1.+Instructional+Model+Comparison



**Instructional Design Model vs. Instructional Strategy** (Please note that the Word Doc file for this essay can be found on the page entitled "Assignments as Links to Docs") An instructional design model is the master plan that an educator or curriculum designer follows as they move through the various stages of course design. It encompasses the entire process, from initial planning stages through materials selection or creation and assessment decisions. A good model will also include a final testing and review stage that will encourage reflection and revision. An instructional model includes a phase, usually in the middle, which calls for the development of instructional strategy. An //instructional strategy// is the methods and philosophy that the instructor will use when presenting the material to the students.


 * Instructional Design Models**

Many instructional design plans are based on the ADDIE model. This basic series of steps includes Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. Each step is evaluated and revised as needed. The models that take their basic structure from this simple plan will often break down these phases into one or more sub-steps for further clarity. Each derivative of this cyclical framework uses the fundamental ideas to solve the instructional problem they are focused on or adjusts it to apply directly to a specific learning environment.

 An excellent example of one such instructional design model is offered by Dick and Carey:

 The Dick/Carey model guides the educator or designer through several beginning stages that thoroughly examine and analyze the goals of instruction, the learners and the learning context, as well as the actually learning events that will take place. In this model the analysis stage includes detailing the instructional goals as the first challenge. This is further broken down into another series of tasks. Included in this process is the Needs Assessment which carefully examines the situation to determine whether the instruction will address a discrepancy between expectations and current results, a problem with a malfunctioning system, or a new skill set that needs to be introduced.

 A careful, delineated approach to the initial analysis ensures that a strong foundation is laid before any actual creation steps are undertaken. This is followed by a review of the entry level skills needed by students and the behaviors required for success. It also involves a review of the context in which the instruction will occur. As Dick and Carey point out in // The Systematic Design of Instruction // //,// this process is critical to ensure that the steps that follow adhere strictly to the verified goals, a realistic evaluation of the students, and the institution’s current needs (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2009).

 Once the rigorous research phase is complete, the designer moves on to the task of writing their performance objectives. By this time they have a clear idea of who their students are, what their skills are coming in, and what needs to be accomplished. This will help to ensure that the goals are realistic and specific. As Dick and Carey point out, the importance of clear and specific statements about what the instructor wants the students to be able to do after the learning has taken place is a vital ingredient for successful instruction (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2009).

 After determining the performance goals the assessment instruments are devised. These are created first so that later when the actual instruction is developed, the activities and materials will be tied concretely with the assessment tool and validity will be insured. Many instructors may find this a counter-intuitive approach at first. It is common practice for teachers to devise their tests after the lesson plans are complete, and sometimes they are written after the instruction has taken place. According to this model, however, it is best to begin with the assessment and then move on to writing the lesson so that every part of the instruction is tied directly to the test and //vice versa//.

 With the assessment instrument in view, the designer then proceeds to the development of the instructional strategy. This involves all of the pedagogical tools and methods that they will use to gain the attention and interest of the students as well as communicate the vital information. All of the activities should reflect the objectives and prepare students for the assessment. It is important to take into consideration several key factors such as the needs assessment that was conducted as well as the technology that is readily available.

 Following the strategy phase, the materials are either selected or created. Again, these should all reinforce the stated objectives and prepare for the assessment. Obviously, the designer will also take into consideration the ages and backgrounds of the students as well as any budgetary constraints that may exist.

 Now that the course is complete, the model provides for a formative evaluation that enables the designer to go through the process again, if necessary, to revise and retool whichever pieces of the course are not performing as planned. At the conclusion of this process, a summative evaluation is conducted to determine whether or not the learning goals are achieved.

 The Dick/Carey model is a popular choice due to it clarity and completeness but it is certainly not the only one based on the ADDIE concept. Another model that lays out a master plan for course creation is this one that was designed specifically for a large banking corporation.

 A situated model, like this one, is designed for a particular organization and often follows the same basic general format as the ADDIE plan. Like the Dick/Carey model, it starts with analysis of the needs and goals as well as the learners and context. It follows this with high level design (the objectives) and then the actual course content.

 It is weaker than the Dick/Carey model in that is does not separate the instructional strategy section from the assessment plan or materials selection. It fails to prompt the designer to develop assessment instruments before the other instructional activities. It also does not appear to reinforce the notion of revision or review, but instead calls its final phase "maintenance", thus discouraging the notion of reworking the plan based on a formative assessment of the success of the curriculum.

 Overall the two models can be evaluated against the ADDIE model:


 * || <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 130%;">DICK/CAREY Model || <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 130%;">Situated ISD Model ||
 * || [[image:Dick_Carey_Model.jpg width="269" height="147"]] || <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 180%;">[[image:ISD_Model.jpg width="257" height="203"]] ||
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 190%;"> A || The analysis phase in the Dick Carey model is separated into more sub-categories and this ensure a more complete analysis. || This stage is all lumped together into a single step and this could lead to over-simplified analysis. ||
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 190%;"> D || The design phases are broken down into several key groups: goals, assessment instrument, instructional strategy, and evaluative instruments. || Again, all of the design phase is labeled simply "design" with no further delineation. ||
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 190%;"> D || The boundaries between design and development are somewhat unclear. It seems that the development phase occurs during some of the same phases. || The development stage comes after detailed design. ||
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 190%;"> I || The model provides for implementation to occur and then again after revisions. || This step, called the pilot test, comes before the course is officially complete. ||
 * <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif; font-size: 190%;"> E || Evaluation is a key component in this model and triggers revision in a cycle of constant improvement. || Evaluation or revision is not mentioned in this model. ||

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 15.6pt; line-height: 200%;">**Comparing Instructional Strategies**

By contrast, the term “instructional strategy” refers to the methods by which an instructor actually teaches a class. There are many different approaches that have been illustrated and elucidated in the form of models and theories. Most of these are designed to meet the needs of a specific population or subject. The choices are as wide-ranging as the students themselves and a teacher is by no means limited to just one when approaching an instructional challenge. The determination of an appropriate strategy will hinge on the demographics of the students and the type of material being presented. In my situation, teaching adults in a technical program at a community college, the strategy that I find the most helpful is often referred to as Andragogy. Here is one example of what the theory of Andragogy might look like in a illustrated, pictorial format:

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 15.6pt; line-height: 200%;"> This particular model is specifically designed to address the andragogical needs of learners in an online course. This representation is by no means exhaustive of all of the elements of this theory. In short, the tenets of Andragogy address the learning needs of adults as opposed to children. The key concepts are: a degree of choice and control over the learning situation, the acceptance and tolerance of people in varying life stages and differentiated social contexts, a strong sense of community and collaboration, curriculum is tied to practical reality and pragmatic concerns, and acknowledgment of the learner's past experience and expertise. With these guideposts in mind, the instructor chooses their methods to enhance the learning experience of the adult so that the environment of the classroom (cyber or otherwise) addresses the needs of the adult learner. This philosophy of teaching is primarily constructivist in nature and de-emphasizes the role of the instructor as much as possible.

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 15.6pt; line-height: 200%;"> Other instructional strategies would also be appropriate in an adult classroom. The choice of which path to take would depend largely on the subject matter at hand as well as the personal teaching style of the instructor and the specific kind of adults in question. Another model that I find appropriate in my classrooms is the Cognitive Apprenticeship Model.



The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model works particularly well in the teaching of computer skills where the instructor can demonstrate the procedure either on a projector or in a digital screencast. In this way the presentation can be repeated as the students follow along and become more confident. It is a very practical and down-to-earth approach with little extraneous material or philosophical clutter. I use this method frequently embedded within the context of Andragogy.

The two strategies can be compared to one another as follows:


 * || **Andragogy** || **Cognitive Apprenticeship** ||
 * || [[image:Andragogy_Model.jpg width="289" height="132"]] || [[image:Cognitive_App_Model2.jpg width="276" height="179"]] ||
 * **Appropriate for adults** || This model focuses primarily on adult needs || This model works well for adults in certain situations. ||
 * **Appropriate for tech skills classes** || Most of the concepts here can be applied to a tech class || This is a great way to teach tech skills when the right technology is available ||
 * **Adjustable for wide range of student needs** || This can be applied to most age groups with the possible exception of some very young adults || This can be used for all age groups ||
 * **Clarity (ease of use)** || This is a complex balance of ideas but becomes reflexive with habitual use || Very clear and easy to use ||

Reference Dick, W., Carey L., & Carey, J.O. (2009). The systematic design of instruction (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.