Instructional Design

Trends and Issues in Instructional Design

Elizabeth B. McGriff

University of Alabama Birmingham

IDD 600: Trends in Instructional Design

Dr. Gurupreet Khalsa

October 5, 2020

Trends and Issues in Instructional Design

Introduction

There is a common goal in humanity to grow the body of knowledge that exists. John Locke described learning as the acquisition of “ideas through our experience of the world. The mind is then able to examine, compare, and combine these ideas in numerous different ways. Knowledge consists of a special kind of relationship between different ideas”(Connolly ). The ability to break down knowledge or information into learning objectives and create systems of instruction and assessment to achieve those objectives has become known as instructional design and development. The field of Instructional Design was born during World War II when psychologists were recruited to research methods and develop training materials for the U.S. military services(Reiser, 2020). The efficacy of these training programs later progressed and has spread throughout the educational system, higher education, and the private sector. For seven decades, as formal educational systems have advanced, so has the field of instructional design.

Part 1- Definition of the Field of Study

Before this course, I believed that Instructional designers helped subject matter experts create programs that bridged the gap between actual performance and desired performance. As an educator, I understand that there are many ways to bridge this gap, but lesson plans and day-to-day instructions often challenge the bigger instructional design. It is of interest that a course can be planned and designed both visually and academically to enhance and encourage student performance.

In his article “The ABCs of ISD,” Marc Rosenberg discussed an instructional model which “provides a procedure for systematically identifying and manipulating significant components which make up the instructional process” in order to improve learning and performance(Rosenberg, 1982). These components were more clearly defined by Walter Dick and Lou Carey. In the article “Introduction to Instructional Design: The Dick and the Carey Systems Approach Model for Designing Instruction,” Dick and Carey defined contemporary instruction as “a systematic process in which every component (i.e., teacher, learners, materials, and learning environment) is crucial to successful learning(Dick 11). In this model, needs assessments, analysis of learners, and analysis of instruction are used to create performance objectives, develop assessments, strategies, and materials. It is noteworthy that Dick pointed out the stakeholders as integral to the design process. In his case, teachers and learners were the stakeholders, but in the corporate world these may include businesses, clients and end-users. Then, after formative assessment, instruction is revised and learners are analyzed again to reteach before summative evaluation. This definition seems to align with Reiser and Dempsey’s adopted definition that “encompasses the analysis of learning and performance problems, and the design, development, implementation, evaluation and management of instructional and non-instructional processes”(Reiser 1997). Most recently, Miriam Larson and Barbara Lockee identified characteristics of Instructional design as being sustainable, optimized, appropriately redundant, right-sized and accounting for continuous improvement(Streamlined,2020). These characteristics follow the iterative ADDIE model(Fig. 1.1) of relevant analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation. Alexander Salas saw the integration of this model with technology as an increasing challenge to designers. In his article “Integrating ADDIE with Digital learning”(2018) he described resources like computers, smartphones and tablets as tools that “demand that instructional designers become flexible and adaptable at the art and science of marrying ADDIE to digital learning.”

Based on the degree of stakeholder participation, design integration, and technology working together to create an effective program, I agree with the title and definition of the field that includes systems- Instructional Systems Design. Tracey and Morrison describe designers as “change agents” who have the end goal of “affecting knowledge, skill and performance”(2018). In order to create and achieve desired learning outcomes, it is necessary to understand the multiple components of the process and the importance of systematic implementation of each component. Teachers can design beautiful lessons, but if they are not aligned to the abilities of students and the learning objectives, they are irrelevant. The goal of instruction must be “to improve learning and performance in a variety of settings”(Reiser 1997).

Part 2- Instructional Design Belief Statement

In her 2017 book Mindset, Carol Dweck described a simple principle of psychology: fixed vs. growth mindset. She describes people with fixed mindsets as those who believe their abilities are fixed and, therefore, limited in their ability to grow or evolve. Conversely, she described those with a growth mindset as those who believe their abilities can grow. My personal belief with the role of IDD and myself as a future instructional designer is that as long as people believe they can grow their abilities, a program can be designed to help close their gap between current performance and a desired, higher performance. The ADDIE model of instructional design provides a framework for this learning process and can be “embellished and specialized to meet specific performance”(Rosenberg, 1982). In a 2014 study, Geeta Thakur designed a lesson for students seeking a B. Ed. instructed teachers using the ADDIE model in which they created storyboards for their lessons integrating multimedia principles. These student teachers were able to create effective lessons and Thakur found that “a systematic and scientific approach is essential to develop quality content” not just translating “existing material...into eContent”(2018). In another study, researchers in Jordan used a computer based ADDIE model to improve 9th graders’ listening and reading skills; the findings concluded that the ADDIE model far outperformed traditional models presenting information in an “ easier way,” “enriches lower level bottom-up processing skill” and “presented the material in a sequential and logical order”(Alodwan, 2018).

These studies prove that organized, logical design of instruction can bridge the gap between actual performance and desired outcomes. I believe that I can design these programs effectively for both corporate and higher education systems. It is necessary as Rosenberg stated to “embellish and specialize” in order to meet specific populations. Alexander Salas described an iterative ADDIE for the digital age that will continue to evolve as digital learning spaces evolve(2018). The ability to work with different academic and skill levels along with the interpersonal and organizational skills to make these teams effective will be essential to my success. When working with corporations, it is essential that the stakeholders understand and are a part of setting objectives and deciding who will participate in the instruction. When working with Subject Matter Experts(SME) in higher education, I will need to build rapport and understand the goals and objectives of both the SME and the administration to create effective instruction systems. I believe that as an instructional designer, I will be able to effect change making curriculum more effective and companies more profitable.

Part 3-Trends and Issues Shaping the Field

Like any other field of study, the economic and social environment of the world in which it operates will ultimately shape the future of instructional design. Over the past 70 years, factors such as technology(film, audiovisual, television, computers) and psychology perspectives on learning(Behavioral Learning, Cognitive information processing, schema, situated learning, Gagne, constructivism, connectivism) have shaped the models that we use to deliver instruction.

The impact of psychological perspectives has shifted learning objectives from Skinner’s desired behavioral outcomes to learners’ prior knowledge and attributes with cognitive theories. Situated learning considered socioeconomic and cultural factors in instructional design; Gagne and the constructivist approach focused on creating learning environments where skills are acquired and practiced(Driscoll, 2018). As popular theories evolve and emerge it is easy to see how instructional design must follow these trends. One hot topic continues to be the contrast between the schema theory and constructivism: the sage-on-the-stage lecturing versus the guide-by-your-side providing information for you to build with. E.D. Hirsch, professor emeritus of education and humanities at University of Virginia, complained that there is too “little whole-class instruction” and “no coherence” from day-to-day(Riley, 2020). In 1987 Hirsch wrote a book titled Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know, that outlines the historical and cultural knowledge he believes are important for true cultural understanding. However, he found that trends in education toward constructivism have weakened the actual schema necessary for a student to grow. This is an example of educators responding to trends in psychology without appropriate instructional design. A positive response to a psychological foundation would be Scardamalia and Bereiter(1994,1996a) studied a situated learning approach approach to instruction called Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment(CSILE). CSILE allows learners and experts to create online “knowledge spaces” building a group database(Driscoll, 2018).

While psychology has an effect on ID, there is no bigger trend that has historically affected the industry like technology. From the films of the 1920s to television to computers, each stage has provided new opportunities for academic learning. While these new technologies have often been met with teacher resistance, their capabilities create new design circumstances. The biggest trend shaping the field of instructional design since its inception is the invention of the internet. With the ability to communicate, create online modules, and store large amounts of information, instructional designers have been able to design digital learning environments and effect the biggest change in the history of the field. In the spring of 2020, when America went into lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, the necessity for digital learning was tested. While some organizations and schools were prepared, most programs were lacking realizing that an effective online learning experience was not just direct translation of in person classroom instruction. Online learning management systems were employed but often teachers or professors just directly loaded their classroom tools into the LMS rather than integrating the technology. In other cases, college professors continued to lecture through a Zoom or Google Meet platform losing student engagement. Historically, teachers have been resistant to technology either because of a lack of training or a refusal to change. This resistance will shape the future of online learning as we move forward. The skills of instructional designers have never been more needed in order to create systemic learning environments in online platforms that integrate technology and traditional classroom methods to reach learning objectives.

Over the next 10 years, we will see growth in the Instructional Design and Development field in higher education and industry. In the Fall of 2018, there were over 6 million students enrolled in undergraduate or post-graduate programs. According to a study from the National Center for Education Statistics, that number is projected to grow to over 17 million by 2029(National Center for Education Statistics, 2020). This increased enrollment has created a need for lecture-capture, learning management systems and collaborative learning platforms. The traditional lecture model of universities does not translate well to the new platforms. This is where the role of instructional design comes in. Through a survey of over 1200 instructional designers working in higher education, Intentional Futures identified 4 main areas of responsibility for IDD in Higher Education: design, manage, train, and support(Intentional Futures, 2016 ). Over the next decade, we will be designing systemic learning in online courses, managing those courses, and training faculty and facilitators in the processes and support of the LMS; these courses will be delivered on technology that we have not yet invented. The technology of the next decade will be more interactive, integrate more artificial intelligence and virtual reality opportunities. In this current technological age, it is important for professional teams to consider providing opportunities for construction of knowledge through conversations, relationships and informal learning aligning with a social constructivist platform(Cartner & Hallas, 2017).

The US Bureau of Labor Statistics described the function of Training and Development Specialists as planning and administering programs that improve the skills or knowledge of employees which is similar(but not as inclusive) to that of an instructional designer. According to the BLS, this field is growing at 9% annually which is much faster than average. In post-pandemic America, employers are learning that employees can effectively function and produce from anywhere which increases the need for ID and digital learning opportunities. I believe the role of ID in corporate America will be to build communities of knowledge, to raise productivity through integration of systems which will require training, and to train and onboard new employees.

Part 4-Personal Growth

After four weeks in the Instructional Design graduate program I feel confident in the understanding of both the ADDIE and SAM design models, the concepts of educational psychology and its different accepted theories, informal learning and performance supports, and IDD in Higher Education. As a teacher, I use the ADDIE model and Gagne’s theory in my daily classroom instruction, but now I understand the background for these theories. However, now I see the ADDIE model as an underlying framework that can be not just linear but iterative when working with online design. I understand that informal learning and performance supports are tools used in corporate training that improve output and solve problems although many of these seem commonsensical. Lastly, after the group project, I am comfortable with the functions of instructional design in Higher Education. Fink’s taxonomy was of particular interest because the caring, human interaction components mesh with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs which would be consistent with a desired learning outcome in higher education.

I struggle with the actual practice of instructional design and how it is implemented. However, the idea that instructionals designers strive to “reduce extraneous processing, manage essential processing and foster generative processing resonates with me(Clark & Mayer, 2018). I believe that the technology in action today can help me create instructional programs that fosters generative learning where connections and integration of material will take place. While we have answered several case-study style questions, I am eager to be a part of the actual process. How are tasks divided? How do these groups of SME, ID, graphic designers, etc. form?

In addition to this graduate program, I plan to experiment more formally with the ADDIE and SAM models in my classroom. While lesson plans already work backward from learning objectives, during the second semester I will have analytics from my students’ standardized test scores as well as their first semester performance. I plan to analyze the data to design my third quarter lesson plans. I can develop grammar and non-fiction lessons to compliment the major novel study and implement this program from January to March 2021. This will give me data to evaluate in the spring in order to determine efficacy. If I see positive results, I plan to share with the Baldwin County Curriculum leader. Next summer, I would like to work with an instructional designer at the University of South Alabama, Springhill College, or Coastal Community college to create online learning opportunities. I feel like an internship or part time design job over the summer would increase my confidence and competence by giving me practical applications for this new knowledge.

In 1988, as a freshman at Southern Methodist University, I wrote “As you grow educationally, your attitudes, ideas, and perceptions will also change as you begin to look more deeply into those topics that interest you, striving to understand rather than just agree with the commonly accepted truth”(Brown, 1988). Thirty-two years later, I still agree with this statement. After writing a paper on epistemology that was published, I completed a Bachelor of Arts in Marketing and Organizational Behavior, worked in advertising, raised children, taught sailing, taught yoga, and only in 2017 got an Education certificate and began teaching English in the classroom. My “attitudes, ideas, and perceptions” have changed, and I am excited to enter a field that allows me to develop programs that engage learners and allow them to create a deeper understanding of material in order to grow in their occupation or education.

References

Alodwan, T., & Almosa, M. (2018). The effect of a computer program based on analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation (ADDIE) in improving ninth graders’ listening and reading comprehension skills in English in Jordan. English Language Teaching, 11(4), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n4p43

Brown, E. (1989). College: A New Way of Learning. In Criteria: A Journal of Rhetoric (pp. 49–51). Southern Methodist University.

Cartner, H. C. & Hallas, J. L. (2017). Challenging teachers' pedagogic practice and assumptions about social media. Online Learning, 21(2) https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i2.1009

Clark, R. C.. & Mayer, R. E. (2018) Using Rich Media Wisely. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.)Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. (Fourth, pp. 261). Pearson.

Connolly, P. J. John Locke (1632-1704). https://iep.utm.edu/locke/.

Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2015). The Systematic Design of Instruction. Pearson.

Driscoll, M. (2018). Psychological Foundations of Instructional Design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. (Fourth, pp. 52-59). Pearson.

Dweck, C. S., (2017). Mindset. Robinson.

Intentional Futures (2016, April). Instructional design in higher education: a report on the role, workflow, and experience of instructional designers. Intentional Futures. https://intentionalfutures.com.

Larson, M. B., & Lockee, B. B. (2020). Streamlined Id: a practical guide to instructional design. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

National Center for Education Statistics.(2020, May). The condition of education: undergraduate enrollment. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp

Reiser, R. A. (2018). What Field Did You Say You Were In? In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. (Fourth, pp. 1-5). Pearson.

Riley, N. S. (2020, September 11). Opinion | Bad Teaching Is Tearing America Apart. https://www.wsj.com/articles/bad-teaching-is-tearing-america-apart-11599857351.

Rosenberg, M. J.(1982) The ABCs of ISD. Training and Development Journal. 36(9). 44-50.

Salas, A. (2018). Integrating ADDIE With Digital Learning. TD: Talent Development, 72(11), 57ID–60ID.

Thakur, G. R.(2014) Training and effectiveness of multimedia e-content on ADDIE model prepared by student teachers in Economics for the students of STD.ix. Journal for Interdisciplinary studies. 2(14). 55- 62.

Tracey, M. W., & Morrison, G. R. (2018). Instructional Design in Business and Industry. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. (Fourth, pp. 152-157). Pearson.

Zemke, R., & Rossett, A. (2002). A Hard Look at ISD. Training, 39(2), 27.