Thoughts on Instructional Design and performance by Big Dog & Little Dog
Deciding I need to tie four instructional design models together (ADDIE, Agile Design, Learning Design and an Extension for ISD), I created this brief description - A Framework for Designing Learning Environments.
I was interested to see you cite ADDIE as an instructional design model. I've heard others make a case for calling ADDIE a process. A process that can be used for any number of outcomes, such as building a house or a website. A true ISD model, on the other hand, is limited to instructional outcomes. Your thoughts?
Hi Martin,I was in the Army Engineers for 22 years, and about the last 8 years of those were spent as an Instructor and Instructional Designer training Armed Forces Engineers (Army, Air Force, & Marines) using ADDIE. And I can honestly tell you that you cannot even build a shed in your backyard using ADDIE, much less a house, strip mall, or website.In their rush to bash ADDIE, people seem to either forget that there or other steps within the five phases of ADDIE, or they have no idea what ADDIE is.For example, some of the steps include, selecting the instructional setting, delivering the training, developing the learning objectives, identifying the learning steps, listing the entry behaviors, etc.How can someone build a house or website with those? I think people should remember that the U.S. Armed Forces starting using the ADDIE model (they called it SAT or ISD) just as the Vietnam war was ending, thus its first major test as an Instructional System Design model was put to use for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.It seems to work. I do know that as the Army is moving towards a dL (distributed Learning) platform that the designers have some concern with ADDIE. They like it and see its importance; however, they do see the need for adding other models or frameworks to it, which is basically what I was attempting to do.
Post a Comment