learning theories

GAGANE’S MODEL

Teaching the course you have just designed is often the only way teachers have of evaluating the effectiveness of the design. Using a lesson plan model helps keep you organized and in line with your design. Many of you do not use any type of lesson plan model, others may use a modified Madeline Hunter model.
There are many other lesson planning models. Gagne, Briggs, and Wager (1992) identify nine Events of Instruction critical for designing lesson level instruction. The nine events are
Gaining Attention
Informing the learner of the objective(s)
Stimulate recall of prior learning
Present the new material and
Provide learning guidance
Elicit performance
Provide feedback
Assess performance
Enhance retention and transfer
Go to http://ide.ed.psu.edu/idde/9events.htm for a detailed overview of the events of instruction. The site provides concrete examples of each event!
In any case, lesson planning models are useful in keeping you aware of each of the elements you need to move through as you teach a lesson. Again, most of this is almost intuitive to most teachers. We tend to know how to gain attention, link new information to previously learned information and so on. But using a lesson planning model does help even seasoned teachers design effective lessons, particularly when you are nervous about the new delivery medium.


Instructional Design in E-learning
IntroductionElearning is the marriage of technology and education, and most often, the instructional designer's greatest role is that of "bridging" concepts between the two worlds. This vital role ensures that a subject matter expert's (SME) concepts are properly developed by graphic designers and programmers. Unfortunately, the role of instructional design (ID) in elearning is often misunderstood - due to the perceived complexity of the process and to poor understanding of the pedagogical requirements of elearning. To a large degree, ID is the process whereby learning, not technology, is kept at the center of elearning development.
The need for instructional design is being noticed in elearning - both in corporate training departments and education institutions. It is one of the fastest growing fields (Find Jobs): "Instructional design is one of the largest categories of e-learning jobs, and search engines produce better results with this specific keyword than the general term e-learning. There also are historical data for the job category of instructional design."
This article explores ID in terms of: definitions, models, and usage. Like many models, ID is simply naming a process that many instructors and course developers already utilize. Often, when instructors first encounter an ID model (like ADDIE), the response is..."Oh, I do that already".
What is Instructional Design?Many definitions exist for instructional design - all of them are an expression of underlying philosophies and view points of what is involved in the learning process. Distinguishing the underlying philosophy of learning (in terms of: How does learning occur? What factors influence learning? What is the role of memory? How does transfer occur? What types of learning are best explained by the theory? Learning Theory) can help instructors and designers select the design model most congruent with their education philosophies. The following is a listing of ID definitions:
Instructional Design is the systematic process of translating general principles of learning and instruction into plans for instructional materials and learning. What is Instructional Design
Instructional design is a systematic approach to planning and producing effective instructional materials. It is similar to lesson planning, but more elaborate and more detailed.
Instructional Design is 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. It includes development of instructional materials and activities; and tryout and evaluation of all instruction and learner activities. Definitions of ID
In general, ID theory needs to move in the direction of flexibility and learner-empowerment if it is to allow ID to keep up with technological and institutional changes...."Like the chiropractor who realigns your spine, we might become healthier from a realignment of our theories. If we admit to and attempt to accommodate some of the uncertainty, indeterminism, and unpredictability that pervade our complex world, we will develop stronger theories and practices that will have more powerful (if not predictable) effects on human learning." What is ID Theory?
Instructional design is the process by which instruction, computer-based or not, is created. Instructional design provides a framework for the creative process of design, and ensures the learners' needs are met. ID and Development
Instructional design ("ID", also known as instructional systems design or "ISD") is a tested and proven methodology for developing instruction. It first gained popularity in World War II, where the Instructional design approach fared so well that it was quickly co-opted into corporate training. In the fifty years that followed, ID has become the standard for producing excellent training in both the military and corporate realms, as well as textbook authoring and development of computer-based learning material What is ID?
Instructional design is a systematic approach to course development that ensures that specific learning goals are accomplished. It is an iterative process that requires ongoing evaluation and feedback. Instructional Design
Instructional Design is the art and science of creating an instructional environment and materials that will bring the learner from the state of not being able to accomplish certain tasks to the state of being able to accomplish those tasks. Instructional Design is based on theoretical and practical research in the areas of cognition, educational psychology, and problem solving. What is ID
Instructional Design ModelsInstructional design, very loosely defined, is a system or process of organizing learning resources to ensure learners achieve established learning outcomes. As such, it is essentially a framework for learning. From a designers perspective, various models can be followed in the instructional design process. It is important to note that, at best, a model is a representation of actual occurrences and, as such, should be utilized only to the extent that it is manageable for the particular situation or task. Put another way, perhaps one model is more effective for designing a math course, and another model is more effective for designing soft skill courses (like managing people, customer service, etc.).Instructional Design Models offers an excellent visuals depicting various models. Here is an overview of some different models for instructional design:
ADDIE - refers to Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate. This is possibly the best known design model, and is frequently used in academic circles.
Algo-Heuristic - "The theory suggests that all cognitive activities can be analyzed into operations of an algorithmic, semi-algorithmic, heuristic, or semi-heuristic nature. Once discovered, these operations and their systems can serve as the basis for instructional strategies and methods. The theory specifies that students ought to be taught not only knowledge but the algorithms and heuristics of experts as well."
Dick and Carey Model - "The Dick and Carey model prescribes a methodology for designing instruction based on a reductionist model of breaking instruction down into smaller components. Instruction is specifically targeted on the skills and knowledge to be taught and supplies the appropriate conditions for the learning of these outcomes."
Robert Gagné's ID Model - "Gagné's approach to instructional design is considered a seminal model that has influenced many other design approaches and particularly the Dick & Carey systems approach. Gagné proposed that events of learning and categories of learning outcomes together provide a framework for an account of learning conditions. "
Minimalism " The Minimalist theory of J.M. Carroll is a framework for the design of instruction, especially training materials for computer users. The theory suggests that (1) all learning tasks should be meaningful and self-contained activities, (2) learners should be given realistic projects as quickly as possible, (3) instruction should permit self-directed reasoning and improvising by increasing the number of active learning activities, (4) training materials and activities should provide for error recognition and recovery and, (5) there should be a close linkage between the training and actual system."
Kemp, Morrison, and Ross Nine step instructional design model.
Rapid Prototyping - "Generally, rapid prototyping models involve learners and/or subject matter experts (SMEs) interacting with prototypes and instructional designers in a continuous review/revision cycle. Developing a prototype is practically the first step, while front-end analysis is generally reduced or convereted into an on-going, interactive process between subject-matter, objectives, and materials " Thiagi - Rapid ID
Epathic Instructional Design - 5-step process: Observe, capture data, reflect and analyze, brainstorm for solutions, develop prototypes
Why Use Instructional Design?With a foundation of what instructional design is, and various models for implementation, we will now focus on the WHY of ID in elearning. Many classroom activities don't leave a "trail" that can be viewed by others (at least not directly - successes of graduates of a program can be evaluated and the relevance of courses assessed). Online learning is far more transparent. Classroom discussion is generally not archived (though certain lectures can be taped and shown to students)...whereas every aspect of elearning is transparent and can be used as a resources for subsequent courses.Content, discussions, interactions, etc. can all be evaluated and reviewed by persons other than the instructor. As such, quality can be assessed more objectively in elearning. ID is a quality process. It seeks to ensure that critical concepts are explored through content presentation and learning activities.
Beyond quality and transparency issues, the greatest value ID offers is to students of online programs. The greatest objective of ID is to serve the learning needs and success of students through effective presentation of content and fostering of interaction.Additional benefits instructional design offers elearning:
"Distance learning courses are likely to fail if they are delivered as if they were traditional courses." (Smith, 1996)
"Pedagogy must drive the choice of instructional technology, not the other way around." (Chizmar & Walbert, 1999)
"Compared with a human instructor, technology is less adaptive. Once a plan of integration is implemented, it is less likely to change it according to student's reactions. This is why instructional design plays an important role in bridging pedagogy and technology. Subject contents have to be well organized and strategies for teaching via a chosen medium have to be well-thought-out. Instructional design can help educators making the best use of technology; therefore guarantee a successful integration." ID Approach for Integrating Pedagogy and Technology
Provides consistency between various courses developed by various instructors/designers. The general look and process of content exploration is standardized.
In a classroom, an instructor can adjust "on the fly"...if, during the design process, a concept was not communicated clearly, a classroom instructor can clarify. Online, this type of adjustment is usually not possible. The design process must anticipate and meet potential concerns/amibiguities...or put another way ID tries to do online what the instructor does in a classroom.
ID focuses on the most effective way to present content
ID begins with the learner and the learner experience
Quality of course is ensured through ID - covers all the phases of good development
ID gives structure to the student's process of working through course material
Appropriate use of technology: "With e-learning and blended learning proving to be no more effective than traditional classroom methods, why are so few training professionals recognising this simple fact: Technology, no matter how advanced, cannot compensate for its misapplication. Here's why instructional design is - and always has been - the key to unlocking the true potential of available learning technologies." Leading edge training technologies
Accelerate development. A current concern in e-learning is development time. ID can speed up development time.
Creates a transparent process - easier to track and utilize the experiences of development teams (a knowledge management issue)
"Too much of the structure of educational technology is built upon the sand of relativism, rather than the rock of science. When winds of new paradigms blow and the sands of old paradigms shift; then the structure of educational technology slides toward the sea of pseudo-science and mythology. We stand firm against the shifting sands of new paradigms and "realities." We have drawn a line in the sand. We boldly reclaim the technology of instructional design that is built upon the rock of instructional science." Reclaiming ID
ConclusionThe growth and success of e-learning is closely linked to the design of quality learning, enabled through the use of technology. Instructional designers play the pivotal role of bringing together these disparate fields - for the benefit of students, instructors, and organizations. Many of the concerns of online learning drop out rates, learner resistance, and poor learner performance can be addressed through a structured design process. The resulting benefits - reduced design costs, consistent look and feel, transparency, quality control, standardization - make organizational investment in ID a simple decision.
References for further interest ID Standards


MVU's Instructional Design category of standards is different than the Technology and Usability categories. Whereas the categories of Technology and Usability contain discrete standards that apply to an entire course, the Instructional Design category of standards will be dependent upon the type and number of performance objectives in a course.
Understanding Our Instructional Design StandardsWe approach the process of designing and evaluating the Instructional Design of a course from a Performance Objective standpoint. In other words, online courses can be broken down into Units and Objectives.
All of the instruction that can be mapped to an objective will be of a particular Performance/Knowledge type (what we refer to as PK Types). Depending upon the type of knowledge and performance that is required for each objective, our standards define a unique set of standards for that objective. This allows for a totally customized design or evaluation of the Instructional Design of an online course.
The table below represents the PK Types our standards have identified. Simply move your mouse over the Type in each cell for a short description of the PK Type. Click on the Type to get a complete description and details of the PK Type standards



K n o w l e d g e
Performance
Recall Facts(F)

Derive Methods(M)
Derive Solutions(S)
Recall Elements(E)
Recall Concepts(C1)
Identify Concepts(C2)
Apply Concepts(C3)
Recall Tasks(K1)
Identify Tasks(K2)
Perform Tasks(K3)
Recall Principles(P1)
Identify Principles(P2)
Apply Principles(P3)
Our PK Types were derived in part from M. David Merrill's Component Display Theory and Jeroen van Merriënboer's Complex Cognitive Skills and Knowledge Theory.

Quality Online Courses
Overview
OID Standards Technology Usability Accessibility Instructional Design F - Recall Fact E - Recall Element C1 - Recall Concept C2 - Identify Concept C3 - Apply Concept K1 - Recall Task K2 - Identify Task K3 - Perform Task P1 - Recall Principle P2 - Identify Principle P3 - Apply Principle M - Derive Method S - Derive Solution
Course Evaluator
Give Us Feedback!


Why ID? The Benefits of Instructional Design Models
Defining Instructional Design (ID)
As I view this issue, you are an instructional designer if you have had training in and consciously use an instructional design model for lesson planning. If you’re an educator, the steps in an instructional design model will look familiar. That’s because you’ve unconsciously used steps in this process to design your own instruction many times.
Instructional design (ID) models grew out of the teaching profession and came to fruition during World War II when the nation had to be quickly trained and troops mobilized to run the equipment of war. A combination of face-to-face, hands-on, individualized, and group units of instruction were developed by the armed forces using ID models to effectively train massive numbers of troops. Today there are many ID models (one useful site to consult is Sherri Braxton-Lieber's at http://www.seas.gwu.edu/student/sbraxton/ISD/id_models.html). However, all of them share some basic features:
Needs assessment
Goal and objective identification
Audience and setting analysis
Content and delivery development
Evaluation and redesign
Many ID models are depicted in little step-by-step rectangular boxes leading to the impression that you complete each one in the order shown. On the contrary, ID is a dynamic process with constant movement back and forth between the steps. For instance, evaluation is based on objectives but it also helps to clarify the objectives. If evaluation alters the objectives, it also alters the content, and both need to be re-addressed.
Why Use ID?
Design teams representing various fields of expertise (producers, instructors, editors, etc.) developed individualized packets of instruction during the war years. Today, teams who work over extended periods of time to do "anticipatory" and "participatory" planning also develop individualized or technology-enhanced instruction. Because these classes are not traditional, instructor-led, face-to-face classes, design teams must anticipate the needs of learners and design instruction that "builds in" clarity, resources, activities, feedback, and the like. Teams also need to choose an appropriate delivery mode (i.e. computers, television, video, etc.) which requires expertise from various fields along with participation in the planning process.
These teams use ID models to:
Speed up the process: Time is money, especially when you have a team of three to four people working on the same project. The design steps save time by focusing the team and serving as the foundation for project development and a roadmap through the process.
Assist in communication: Team members need to share expertise, intent, calendars, and so forth. Instructors need to clarify their goals, objectives, content, and evaluation plans for producers and describe the level of audience expertise and their physical setting (equipment, software, support). Producers need to focus on the identified audience and objectives and suggest technology options. They need to include instructors in choosing appropriate technology and involve them in script writing, editing, computer course layout, etc.
Cover all phases of good instructional design: Insure that the elements of instruction are all consciously addressed and all the pieces relate to and support each other. Insure that the design is complete and packaged to be transmitted to the clientele prior to instruction.

ID Models…Not Just for Teams
ID models can be used in many settings and to varying degrees. Individual instructors creating their own traditional classroom material can benefit from consciously using an ID model. It speeds up the course planning process, helps internal communication (just transferring goals and objectives from thoughts to paper clarifies them and focuses design efforts), and insures that no phase of instructional design will be forgotten or shortchanged.
An ID Model can be used to evaluate existing instruction. Use the model to assess a short lesson, workshop, or textbook chapter. Try to match the objectives of the instruction to the content and/or the evaluation.
An ID model can also be a good tool for general planning. Try adapting it for planning your next vacation. Before you look at your budget or get into the content plans (i.e. location, reservations, etc.) ask your travel partner to write on paper the one overarching goal they have for this vacation: what does he or she want to get out of it? You do the same, exchange goals with your partner, and discuss. Then start planning the content of the vacation while keeping the goals in mind. You might be surprised at the results!
In Conclusion
Instructional design models can help both individuals and design teams work through the process of planning instruction. Consciously working back and forth through the steps of an ID model will add speed and clarity and insure that key instructional principles are addressed. Instructional design models can also be used to assess existing educational material and help in everyday planning.
Instructional Design: Resources for Further Reading
Books:
Dick, Walter, Carey, Lou, and James O. Carey. The Systematic Design of Instruction, 5th ed. New York: Longman, c2001.
Reigeluth, Charles M., ed. Instructional-Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983.
Wilson, Brent G., ed. Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. Foreword by David N. Perkins. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications, 1996.
Websites:
Sherri Braxton-Lieber, Ph.D.http://www.seas.gwu.edu/student/sbraxton/ISD/design_models.html
Professional Organizations:
The Association for Educational Communications and Technologyhttp://www.aect.org/
American Society for Training and Developmenthttp://www.astd.org/







A Brief History of Instructional Design

As a formal discipline, Instructional Systems Design has been a long time in the making. The early contributions of thinkers such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato regarding the cognitive basis of learning and memory was later expanded by the 13th century philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas who discussed the perception of teachings in terms of free will. Four hundred years later, John Locke advanced Aristotle's notion of human's initial state of mental blankness by proposing that almost all reason and knowledge must be gained from experience. Then, at the turn of the 20th century John Dewey presented several tenets of the philosophy of education which promoted the idea that learning occurs best when married with doing, rather than rote regurgitation of facts.
As the 1920's approached, a behaviorist approach to educational psychology became increasingly predominant. Thorndike's theory of connectionism represents the original stimulus-response (S-R) model of behavioral psychology, and was expanded on some twenty years later by Hull in his exposition of drive reduction – a motivational model of behavior which emphasizes learner's wants, attention, and activities. With the Industrial Revolution came an increased attention to productivity, and educational behaviorists during the 1920's such as Sidney Pressey applied mechanized technology to increase the efficiency of the learning process. Though their initial incarnation did not see much use after the Depression, many of the lessons learned research into these teaching machines regarding the delivery of standardized instruction contributed to the instructional media research & development movement of World War II.
The advent of the Second World War presented a tremendous instructional dilemma: the rapid training of hundreds of thousands of military personnel. Ralph Tyler's work a decade before WWII indicated that objectives were most useful to instructional developers if written in terms of desired learner behaviors. Armed with this knowledge and the experience of creating standardize methods of instructional delivery using teaching machines, military researchers developed a bevy of training films and other mediated materials for instructional purposes. In part, the United States' heavy investment in training and R&D was credited with the country's victory in the war. With the economic boom that followed, federal dollars followed researcher's desire to better flesh out the underpinnings of learning, cognition, and instruction.
The 1950's are characterized by a shift away from the uninformed application of instructional technology to the formulation of theoretical models of learning. The publication of B. F. Skinner's The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching in 1954 canonized the basic behaviorist principles of S-R, feedback, and reinforcement. As the key element of his theory of operant conditioning, the reinforcement of desired learner responses was also incorporated into Skinner's implementations of programmed instruction. Considered by many the progenitor of contemporary instructional design, programmed instruction emphasizes the formulation of behavioral objectives, breaking instructional content into small units and rewarding correct responses early and often.
Another substantial instructional theorist of the 1950's was Benjamin Bloom. His 1956 taxonomy of intellectual behaviors provided instructors a means by which to decide how to impart instructional content to learners most effectively. Advocating a mastery approach to learning, Bloom endorsed instructional techniques that varied both instruction and time according to learner requirements. While this approach provided instructional developers a means by which to match subject matter and instructional methods, Bloom's taxonomy was not in and of itself capable of satisfying the desire of large organizations to relate resources and processes to the performances of individuals. To achieve this, researchers in the military's Air Research and Development Command borrowed from Ludwig von Bertalanffy's General Systems Theory of biological interactions to integrate the operations of a wide range of departments, such as training, intelligence, and staffing. Combined with the Bloom's Taxonomy, the systems approach to instructional and organizational development allowed planners and policy-makers to match the content and delivery of instruction in a fashion which considered both super- and sub-systems (the organization as a whole, as well as groups and individuals within the organization). These advances of Skinner, Bloom and von Bertalanffy were usually employed to develop instruction in what was only assumed to be an effective an efficient manner. The formalization of a standardized design process still had yet to be devised.
Again it was a crisis that spurred the next evolution of instructional technology – a shift away from an emphasis in the development of instructional programs to one which focused on the design of entire curriculum. Again the crisis was a war, but this time the war was a political one. In 1957 the Soviet Union launched the Sputnik satellite and began the "space race". America was taken by surprise and the government was forced to reevaluate the education system and its shortcomings. Science and math programs were the first to be targeted, and the government employed experts in these fields to bring the content up to date.
In 1962 Robert Glaser synthesized the work of previous researchers and introduced the concept of "instructional design", submitting a model which links learner analysis to the design and development of instruction. Interestingly, Glaser's contribution to the current field of instructional systems is not so much in the advancement of his model, but in work concerning Individually Prescribed Instruction (IPI), an approach whereby the results of a learner's placement test are used to plan learner-specific instruction.
At the same time Glaser was developing his theories of instructional design and IPI, Robert Mager published his treatise on the construction of performance objectives. Mager suggested that an objective should describe in measurable terms who an objective targets, the behavior they will have exhibited, the conditions or limitations under which they must carry out this behavior, and the criteria against which their behavior will be gauged.
As early as 1962 when he published "Military Training and Principles of Learning" Robert Gagné demonstrated a concern for the different levels of learning. His differentiation of psychomotor skills, verbal information, intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, and attitudes provides a companion to Bloom's six cognitive domains of learning. Later, Gagné extended his thinking to include nine instructional events that detail the conditions necessary for learning to occur. These events have long since been used for the basis for the design of instruction and the selection of appropriate media.
The mediation of instruction entered the computer age in the 1960's when Patrick Suppes conducted his initial investigations into computer-assisted instruction (CAI) at Stanford University. Developed through a systematic analysis of curriculum, Suppes' CAI provided learner feedback, branching, and response tracking – aspects were later incorporated into the PLATO system in the 1970's and continue guide the development of today's instructional software.
By the late 1960's America was again in crisis. Not only was the country involved in another war, but the nation's schools were unable to elicit the achievement from learners it anticipated. Grant Venn argued that since only 19% of first graders complete a bachelor or arts degree, that the current educational system is only serving the advantaged minority of schoolchildren. To counter this trend Robert Morgan proposed to conduct an experiment with an "organic curriculum" which would to incorporate into the educational system the best instructional practices identified through research. Accepted in 1967 the proposal by the US Office of Education, the project was dubbed "Educational Systems for the 1970's", or ES'70. Morgan engaged an array of experts in the field of learning, cognition, and instructional design to contribute to the project and carried out multiple experiments in a variety of settings. Of these was Leslie Briggs, who had demonstrated that an instructionally designed course could yield up to 2:1 increase over conventionally designed courses in terms of achievement, reduction in variance, and reduction of time-to-completion – this effect was four times that of the control group which received no training. In 1970, Morgan partnered with the Florida Research and Development Advisory Board to conduct a nation-wide educational reform project in South Korea. Faced with the task of increasing the achievement of learners while at the same time reducing the cost of schooling from $41.27 per student per year Morgan applied some of the same techniques as had been piloted in the ES'70 project and achieved striking results: an increase in student achievement, a more efficient organization of instructors and course content, an increased teacher to student ratio, a reduction in salary cost, and a reduction in yearly per student cost by $9.80.
Around this time Roger Kaufman developed a problem-solving framework for educational strategic planning which provided practitioners a means by which to demonstrate value-added not only for the learner, but the school system and society as a whole. This framework provided the basis for the Organizational Elements Model (OEM), a needs assessment model which specifies results to be achieved at societal, organizational, and individual performance levels. By rigorously defining needs as gaps in results Kaufman emphasized that performance improvement interventions can not demonstrate return-on-investment unless those interventions were derived from the requirements of these three primary clients and beneficiaries of organizational action. This approach to needs assessment and strategic planning has since been used across the world as the foundation for planning, evaluation, and continuous improvement in military, business, and educational settings.
A variety of models for instructional system design proliferated the late 1970's and early 80's: Gagné and Briggs, Branson, Dick and Carey, and Atkins, to name a few. One possible reason for this phenomenon deals with the establishment of formal education and training departments within both public and private organizations. Faced with the computerized technologies of the times, these organizations require a means by which to quickly develop appropriate methods by which to educate internal employees in the new business practices ushered into existence by the Information Age. Another explanation is that businesses, especially consulting organizations, are becoming increasingly required to demonstrate value-added not only to their organization, but to the clients they serve. The evaluation and continuous improvement components of contemporary models of ISD make far strides from the early develop-and-implement models of the middle of the century in this aspect.
In the 1990's a dual focus on technology and performance improvement has developed. For example, in his 1988 essay "Why the Schools Can't Improve: The Upper Limit Hypothesis" Robert Branson offers an argument for systemic school reform, suggesting that schools are operating at near peak efficiency and must be redesigned from the top down using technological interventions. Later in that year Branson was contracted by the Florida Department of Education (DOE) to analyze it's various programs and plan a system-wide technology-based educational reform initiative for Florida called Schoolyear 2000. Over the next several years Branson's team developed and piloted multiple computerized instructional technologies, as well as models of the interaction between the internal operations of the school system and the experiences and knowledge of students, parents, and teachers.
Developments in performance improvement outside ISD during the 1990's such as Quality Management (QM), Organizational Engineering, and Change Management have required that instructional designers look outside their profession to demonstrate the utility of their practice. Introduced earlier by Deming, QM has swept public and private organizations alike in the 90's. Whereas initially thought of in terms of "quality control" or "zero defects", quality practices have evolved into tools for organizational continuous improvement. Similarly, instructional designers in the 90's often work alongside authorities in the field of organizational engineering. Characterized by a concern for an organization's culture and interaction between groups, organizational engineering seeks to improve organizations through the identification of relationships between an organization's vision, mission, goals, methods and personnel. Similarly, change management has become a business in and of itself, with leaders such as Darly Conner and Joel Barker pioneering methods for and models of organizational change.
The advent of new media, such as the Internet and hypermedia, has brought about not only technological innovations, but also coupled these with new ways of approaching learning and instruction. As opposed to the behavioralist perspective that emphasizes learning objectives, the constructivist approach holds that learners construct their understanding of reality from interpretations of their experiences. Theorists such as Thomas Duffy and Seymour Papert suggest that constructivism provides a model whereby socio-cultural and cognitive issues regarding the design of learning environments can be supported by computer tools. This philosophy has been applied to such computerized technologies as online help systems and programming language LOGO.
In the future, instructional designers are likely to choose one of two paths: specialist or generalist. In the prior path, designers will focus on one aspect of learning or instruction and act as consultants or subject matter experts, whether internal or external to the organization. The other approach is one more aligned with managerial activities. Since the field is becoming too broad for most designers to work with authority in all matters, this option allows practitioners to oversee the development of instructional projects, rather than narrow their efforts exclusively on assessment, analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation or continuous improvement.
References
Boling, E. (1996). Instructional Technology Foundations I: Historical Timelines Project Page [Online]. Available: http://education.indiana.edu/~istcore/r511/datelist.html [1998, June 7].
Kearsley, G. (1994). Learning & Instruction: The TIP Database [Online]. Available: http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/educ/tip/1.htm [1998, June 7].
Reiser, R. A. (1987). Instructional Technology: A History. In R. M. Gagné (ed.), Instructional Technology: Foundations (pp. 11 - 40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shrock, S. A. (No date). A Brief History of Instructional Development [Online].Available: http://uttc-med.utb.edu/6320/chapters/summary_ch2.html [1998, June 7].
Algo-Heuristic Theory (L. Landa)
Landa's theory is concerned with identifying mental processes -- conscious and especially unconscious -- that underlie expert learning, thinking and performance in any area. His methods represent a system of techniques for getting inside the mind of expert learners and performers which enable one to uncover the processes involved. Once uncovered, they are broken down into their relative elementary components -- mental operations and knowledge units which can be viewed as a kind of psychological "atoms" and "molecules". Performing a task or solving a problem always requires a certain system of elementary knowledge units and operations.
There are classes of problems for which it is necessary to execute operations in a well structured, predefined sequence (algorithmic problems). For such problem classes, it is possible to formulate a set of precise unambiguous instructions (algorithms) as to what one should do mentally and/or physically in order to successfully solve any problem belonging to that class. There are also classes of problems (creative or heuristic problems) for which precise and unambiguous sets of instructions cannot be formulated. For such classes of problems, it is possible to formulate instructions that contain a certain degree of uncertainty (heuristics). Landa also describes semi-algorithmic and semi-heuristic problems, processes and instructions.
The theory suggests that all cognitive activities can be analyzed into operations of an algorithmic, semi-algorithmic, heuristic, or semi-heuristic nature. Once discovered, these operations and their systems can serve as the basis for instructional strategies and methods. The theory specifies that students ought to be taught not only knowledge but the algorithms and heuristics of experts as well. They also have to be taught how to discover algorithms and heuristics on their own. Special emphasis is placed on teaching students cognitive operations, algorithms and heuristics which make up general methods of thinking (i.e., intelligence).
With respect to sequencing of instruction, Landa proposes a number of strategies, the most important of which is the "snowball" method. This method applies to teaching a system of cognitive operations by teaching the first operation, then the second which is practiced with the first, and so on.
Scope/Application:
While this is a general theory of learning, it is illustrated primarily in the context of mathematics and foreign language instruction. In recent years, Landa has applied his theory to training settings under the name "Landamatics" (Educational Technology , 1993)
Example:
Landa (1976) provides the following example of an algorithm for teaching a foreign speaker how to choose among the English verbs "to offer", "to suggest" and "to propose":
Check to see whether something that one presents to another person is a tangible object or viewed as tangible. If yes, use "offer". If no, it is an idea about some action to be performed. Check to see if this idea is presented formally. If yes, use "propose", otherwise use "suggest".
Applying the snowball method would involve teaching the student the action of checking the first condition and then the action of checking the second condition followed by practice that requires both conditions to be checked. Landa explains that after sufficient practice the application of the algorithm would become automatic and unconscious.
Principles:
1. It is more important to teach algo-heuristic processes to students than prescriptions (knowledge of processes); on the other hand, teachers need to know both.
2. Processes can be taught through prescriptions and demonstrations of operations.
3. Teaching students how to discover processes is more valuable than providing them already formulated.
4. Break processes down into elementary operations of size and length suitable for each student (individualization of instruction).
References:
Educational Technology (1993). Landamatics ten years later. Educational Technology, 33(6), 7-18.
Landa, L. (1974). Algorithmization in Learning and Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Landa, L. (1976). Instructional Regulation and Control: Cybernetics, Algorithmization, and Heuristics in Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Relevant Web Sites:
For more about Landa and his work, see: http://www.wiu.edu/users/mflll/landa.htmhttp://tecfa.unige.ch/staf/staf9698/mullerc/3/landa.html

[ INTRO ] [ THEORIES ] [ CONCEPTS ] [ DOMAINS ]

Dick and Carey Model
Presentation by Hee-Sun Lee & Soo-Young Lee
This model describes all the phases of an iterative process that starts by identifying instructional goals and ends with summative evaluation. This model is applicable as shown below. (See bold faces)
Expertise Level
Novice
Expert
Orientation
Descriptive
Prescriptive
Knowledge Structure
Procedural
Declarative
Purpose & Uses
Small Scale (Unit, Module, Lesson)
Large Scale (Course, Intruction)
Theoretical Basis
Learning Theory
Analysis Functions
Context
K-12 / Higher Education
Business / Government
(Flow chart and table from Sherri Braxton's site on Instructional Design Models)
Stage 1. Instructional Goals
* Instructional Goal: Desirable state of affairs by instruction* Needs Analysis : Analysis of a discrepancy between an instructional goal and the present state of affairs or a personal perception of needs.
Stage 2. Instructional Analysis
* Purpose : To determine the skills involved in reaching a goal* Task Analysis (procedural analysis) : about the product of which would be a list of steps and the skills used at each step in the procedure* Information-Processing Analysis : about the mental operations used by a person who has learned a complex skills* Learning-Task Analysis : about the objectives of instruction that involve intellectual skills
Stage 3. Entry Behaviors and Learner Characteristics
* Purpose : To determine which of the required enabling skills the learners bring to the learning task* Intellectual skills* Abilities such as verbal comprehension and spatial orientation* Traits of personality
Stage 4. Performance Objectives
* Purpose : To translate the needs and goals into specific and detailed objectives* Functions : Determining whether the instruction related to its goals. Focusing the lesson planning upon appropriate conditions of learning Guiding the development of measures of learner performance Assisting learners in their study efforts.
Stage 5. Criterion-Referenced Test Items
*To diagnose an individual possessions of the necessary prerequisites for learning new skills*To check the results of student learning during the process of a lesson*To provide document of students progress for parents or administrators*Useful in evaluating the instructional system itself (Formative/ Summative evaluation)*Early determination of performance measures before development of lesson plan and instructional materials
Stage 6. Instructional Strategy
* Purpose : To outline how instructional activities will relate to the accomplishment of the objectives*The best lesson design : Demonstrating knowledge about the learners, tasks reflected in the objectives, and effectiveness of teaching strategies
e.g. Choice of delivering system. Teacher-led, Group-paced vs. Learner-centered, Learner-paced
Stage 7. Instructional Meterials
* Purpose : To select printed or other media intended to convey events of instruction.* Use of existing materials when it is possible* Need for development of new materials, otherwise* Role of teacher : It depends on the choice of delivery system
Stage 8. Formative Evaluation
* Purpose : To provide data for revising and improving instructional materials* To revise the instruction so as to make it as effective as possible for larger number of students* One on One : One evaluator sitting with one learner to interview* Small Group* Field Trial
Stage 9. Summative Evaluation
* Purpose : To study the effectiveness of system as a whole* Conducted after the system has passed through its formative stage* Small scale/ Large Scale* Short period/ Long period

References
· Dick, W. & Cary, L. (1990), The Systematic Design of Instruction, Third Edition, Harper Collins* Briggs, L. J., Gustafson, K. L. & Tellman, M. H., Eds. (1991), Instructional Design: Principles and Applications, Second Edition, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ* Edmonds, G. S., Branch, R. C., & Mukherjee, P. (1994), A Conceptual Framework for Comparing Instructional Design Models, Educational Research and Technology, 42(2), pp. 55-72.* Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J. & Wagner, W. W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th ed.), Holt, Reinhardt, and
·