1. Read Boise State's page on Analysis
  2. Read The Systematic Design of Instruction
  3. Watch this introductory video on the Analysis Phase:




Tuesday, January 24, 2012

New Video: What Instructional Designers Do

It can sometimes be difficult to explain what an instructional designer does. I made this video which describes clearly (I hope!) what most instructional designers do. I hope it is helpful.




What do you think? If you are not an instructional designer, does this explanation help? If you are an instructional designer, does this description make sense?

Saturday, January 21, 2012

The "Learning Styles" Fallacy

As I have taught my graduate students over the past few semesters, it is surprising how many bring up learning styles as a valid frame of reference for a trainer or an instructional designer. A learning styles approach assumes that different people learn more effectively in different ways; for example, people view themselves as "visual learners" or as "kinesthetic learners."

The Fallacy
While this theory seems to make some sense, there is actually little or no empirical evidence that learning styles are a legitimate way to view learners when designing instruction. This has been reported on in some news sources, (for example here or here), which are based on this research study. The researchers in this study conclude that there is currently no evidence supporting the use of learning styles when creating training and designing instruction.

What to do?
So, if learning styles don't give a good foundation for creating instruction or training, what should we consider? This is an important question and there is an answer: To have the greatest chance of designing and delivering effective instruction, trainers and instructional designers need to base their instruction on research-based principles and instructional theories. (I've described how good instructional designers use these and other "tools" in a previous post entitled What is Instructional Design? part 2).

Here is a very short list of instructional theories and principles that a trainer or instructional designer can refer to when considering how to design and develop high quality training and instruction:
  1. Gagne's 9 Events of Instruction. These best practices are based on decades of research. They provide specific steps to take when delivering instruction to a learner.
  2. Merrill's First Principles of Instruction. A more current theory of instruction, these principles prescribe effective, research-based methods for teaching complex skills and knowledge. I describe these principles in more detail in a previous post entitled Merrill's First Principles of Instruction.
  3. Principles of e-learning.  Clark and Mayer (2011) summarize these principles extremely well. The share how to create online training and instruction that adheres to best practices based on the evidence.
There are many, many more resources out there, but these provide a basic foundation for implementing instruction that is based on evidence instead of on unfounded ideas.

What Would You Add?
What else would you add to this list? What other research-based practices are available to help budding trainers and instructional designers create effective learning experiences for their learners? Do you agree that learning styles should be eliminated from our vocabulary as professionals and scholars?

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Working in Higher Education - I Love My Job!

A couple of weeks ago I helped a friend move a piano, and as a result, I have pinched a nerve in my back and haven't been able to walk, stand, or sit for the last 2 weeks. I am improving and should fully recover, but I had two full weeks to really think deeply about my life- what I am doing with it and where I am headed.

 One of the happy conclusions I have come to is that I absolutely love my job! I am a faculty member at Franklin University, and my role is to help design and develop quality courses with several other faculty members at the university. I also teach in the university's Instructional Design and Performance Technology program, and I have been blessed to interact with excellent students over the past year.


Here is the mission of my university:
"Franklin University provides high quality, relevant education enabling the broadest possible community of learners to achieve their goals and enrich the world." (from Franklin University's Mission and Philosophy).

This is a mission that I can stand behind and believe in. Providing knowledge, skills, and opportunities to others through education is meaningful work. It is something that benefits society and gives people more- it enables and strengthens. There are few "products" that can enhance or improve a person's potential for success and fulfillment in life, but I believe that meaningful education does. Education provides individuals with the power to change their lives and communities in fundamental, meaningful ways. Providing education resonates deeply with my own personal desire to help others improve their lives through kindness, service, and knowledge.

Is my job perfect? Of course not- it is difficult, stressful, and time-intense. But I love what I do. I love being in a position in which I have the power to positively influence others' lives, to provide them with tools that will benefit them and their families for generations. I am an educator to the core, and I am grateful for the opportunity to work in higher education at an excellent institution.

Friday, January 13, 2012

What is the Difference Between Instructional Design, Instructional Science, and Instructional Technology?

What is the difference between instructional design, and instructional technology, and instructional science? There are many different subsets of the field of instructional design, and in this post I will clarify the differences between these different terms.


Science* is "knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science). Instructional Science, therefore, is knowledge about instruction and learning and is based on systematic research and study of what works in instruction. Much of this knowledge is produced through research, and practicing instructional designers also acquire useful knowledge through experience.

Instructional Technology is a tool or technology used to aid learning. I perceive three main types of instructional technologies or tools (and describe them in more detail in another post):
  1. Instructional Theory - a set of prescriptions describing what the instruction should be like when it is finished. Instructional theory "offers explicit guidance on how to better help people learn and develop" (Reigeluth, 1999; also, see Wikipedia's article on Instructional Theory).
  2. Instructional Design Process - systematic guidance on specific steps or phases to follow to help ensure that the instruction is of high quality. Examples include the ADDIE Model and the Dick & Carey Model (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2006). Both of these are briefly described in Wikipedia's article here.
  3. Physical Technologies and Tools - physical objects used to create and represent the knowledge that is being taught in the instruction. These technologies are be used by the instructional designer to create the instruction.
So then what is Instructional Design? It is the deliberate planning and creation of materials used to provide knowledge to learners. I discuss this in more detail in previous posts entitled What is Instructional Design part 1 and What is Instructional Design part 2.

A degree in instructional design is different than a degree in instructional technology. Clearly there is a lot of overlap, but different programs have different emphases. I earned a master's degree in instructional technology, so in my courses we spent a fair amount of time focusing on the tools. In contrast, a degree in instructional systems design might place more emphasis on the instructional design process. I currently teach in the Master Program in Instructional Design and Performance Technology at Franklin University. This program focuses more on the design process and on linking design to business results.

*Random side-note: When I think of science, I think about 10th grade chemistry class. I thought the girl in front of me was really cute, so that was where my mind was, a lot of the time. The teacher did a bunch of experiments with test tubes and bunsen burners and by the end of the class, I knew two things: (1) there is a periodical table of the elements and (2) I was too scared to even talk to the cute girl.


References

Dick, W. O., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6 ed.): Pearson/Allyn &; Bacon.

Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). What is instructional design theory? In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.) Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 5-29). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
 

Friday, January 6, 2012

Skills for Success in the Knowledge Society

The work of the instructional designer is crucial in the emerging knowledge society. We are knowledge workers- processing information and sharing knowledge in the form of instruction. But how can we anticipate the best way to prepare for work as instructional designers in the future? What general skills and abilities will be relevant and meaningful to instructional designers in the future? (For more field-specific competencies, there are many lists of competencies described by different professional organizations and societies, and these lists are crucial. I now refer to general skills pertinent to successful work in the knowledge society.)


The Institute for the Future recently published a list of 10 skills for the future, which is reviewed nicely here. I list below the few (in my own words) that I find most interesting:
  • Gain competency in many disciplines - in the knowledge society, people must see how things connect and work together. I have found that as an instructional designer, I design instruction more efficiently when I am competent in (or at least understand) the subject matter. In addition, being able to see the connection between what I am doing and the rest of the organization increases my value, purpose, and ability to act effectively.
  • Be able to process and make sense of information - there is so much information, we must learn how to draw coherent conclusions from the deluge of information. This includes understanding and coping with information from multiple sources and media. As an instructional designer, making sense of a topic or a field is crucial, and those fields grow and change, being able to make sense of and design around that field becomes crucial.
  • Be able to communicate effectively - this includes communication across cultures and using many different media. It also includes a sense of social intelligence. Instructional designers communicate endlessly with peers, students, subject-matter-experts, management, and many others. Having social intelligence and the ability to communicate effectively and efficiently is vital, and cultural competence in our global economy is also crucial.
  • Be able to design and create - as knowledge workers, we must be able to create knowledge and tools that are useful and help others to succeed and find meaning in the future. Clearly this relates directly to instructional design- we translate information into instruction so that our learners can use that knowledge- and we must learn to do it as efficiently and effectively as possible.
What do you think? Will these competencies be important to instructional designers of the future? Or have they always been important to instructional design? Does this partial list give us guidance on how we might develop ourselves as designers and plan for the future?