During C.A.C. I had a brief discussion with Louis Biggie, from Johns Hopkins University, about the ADDIE model and breaking the rules of instructional design. The issues here is that as technology evolved, giving instructional designers better and better tools, the design process itself has not. The design process usually follows a model, like ADDIE, step by step without much deviation. There are several models and each one is an attempt to streamline the design process, but the actual process of designing instruction sometimes makes it difficult to follow a model step by step.
Let's look at the ADDIE model which serves as the staple of instructional design. ADDIE is an abbreviation of the five steps that make up this model: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. An instructional designer supposed to follow these five steps in order, using the outcome of one stage as the starting point of the next. However, the Design and Development stages can be done simultaneously which simplifies the process. For example, let's assume that during the Analysis stage it became evident a client's needs would be best served by a web based instructional solution. Therefore, a web developer could be building a site, while an instructional designer is working on a solution.
This is why I like the Layers of Necessity model. Layers of Necessity allows you to modify it to fit a project in hand instead of following it blindly step by step. The most important parts, Learner Analysis for example, are placed in the fist layer. While the rest, depending on their importance, project time line, and the budget, are placed in the second, third, or nth layers. This model has only been around for seventeen years, but it demonstrates what instructional design can become if the theoretical development follows closely with the technological.
4 days ago