Running head: MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
Comparison of Instructional Design Models
MEDT 7461
Christi Lenz
University of West Georgia
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
2
The concept of instructional design dates back to the early philosophical greats
such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato. However it gained its strongest foot hold during
WWII due to the need to train large numbers of people in a short amount of time. There
are many definitions of instructional design. Carl Berger and Rosalind Kam define it as,
“the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and
instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis
of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those
needs.” (Berger and Kam) In the book Trends and Issues in Instructional Design it is
stated that it “may be thought of as frameworks for developing modules or lessons that
increase and/or enhance the possibility of learning and encourage the engagement of
learners so that they learn faster and gain deeper levels of understanding.” (Reiser and
Dempsey) I would best describe instructional design as a process of building a road
map for learning and teaching. In building this road map the desired outcome is always
considered first along with how the outcome will be evaluated. Then the path to meet
the outcome can be developed.
Instructional design models have worked their way from the training fields during
WWII into corporate training and down the ranks to the public school systems. This
information-processing-based approach to the design has established itself as the
primary means of developing instructional models across the board. Although there are
many models to choose from we will explore the following three models: the ADDIE
Model, Understanding by Design model, and ASSURE model.
First we are going to look at the ADDIE model. ADDIE is basically a generic term
for the five phase instructional deign model that includes analysis, design, development,
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
3
implementation and evaluation. Most of the current instructional design models are
spin-offs or variations of this model. The ADDIE model first appeared in 1975. It was
created by the Center for Educational Technology at Florida State University for the
U.S. Armed Forces (Branson, Rayner, Cox, Furman, King, Hannum, 1975; Watson,
1981). It is frequently used in business and corporate training because it has been
found to save time and money due to of its ability to help catch errors while they are still
easy to fix.
The first phase of the ADDIE model is analysis. During analysis the learning
problem is identified as well as the goals and objectives and the audience’s needs. The
analysis phase also takes into account existing knowledge, the learning environment,
and the timeline for the project. The second phase is design. During the design process
learning objectives are specified and storyboards and prototypes are made. The third
phase is development. This is where the actual creation of the content and learning
materials is put together based on the design phase. The fourth phase is
implementation. During this phase the plan is put into action and the plan for training the
learner and teacher is developed. The final phase is evaluation. During the evaluation
phase both formative and summative evaluation processes are used. Formative
evaluation is imbedded throughout the different phases and the summative evaluation
takes place at the end. This type of evaluation makes it possible to provide feedback
throughout the process, thus allowing corrections to be made as problems arise. In
summation the ADDIE model is designed to ensure that all learners will achieve the
desired goals through evaluation of the learner’s needs and the design and
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
4
development of instructional materials. The literature on ADDIE estimates that there are
well over 100 different variations of the ADDIE model in use today.(Castagnolo)
The second design model we will look at is Understanding by Design.
Understanding by Design is a framework for improving student achievement that was
developed by nationally recognized educators Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe. Their
work was published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development in
1998 so it is one of the more recently developed models for instructional design. The
Understanding by Design model is based on a three-stage "backward planning"
curriculum design process that includes design standards and rubrics. It is set up to
help teachers design, edit, critique, peer- review, share, and improve their lessons and
assessments.
The Understanding by Design model is built upon the "Six Facets of
Understanding" which include explain, interpret, apply, perspective, empathize, and selfknowledge. Along with taking the six facets of understanding into account it centers on
the idea that the design process should begin with the desired results and then "work
backwards" to develop your curriculum and instruction. The framework for
Understanding by Design identifies three main stages: identify desired outcomes and
results, determine what constitutes acceptable evidence of competency (assessment),
and plan instructional strategies and learning experiences.(The Center for Teaching)
As a part of identifying desired results you first have to establish your learning
goals. You should take into consideration what the students should know, understand,
and be able to do. Then you have to prioritize and narrow down the content to make it fit
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
5
into the framework of the lesson, unit, or course. Next as a part of determining
acceptable evidence, you have to decide what you will accept as evidence that students
are making progress toward the desired goals of the course. When planning how you
will collect this evidence you might consider some of the following assessment methods:
essays, tests, term papers, short-answer quizzes, homework assignments, or lab
projects. It is very important to make sure that the assessments match our learning
goals so we can attain the evidence we want. After you have identified the desired
result and determined the acceptable evidence, you can begin planning the learning
experiences and course of instruction. This part of the process is where you get to
decide how you’re going to teach the content, basically what are the best exercises,
problems, or questions for helping your students to meet the learning goals you have
set for them. By following the Understanding by Design model you will be building your
lessons, units, and course by a backwards design process which will enable you to
focus on the six facets of learning, thus creating enduring understanding for the
students.
The third model we will look at is the ASSURE model. The ASSURE Model is a
six-step guide for planning and delivering instruction developed by Robert Heinich,
Michael Molenda, and James D. Russell in the 1990′s. This model highlights its ability to
incorporate technology and media into the design process. The six steps used for
planning include: analyze learners, state objectives, select instructional methods and
materials, utilize media and materials, require learner participation, and evaluate.
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
6
During the first step of this process you need to analyze the learners. You will
need to consider general characteristics, socioeconomic levels, prior knowledge and
learning styles. Once you know your students, you can begin developing your
objectives or desired learning outcomes. Then you can begin selecting instructional
methods, media, and materials. Before utilizing the materials and selected media with
your class be sure to preview them to make sure they are appropriate and work
correctly. The fifth step in this process is required learner participation. It is important to
make sure that the student is always actively involved in the learning process. The final
step in this process is to evaluate and revise if necessary. The premise of the ASSURE
model is that in the end, as you evaluate, you continue to revise and re-teach until the
students have become successful learners.
When taking a closer look at these three models of design we can find there are
many similarities and difference between them. The ADDIE and ASSURE models are
more closely in line with each other whereas Understanding by Design stands on it own
a little more. The most obvious in differences is the number of steps involved in each
process. ADDIE implements five steps where as Understanding by Design only uses
three steps and ASSURE uses six steps. Both ADDIE and ASSURE begin their process
as a front end analysis and design whereas Understanding by Design uses a
backwards design approach. ADDIE and ASSURE both begin with an analysis stage
which allows for consideration of the learner’s back ground and environment. This
stage is not allotted for in the Understanding by Design model. ADDIE and ASSURE
also have a stage to focus on implementation which allows for effective use of media
and technology to be addressed. This also is a stage that is not addressed in the
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
7
Understanding by Design model. Another similarity between ADDIE and ASSURE is
that they are both based on Robert Grange’s Conditions of Learning. Understanding by
Design in comparison has developed its own six facets of understanding. In a final
comparison of the three models we can look at methods of evaluation. ADDIE and
ASSURE address evaluation in the final stage whereas Understanding by Design
addresses it in the second stage. Regardless of what stage evaluation is addressed, all
three models provide for formative and summative assessment. It seems that all three
models have their strengths and weaknesses. Most schools in our area are turning
toward the Understanding by Design model due to its ability to pinpoint the desired
outcome up front which helps to increase test scores. I think many teachers naturally
include some of the stages from ADDIE or ASSURE in an attempt to bridge the gap
between teaching the test and providing for the needs of the whole child.
Regardless of which model you prefer it is important that instructional design be
considered when planning and implementing your lessons, units, and courses. The
advantages of using an instructional design model include the formality of it, the fact
that it is a proven method, and it provides data for evaluation. Without a formalized
approach to design teachers would be reinventing their own method over and over
again; whereas over the last fifty years, instructional design models have been proven
to be an effective method of teaching and learning. Finally it is important as teachers
that we collect data for evaluations and this type of feedback is built into instructional
design models and allows for comparison across courses and disciplines.(Cogsim)
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
8
In the ideal world planning and implementing an instructional design model
should be a group effort including the teacher, media specialist, and technology
specialist. The grade level teachers should be the leaders of the group having an idea
of what the content or curriculum area is that they are needing to plan for. The media
specialist and technology specialist should act as consultants in the area of planning.
First the group would identify the content and curriculum standards to be taught and
suggest means of evaluation. Then grade level teachers would provide an analysis of
sorts of the audience and the strengths, weaknesses, and potential obstacles they
might encounter along the way. As the group discusses ways to implement the lesson
the media specialist and technology specialist would brainstorm what media and
materials might be most useful to help the students develop an understanding of the
materials and subject matter. I see the relationship of the three positions working as a
partnership where each part has its own individual job. In the end it is up to the grade
level teacher to present the materials and carry out the planned assessments.
Currently as the music specialist I am not directly involved in the planning of
instructional design units with the grade level teachers. After the initial planning is done
the plans are posted for all of the supporting teachers to have access to and we find
ways to integrate the grade level standards and units of study into our curriculum. In
the future, as a media specialist I would like to be very involved in the planning process.
I am very well versed in the Georgia Performance Standards and have a good idea of
what materials and resources could be used to help support teaching across all areas of
the curriculum. I would also like to be able to develop collaborative lessons with the
grade level teachers so I could insure that information literacy is being taught as well. In
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
9
conclusion it is critical that we as educators embrace instructional design in one form or
another and become designers of student learning so that we can ensure understanding
takes place.
MEDT 7461 – COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS
10
References
at Learning Theories. (n.d.). at Learning Theories. Retrieved February 13, 2011,
from http://www.learning-theories.com?addie-model.com
Branson, R. K. (1975). Interservice procedures for instructional systems development .
Tallahassee: Center for Educational Technology, Florida State University.
Heinich, R. (1996). Instructional media and technologies for learning . Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Merrill.
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2011). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and
Technology . Boston: Pearson.
The ADDIE Model - Why Use It?. (n.d.). EzineArticles Submission - Submit Your Best
Quality Original Articles For Massive Exposure, Ezine Publishers Get 25 Free
Article Reprints. Retrieved February 13, 2011, from
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-ADDIE-Model---Why-Use-It?&id=859615
Understanding by Design | Center for Teaching | Vanderbilt University. (n.d.). Center
for Teaching | Vanderbilt University. Retrieved February 13, 2011, from
http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/teaching-guides/pedagogical/understanding-by-design/
What. (n.d.). Welcome to CogSim Educational Consulting. Retrieved February 13, 2011,
from http://www.cogsim.com/idea/idea/isd.htm
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design . Alexandria, VA.:
Association for supervision and Curriculum Development.