Preparing this chart helped me to keep all the information organized as I worked through this task. I shared this with my fellow students in a Google Doc and invited them to add or edit any part of it as a starting point to a discussion. I enjoyed organizing this and studying the models. It certainly helped me to understand that different approaches and to reflect on which approach I might use in different circumstances. In the blog, I have added my ideas on where i might use these models in my curriculum planning for this course. My idea is to plan instruction for transforming traditional classrooms into technology enhanced learning environments.
ADED 4F33 WEEK TWO DESIGN MODELS COMPARISON CHART
ADED 4F33 WEEK TWO DESIGN MODELS COMPARISON CHART
MODEL
|
MAIN COMPONENTS
|
COMPARISON TO MORRISON
ET AL’S DESIGN and when I
would use this model
|
MORRISON ET AL
Systemic and nonlinear. The model takes on an oval shape. A
continuous cycle.
|
Nine key elements: Identify instructional problems, and specify goals for
designing an instructional program. Examine
learner characteristics that should receive attention during planning. Identify subject content, and analyze
task components related to stated goals and purposes. State instructional objectives for the learner. Sequence content within each
instructional unit for logical learning. Design
instructional strategies so that each learner can master the objectives. Plan the instructional message and
delivery. Develop evaluation
instruments to assess objectives. Select
resources to support instruction and learning activities
|
This model is comprehensive and has all the elements that excellent
design would require. The fact that the model is cyclical encourages
returning to the start to re-adjust as conditions change and makes the model
an organic, living design tool. I would (and will) use this model in
designing instruction for the college courses that I teach. (I also enjoyed
the Taba model)
This model will be the one that I will use in planning the instruction for my curriculum design work for this course. I find it to be the most comprehensive in design and keeping the learner in mind. The case for logical sequencing is also a very important aspect. Design should make sequential sense or it will not keep the learner engaged. Confusion should be avoided! |
ADDIE
Florida State University initially developed the ADDIE model. The
design we know today appeared in the mid 1980`s. Generic design model used by
many.
|
Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluation
|
Less specific in its presentation. Same basic tasks but ADDIE
concludes with evaluation as final step. I could use this model when doing
basic design work or a quick instructional design strategy. It would still be
very effective as a model. It leaves much room for interpretation and
personal design choices.
|
TYLER
Tyler's
original curriculum design model of 1949 is often referred to as a
'Linear Objectives' model. Tyler's model is linear in that learning
objectives are specified first followed by explication of certain curriculum
elements in the order shown.
|
1949 four part model based on four questions. What educational purposes are sought? What educational experiences are likely to attain these
objectives? How can these
experiences be organized effectively?
How can we determine
whether these purposes are being attained?
|
Linear rather than cyclical. I can see myself using this for
designing materials that are not of a creative nature. For example, in the
design of set materials that require certain sequencing.
I like the questions that the Tyler model asks us to consider. These are great questions to ask when designing any instructional materials. |
TABA
Defined in the sixties by Hilda Taba and aims to help designing
courses down to lessons in areas where students are supposed to learn how to
think.
|
Identify the needs. Develop the objectives and choose
content that matches the objectives. Organize
content considering the learner. Select
instructional method that promotes engagement. Organize
experiences by sequencing content. Evaluate
to ensure mastery.
|
Taba’s design appeals to me the most. It is presented in an easy to
understand formula keeping the learner in mind while organizing the content.
I would use this model for its strength in developing critical thinking
skills in students.
I would use this model for it's strength in asking us to engage the learner. I like the idea of integrating this model with the Morrison et al model. :) |
DICK AND CAREY
1978, Dick
and Carey made a significant contribution to the instructional design field
by championing a systems view of instruction as opposed to viewing
instruction as a sum of isolated parts. The model addresses instruction as an
entire system.
|
Identify instructional
goals. Identify the entry
behaviours and conduct instructional analysis, then write performance
objectives. Develop the
instructional strategy then select and develop the materials. Develop formative and summative
assessments.
|
Needs analysis is integrated into the design elements to identify
critical needs before development of instructional strategy. I would use this
to develop in an area where I am unfamiliar with the content and the intended
learners.
|
“Instruction requires an approach, components and sequences”
& “Effectiveness and efficiency are additional priorities for selecting
instructional methods”
Reigeluth and Keller (2009)
Information retrieved
from:
Reigeluth, C.M.; Carr-Chellman, A.A.; Instructional-Design Theories and Models, Volume III; 2009; Routledge
Cranton, P.; Planning
Instruction for Adult Learners, Second Edition; 2000, University of Toronto
Press
No comments:
Post a Comment