1

Running head: Instructional Model

Title: Creating an Instructional Model

Rose Bertin
ID Number:

316104004

Masters in Instructional Design and Technology

Instructional Design Theories, Models and Strategies
University of the West Indies Open Campus
Assignment 3

2
Instructional Model

Summary of work environment

I have been employed as a Graduate Teacher at the Ciceron Secondary School in St.
Lucia from the opening of the School in 1993. The school was deemed, at the time, as the
Flagship of Secondary Education on the island because of the plan for the integration of
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into the Technical Vocation Programme and
the first ever pilot of the Modular Approach to education on the island. Prior to the opening of
the School in 1993, some of the teacherswho were recruited to teach at the school were selected
and sent to Paxton/Patterson in Wisconsin, USA. There we received training over a three (3)
week period on the use of various modules on classroom technology learning systems.
The website of the Paxton/Patterson institution indicates that in 1990, it became one of
the first companies to provide classroom technology learning systems and provides learning
systems which engage students with problem-based, real-world technology. The programs
concentrate on STEM Education, Health Science Careers, Family and Consumer Sciences, and
Architecture and Construction.Twelve modules were selected from the suite of Paxton/Patterson
programsfor the Ciceron Secondary School in St. Lucia and there are sevenfully equipped,
technologically enabled/computer-based labs at the School: Food & Nutrition, Information
Technology, Building Technology, Technical Drawing, Clothing and Textiles, Integrated Science,
and Agriculture.
The Schools vision, mission and motto are as follows:

Vision: Creating a unique learning environment for the total development of every
child.

3
Instructional Model

Mission: To produce well rounded individuals who will make a positive difference in
society, by empowering them with the necessary life skills, utilizing technology

through an integrated curriculum, with the collaborative efforts of all social partners.
Motto: Empowerment, Persistence, Success.

The School was meant to cater for students who were not particularly academically
inclined as the entrance scores for admission into the School, from the Primary School system,
range between thirty-five percent (35%) to seventy-five percent (75%), which is below average
to just slightly above average. There were thirty-two (32) teachers at the School - including the
learning resource coordinator, at the end of the 2015/16 school year. The table below shows
thedistribution of teaching staff, based on gender and qualifications. The ratio of male to female
is about 1:2.
Table 1: Profile of Teaching Staff at the Ciceron Secondary School
Graduate
Non-Graduate
Trained
Untrained
Trained
Untrained
Male
6
2
2
1
Female
9
9
3
0
Total
15
11
5
1
Source: Ciceron Secondary School: Annual Report 2015/26

Total
11
21
32

Further analysis of the above table indicates that sixty-two percent (62%) of teachers are
trained, eighty-one percent (81%) are University graduates with at least a first degree and almost
half, forty seven percent (47%) are both graduate and trained teachers.
2. Instructional Model which best describes the work environment
The Instructional Model which best describesthe work environment in the first two to
three years of the operation of the School was modular instruction, based on the collaboration

4
Instructional Model
with Paxton/Patterson outlined above.Modules are self-contained, self-instructional packages,
with learning dictated by each student based on his/her individual needs and ability. A module
can cover either a single aspect of subject matter content or a grouping of content elements
forming a discrete unit of subject matter or area of skill (Ali, et al. 2010).
However, after the first two to three years, the use of the Modular model diminished and
the Direct Instructionmodel best describes the work environment presently. This conclusion was
arrived at based on my own observations as a teacher at the institution from 1993, as well as
feedback received from the School Principal and other colleagues in interviews conducted on
which model best describes the work environment at the Ciceron Secondary School.
In the Direct Instruction model, the teacher imparts knowledge or demonstrates a skill.
The Model uses a teacher-centered approach to help students understand organized bodies of
knowledge. Teachers use advanced organizers at the beginning of a lesson to preview and
structure new material, linking it to students' existing network of organized and interconnected
ideas and relationships (Tarver, 1999).
3. Instructional strategies used in the work environment
Direct instructional strategies arelargely teacher-directed, where teachers tell the students
the concept or skill to be learned and then lead them through instructional activities based on
behaviouristic learning principles, e.g. getting students' attention, reinforcing correct responses,
providing corrective feedback, practicing correct responses (Tarver, 1999).The work
environment is characterised by teacher structured lessons, following a sequential approach, with
the teacher in control of the content, activities, and lesson pacing. Teachers monitor student
understanding and provide feedback. Specific instructional strategies used in my work

5
Instructional Model
environment include methods such as: lectures, didactic questioning, explicit teaching, practice
and drill, and demonstrations.
4. New Instructional Model
a. Name and description of model
I am proposing a new instructional model: Web 2.0 and Mobile Infused Kemp Model,
based on a modular approach, which is a variation of the Jerold Kemp instructional design
model. The name of the model refers to the use of Web 2.0 and mobile technology based
approaches as fundamental aspects to be infused into the Kemp Model, within the overall
framework of the modular approach. This model was chosen primarily because the original
Kemp model has been found to be particularly useful for developing instructional programs that
blend technology, pedagogy and content to deliver effective, inclusive (reliable) and efficient
learning (Manichander, 2016).Kranch (2008) also contends that the comprehensive nature of the
Kemp Design Model make it an appropriate tool for designing large online instructional
modules.
Figure 1: Original Kemp Model

6
Instructional Model

The proposed
model also attempts to build upon the original intention of the School, when it piloted the
Modular approach to education in St. Lucia in 1993, as well as incorporating the more recent
technological advancements of Web 2.0 and mobile technologies to instructional design. This
new model is best suited for the work environment due to the following:

Background of the School with Modular approach: training and experience of

some teachers with the Paxton/Patterson modules;

High percentage of graduate and trained teachers with the capability to adopt and

implement more innovative instructional approaches;

Availability of Modular content and Web 2.0 tools at the school;
Student profile: academically challenged and need for more effective, engaging
learning strategies.

Figure 2: New Model: Modular Based: Web 2.0 and Mobile Infused Kemp Revised Model

7
Instructional Model

The
original

model
defines
nine

different

components

of

instructional

design and adopts a continuous implementation/evaluation model. Kemp adopts a wide view, the
oval shape of the model conveys that the design and development process is a continuous cycle
that requires constant planning, design, development and assessment to ensure effective
instruction.
The new model is systemic and nonlinear and will encourage instructional designers to
work in all areas as appropriate (McGriff, 2001). The new model adopts the circular, as opposed
to a linear structure, by viewing the nine core elements of the model as interdependent rather
than singular and independent. This allows for a high degree of flexibilityas the design process
can begin with any of the nine components or stages, rather than being restricted to working in a
linear fashion (Akbulut, 2007). The nine elements of the model are as follows: 1. Identify
instructional problems, and specify goals for designing an instructional program; 2. Examine
learner characteristics that should receive attention during planning; 3. Identify subject content,

8
Instructional Model
and analyze task components related to stated goals and purposes; 4. State instructional
objectives for the learner; 5. Sequence content within each instructional unit for logical learning;
6. Design instructional strategies so that each learner can master the objectives; 7. Plan the
instructional message and delivery; 8. Develop evaluation instruments to assess objectives and 9.
Select resources to support instruction and learning activities (Giles, 2013)
Another key reason for the applicability of this model to my working environment, is that
it emphasises the need to take into account not only the learning objectives, but also a number of
other factors, including the needs and characteristics of the learner, the instructional content and
activities (including tasks and procedures), instructional resources and support services, and
learner assessment and evaluation tools and methods (Forest, 2016). All of these factors are very
relevant in the context of the Ciceron Secondary School.
The circular approach adopted by the new model, as with the Kemp model, takes into
consideration the perspective of the learner, so that the learners overall goals, needs, priorities,
and constraints are taken into account when deciding on instructional solutions. The nine key
components of the Kemp Instructional Design, which are intended to focus on the whole learner
throughout the design process, are much more detailed and due to the interrelatedness of these
elements, the design process itself can be a more dynamic and fluid process than other models
would allow(Morrison et al 2010).
b. How the model will support the work environment?

The reintroduction of modular approach, based on the new model will provide
tremendous support for the work environment as Modules emphasize analysis and
application of concepts and techniques in a concrete and interactive manner. It provides

9
Instructional Model
active participation of students in responding and meeting areas of individual interest,
which also helps the teacher to extend more individualized instruction in school and even

at home.
The learner is able to engage with the material at his own rate, choose his own learning
mode, select among a variety of topics, identify his strengths and weaknesses, and review
as necessary (Guido, 2014). Modules include pre-test, clear learning objectives, criteria
for success, instructional activities, a post test, remedial instruction and reinforcement. It

also provides the students with an interface for immediate feedback (Guido, 2014).
The new model will leverage existing Web 2.0 technologies, such as Wordle (used to
introduce students to the lesson); Youtube (to introduce students to the different types of
concepts); Bubbl.us (to create a mind maps); Voki (for students to share their knowledge
of what they have learnt during the lesson in 60 seconds or less) and Quizle (to create

evaluation exercises)(Greenhow, et al. 2009).

Support will be provide to the teachers using the modular approach as it would: provide
the opportunity for organizing numerous sequences to reflect special interests of the
teacher and students; allowteachers to focus on the weaknesses of students in the subject
matter; and reduce the need of addressing subject matter already grasped by students. The
use of modules will enable the progress of students to be assessed and the routine aspect
of instruction is reduced giving the teacher more time to meaningfully interact with

students(Guido, 2014).
Fostering cooperative learning, which is a teaching strategy in which small teams, each
with students of different ability levels, use a variety of learning activities to improve
their understanding of a subject. By using this method, students will feel more supported
in the learning experience and also feel more valued as an important member of the class.

10
Instructional Model
Overall, the new model is much better suited for providing support given the student profile at
the Ciceron Secondary School as it provides for more flexible and effective learning approaches
such as differentiated andstudent centered instruction.
c. Instruction strategies provided by the new model

The new model will provide for interactive instruction based on discussion and sharing
among participants using face to face methods and mobile technologies. The interactive
instruction strategy will allow for a range of groupings and interactive methods. These
will include total class discussions, small group discussions or projects, or pairs of
students working on assignments together, in person or using web based platforms and

mobile technology.
Experiential learning which is inductive, learner-centred, and activity oriented will be
provided for by the new model. Experiential learning greatly increases understanding and
retention in comparison to methods that solely involve listening, reading, or even viewing
(McNeil & Wiles, 1990). Students are usually more motivated when they actively

participate and teach one another by describing and reflecting on what they are doing.
The model will also provide for Differentiated Instruction which is desperately required
for my work environment. Web 2.0 tools can readily be used fordifferentiated instruction
with learning through interaction, collaboration and sharing by the users of the tools.
Interactions will include interactions between users and the web tools as well as
interactions between the users of the tools, the learners, themselves (Collis and Moonen,
2008). In Web 2.0,applications which address individual needs can be used in my
environment to support differentiated learning and instruction tailored around the
individual.

11
Instructional Model

Independent study in another strategy which will be provided by the model. This refers to
a range of instructional methods which are provided to foster the development of
individual student initiative, self-reliance, and self-improvement. It can be used as the
major instructional strategy with the whole class, in combination with other strategies, or
it can be used with one or more individuals while another strategy is used with the rest of

the class (Keesee, 2014)

Collaborative Learning, as an instructional strategy,will be supported by Mobile Learning
Technologies. Naismith defined collaborative learning activities as, activities that
promote learning through social interaction. (Naismith, et al, 2004). Mobile devices
provide a practical additional communications medium and a portable means of sharing
information electronically (Kukulska-Hulme, 2005).Naismith (2004) found that the most
convincing examples of conversational learning occur when mobile technology is used to
provide a shared conversation space. They concluded that effective learning occurs when
people can converse with each other and question and share their descriptions of the
world.

d. Similarities and differences between work environments current instructional model

and new model
The main similarity between the current instructional model at the work environmentand
the new model is that the new model may include some key aspects of the current model, that is:
direct instruction, as a part of the overall approach to the design and delivery of educational
content. In particular, dimension six (6) of the Kemp model requires designing instructional
strategies so that each learner can master the objectives. This may include strategies which are
based on direct instruction.

12
Instructional Model
The new model will be far more interactive and beneficial to the learning outcomes for the
students however. In a recent study, Valdez (2013) examined students performance on Higher
Order Thinking Skills (HOTS)questions, learningstyle, motivation style, creativity and interest
using combined quantitative-qualitative techniquesand analysis in an experimental study
involvingeighty-seven (87) third year high school students. Experimental groupexposure on
modular instructions using HOTS techniquesinvolving multimodal strategies showed
significantly better effects, ascompared to the control group. Most of them favored theHOTS
techniques and modular instructions and they found itdifficult yet more interesting, challenging
and enjoyable.(Valdez, A. et al., 2013).
The new model: Web 2.0 and Mobile Infused Kemp Revised Model is also different to the
current model because it is based on the following:

The design belief: instructional design is a continuous cycle with revision as an ongoing

activity associated with all of the other elements.

The four essential elements of instructional technology are students, objectives (what to
be learned), method (what procedures and resources will work best to reach desired

learning levels), and evaluation (how we will know the desired learning occurs)
The characteristics of the model include:
o A general systems view of development: all elements are interdependent
o All the elements can be performed simultaneously
o Developer can start anywhere
o Learning needs, goals, priorities and constraints determine the instructional

solutions.
The new model also provides for interactive instruction, experiential learning, differentiated
instruction, independent study and collaborative learning as outlined above. With the direct
instruction model, the teacher poses the problem and then solves it without giving the child an

13
Instructional Model
opportunity to discover. Therefore the child is not given an opportunity to use the necessary
process skills (Ray, 1961).
5. Reflection on journey creating model
My research experience in developing the model was very interesting and rewarding.
Reviewing the literature to identify which instructional model and strategies best described my
work environment helped me to see the models and strategies in a different light. Once I
identified the model which I thought best described my environment, I conducted further
research using interviews with the School Principal and a few colleagues to confirm that my
view of the model and strategies were valid.
Thisassignment was also very personal and nostalgic, as it took me back about thirteen years,
from before the School opened, to examine and assess activities that I was, and still am, a part of.
Creating the model also brought the material into a whole new light as it challenged me to find
which areas would be of most value to my current work environment. My decision to use the
Kemp model and modifying it to include Web 2.0 and Mobile technologies, within an overall
context of a modular approach, was both in keeping with the literature which I was exposed to,
as well as my own personal and professional experience as an Information Technology Teacher
at the institution.

14
Instructional Model
References:
Ali, et al. (2010). Effectiveness of Modular Teaching in Biology at Secondary Level, Asian
Social Science Vol. 6, No. 9; Canadian Center of Science and Education
Akbulut, Y. (2007). Implications of two well-known models for instructional designers in
distance education: Dick-Carey versus Morrison-Ross-Kemp. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 8(2).
Alexander, B. (2004). M-learning: Emergent pedagogical and campus issues in the mobile
learning environment. ECAR. 16, 1-10.
Collis, B., &Moonen, J. (2008). Web 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: Quality
perspectives. Educational Media International, 45(2), 93-106.
Forest,

E.

(2016).

Kemp

Design

Model

in

Frameworks

Model.

[Slideshare].

and

Theories:

http://educationaltechnology.net/kemp-design-model/.
Giles,

Michelle.

(2013).

The

Kemp

ID

Retrieved

from

http://www.slideshare.net/lindamgiles/kemp-id-modelpresmgiles-16411696
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., &Hudges, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a
digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research--What path should we take "now"? Educational
Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.
Guido, R. N. (2014). Evaluation of a Modular Teaching Approach in Materials Science and
Engineering, American Journal of Educational Research, 2014, Vol. 2, No. 11, 1126-1130,
Science and Education Publishing.

15
Instructional Model
Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). What is instructional design. Trends and issues in
instructional design and technology, 16-25.
Keesee, G. (2014) Instructional Approaches. http://teachinglearningresources.pbworks.com
/w/page/19919560/Instructional%20Approaches
Kramer, E. (2013, March). Instructional Design Models and Their Effectiveness for
Asynchronous Online Curriculum Development. In Society for Information Technology &
Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2013, No. 1, pp. 645-652).
Kranch, D. A. (2008). Getting it Right Gradually: An Iterative Method for Online Instruction
Development. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(1).
Kukulska-Hulme, A. Mobile Usability in Educational Contexts: What have we learnt?.The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 8, Number 2;
Special Issue: Mobile Learning
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kemp, J. E., &Kalman, H. (2010). Designing effective instruction.
John Wiley & Sons.
McNeil, J. D., & Wiles, J. (1990). The essentials of teaching: Decisions, plans, methods. New
York: Macmillan.
McGriff,

Steve.

(2001).

Instructional

systems

design

models

[on-line].

Available:

http://www.personal.psu.edu /faculty/s/j /sjm256/portfolio/kbase/IDD/ISDModels.html.

Manichander, T. (2016). E-EDUCATION,Lulu Press, Inc

16
Instructional Model
Naismith L, Lonsdale P, Vavoula G, and Sharples M (2004), Literature review in mobile
technologies and learning, Futurelab series, Report 11, University of Birmingham.Instructional
Approaches
Ray, W. (1961). Pupil discovery vs. direct instruction. The Journal of Experimental Education,
29 (3), 271-280. Retrieved from JSTOR
Suresh, S. and Al-Khafaji, A.W. (2009) Teaching and learning activities through the use of
mobilephone technology. In: Dainty, A. (Ed) Procs 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9
September. Nottingham, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 515-22.
Tarver, S. (1999). Focusing on Direct Instruction. Current Practice Alerts; Division for Learning
Disabilities and Division for Research, 2, 1-4.
Valdez, A. et al. (2013). Effects of HOTS Techniques through Modular Instructions in Teaching
High School Chemistry in MSU-Balindong High School, International Journal of e-Education, eBusiness, e-Management and e-Learning, Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2013