Instructional Design
An organization’s educational opportunities often fail due to a lack of attention to the designing of their instructional programs. The following will address what educational design is intended to look like at a heavy equipment operation. Three common types of instructional design will be compared and contrasted to gain a greater understanding of the options available to instructions when designing instructing programs. Additionally, a proposal will appear for a particular instructional design program at the said heavy equipment organization.
Instructional Design Defined
Instructional design is a systematic process to strategically set up the instructional programs and the implementation of learning processes. In the construction field, this often takes the form of collaboration and physically performing tasks to learn. The process starts with a basic breakdown of the task at hand. The individual usually watches others performing a task, having the opportunity to ask questions and being given a checklist of items to note and look out for. Actually operating provides the best instruction because the employee has to get a feel of the machine and the way dirt feels moving with the machine.
Instructional Design Models Comparison
The three models presented for instructional design offer a variety in depth of design. ADDIE appears to be the most simplistic and often employed model. The premise is based on five processes which makes it simple and easily understandable but less detailed than the other two models. The ADDIE approach is also more commonly employed by organizations or businesses (Clark, 2013). The model developed by Dick, Carey and Carey is more appropriate for educational insti...
... middle of paper ...
...itutional setting. The proposal drafted in this paper is to continue to employ the model by Morrison, Ross and Kemp because it promotes the most flexibility as well as continuous execution and evaluation of the instructional design (Hanley, 2009).
Works Cited
Clark, D. (2013). The Dick and Carey model-1978. Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/history_isd/carey.html
Colorado State University-Global Campus. (2014). Module 1: What is instructional design. Instructional Theory and Design Principles OTL-540.
Hanley, M. (2009). Discovering instructional design 11: The Kemp model. Retrieved from http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/10/discovering-instructional-design-11-the-kemp-model/
People Learn. (n.d.). Kemp, Morrison, and Ross’s instructional design process. Retrieved from http://peoplelearn.homestead.com/MEdHOME2/InstructionalDesign/Kemp.pdf
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Zenger, Weldon F. & Zenger, Sharon K. (1999). Schools and curricula for the 21st century: Predictions, visions and anticipations. NASSP Bulletin: Vol. 83 (pp. 49-60).
CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA. Retrieved on February 5, 2014 from http://www.udlcenter.org
DeCoste, D. C. (2001). A Handbook on Universal Design for Learning. Rockville, MD 20850: Montgomery County Public Schools.
In this paper I’m going to write a reflection about EDIT 6110 - Advanced Instructional Design course I just completed. For the past eight weeks, I have taken the instructional training on how to create a successful blog, we created in our previous course and use the outline that my team of students developed, and I revised it to better suit the diverse group of students who volunteer to participate in the implementation. I had the privilege and opportunity of seeing teachers benefit and learn a new tool from my design, and the frustration of seeing technical challenges during and after implementation.
Wiggins, G., & Mctighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kemp's Instructional Design Model: Jerold Kemp model defines 9 different constituents of an instructional design while in the same moment adopts an unremitting evaluation/implementation prototype
Shrock, Sharon, A.(1995). A Brief History of Instructional Development. In G. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, Present and Future (p. 15-16). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Universal Design for Learning is organized into three general principles that have been broken down into considerable detail as part of the Universal Design Learning Guidelines developed by CAST. The principles of UDL are designed to provide multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement (CAST, 2011). Multiple means of representation includes varying the ways that information is presented to students along with providing necessary su...
Parrish, P. E. (2009). Aesthetic principles for instructional design. Educational Technology Research And Development, 57(4), 511-528.
National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2012b). Learner Variability and Universal Design for Learning [Online seminar presentation]. Retrieved from http://udlseries.udlcenter.org/presentations/learner_variability.html?plist=explore
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. The diagram below, from the third edition of The Conditions of Learning (Gagné, 1977), illustrates his vision of how the events of learning impact the conditions learning, which ultimately result in the learning outcomes, or learning capabilities.
This study is anchored on the following theories and principles. These are subsumption theory, schema theory, social constructivism theory, integrated curriculum theory, thematic instruction theory, holistic education theory and instructional system design theory.
Linear ID models follow a step by step process where flexibility or deviation in any step is not allowed. Examples of this category of model are Dick and Carey ID, Seels and Glasgow ID. While the Non Linear ID models such as (G. Morrison, Ross, & Kemp) and Learner Centered ID model allow flexibility of process flow (Melsom, 2010). Comparing the process flow of these models, the nonlinear categories focus more on learners’ characteristics because of its flexibility that incorporates the learner’s need at every stage of the development. The essence of designing a learning system is for the enhancement of learners’ skills. Hence, major concern should be on how the learner will perceive and process the learning content. The brief description of samples of instructional system design is given in section a, b and c below:
Analysis is a difficult process for the instructional designer. It involves many hours of research and interviewing to improve the skills of the participants to determine course expectations for them. The purpose of the analysis process is to discover as much as one can regarding the following aspects: