The final project is done

The final project of EDU 623 is now complete.  This blog contains the 5 steps of the ADDIE model used in teaching students how to use blogger.com.  Each phase in the development of this training program is addressed in the page tabs at the top of this blog. 

Personal Reflection

I am surprised to read that the implementation phase is sometimes overlooked in the ISD process.  Implementation is when the students are introduced to the instruction.  In addition, evaluations are performed to assess the participant's impressions of the training and whether the training has met it's objectives.  I am impressed by the fact that the 'four level' model for course evaluation created by Donald Kirkpatrick in 1959 is still used in the evaluative process today. It is only until recently that a fifth methodology called return on investment or ROI has been added to the methodology.  Created by Dr. Jack Phillips this evaluative process weighs the benefits of the training against the costs.  I am also suprised to discover that there are other models of assessment including:

Daniel Stufflebeam's CIPP Model (Context, Input, Process, Product)

Robert Stake's Responsive Evaluation Model

Robert Stake's Congruence-Contingency Model

Kaufman's Five Levels of Evaluation

CIRO (Context, Input, Reaction, Outcome)

PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique)

Alkins' UCLA Model

Michael Scriven's Goal-Free Evaluation Approach

Provus's Discrepancy Model

Eisner's Connoisseurship Evaluation Models

Illuminative Evaluation Model

Portraiture Model

and also the American Evaluation Association

Though not always included in a ISD training program, it is one important aspect that should not be overlooked.  The feedback from the participant as well the knowledge of knowing that objectives were met assures the designer that the training was complete. 

Kirkpatrick, D. (1959). Kirkpatrick's learning and training evaluation theory. Retrieved from http://www.businessballs.com/kirkpatricklearningevaluationmodel.htm

The Implementation Phase~

made with pixlr.com

  

 

The implementation phase is where the rubber meets the road. It is in the implementation phase that the instruction meets the participants. At this point in the instructional design system, the analysis, design, and development phases are complete. The course content is finalized. Objectives and terminal outcomes are defined.

The evaluation of the implementation process also includes at a minimum two levels of the Kirkpatrick evaluation model. Level one evaluates the learners’ impression of the training and level two validates that the objectives are being met by the learner (Hodell, 2011).

Hodell, C. (2011). Isd from the ground up. (3rd ed.). Chelsea, MI: Sheridan Books, Inc.

This web link about the implementation phase of ADDIE, http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/EDTEC540/EDTEC540BB/Module3/mod03.htm#imp, is from San Diego State University. It was created in 2006 by Bob Hoffman, Donn Ritchie and James Marshall of the Department of Educational Technology. They are still on the faculty today. Implementation is described as being the means to deliver instruction to the learner whether it is through textbooks, workbooks, workshops, or electronic media, etc. 

 

The following link, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBpI0B5PtaA … is an animation video hosted by Amber and Tamara describing Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation.  This clever presentation created in February 2011, describes the history of the Kirkpatrick method as well as details for each level in the evaluation process. 

Project #3 has been submitted

The content for instruction containing handouts, websites, and a powerpoint has been submitted. 

The Development Phase~

created with pixlr.com

In the development phase, the course content described in the design phase is transformed into a complete instructional training program.   The development of the course material involves creating learner activities, choosing an instruction method, reviewing existing material, and developing the instruction (Clark, 2010).  Instructional designers need to also address many aspects outside the design of the course material.  These include establishing budgetary costs, meeting deadlines, obtaining written agreements, providing examples of coursework, finalizing course approval,  pilot-testing the finished product, and training facilitators to teach the instructional session with a separate train-the-trainer teaching session (Hodell, 2011). 

Clark, D.R. (2010). Development phase in instructional design. Retrieved from: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat4.html.

Hodell, C. (2011). Isd from the ground up. (3rd ed.). Chelsea, MI: Sheridan Books, Inc.   

This blog, http://joelleegardner.blogspot.com/2012/02/addie-process-development-phase.html is very helpful in bettering your understanding of the development phase of ADDIE.  The author, Dr. Joel Gardner is a teacher of instructional design and instructional theory.  He guides the reader through the process of creating the materials planned for in the design phase.  This site also allows the user to review other aspects of the ADDIE instructional design system as well as link to some popular posts on ISD and the ADDIE model.

I also came across this article, http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/thompson.htm, written by Nadeen Thompson, Program Development Specialist at the University of Wisconsin about the benefits of using an instructional design model for planning instruction. She explains well the dynamic process and fluidity of movement through the phases in the creation of final product.   

Personal Reflection

Until recently, I didn’t understand the extent to which coursework was prepared.  Working my way through the ADDIE model has given me first-hand experience of the elaborate process to planning content rich instruction that is well-organized, effective, and engaging.  The development phase has the most work associated with it as this is the phase where the actual content for the training is created.  Handouts, power points, on-line resources, and training examples insure that the design is complete (Hodell, 2011).  The dynamic progression of instructional design through analysis and needs assessment, objective identification, audience and population evaluation, content and delivery development, and evaluation and redesign is a constant movement back and forth adjusting materials in the creation of the final product (Thompson, 2001).  In my practice it will be beneficial to provide a better variety of visuals to support the lecture material, keeping in mind that over-use, just like under-use of visuals fails to support student learning (Clark, 2003).  It is very easy to make wordy power points rather than prepare graphics and images to enhance the learning experience for students.  Using a systematic approach to planning visuals focuses on the tasks to be learned enhancing student learning (Lyons, 2003).   

 

Clark, R. C. (2003, August 11). More than just eye candy: Graphics for e-learning. The e-learning developers' journal

Hodell, C. (2011). Isd from the ground up. (3rd ed.). Chelsea, MI: Sheridan Books, Inc. 

Lyons, C. C. (2003, September 15). More than just eye candy: Graphics for e-learning. The e-learning developers' journal

Thompson, N. (2001). Why id? the benefits of instructional design models. Teaching with technology today, 7(6), Retrieved from http://www.uwsa.edu/ttt/thompson.htm

Project #2 Coming soon!

Project # 2 on the design of the blogger training session due this Sunday.