Comparison and Brief Analysis of

Instructional Design Models

Shirase, Miko R.D.

Educational Technology
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

The concept of instructional design dates back to the early philosophical greats

such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato. However it gained its strongest foot hold during

WWII due to the need to train large numbers of people in a short amount of time. There

are many definitions of instructional design. Carl Berger and Rosalind Kam define it as,

“the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and

instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis

of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those

needs.” (Berger and Kam) In the book Trends and Issues in Instructional Design it is

stated that it “may be thought of as frameworks for developing modules or lessons that

increase and/or enhance the possibility of learning and encourage the engagement of

learners so that they learn faster and gain deeper levels of understanding.” (Reiser and

Dempsey) I would best describe instructional design as a process of building a road

map for learning and teaching. In building this road map the desired outcome is always

considered first along with how the outcome will be evaluated. Then the path to meet

the outcome can be developed.

Instructional design models have worked their way from the training fields during

WWII into corporate training and down the ranks to the public school systems. This

information-processing-based approach to the design has established itself as the

primary means of developing instructional models across the board. Although there are

many models to choose from we will explore the following three models: the ADDIE

Model, Understanding by Design model, and ASSURE model.

First we are going to look at the ADDIE model. ADDIE is basically a generic term

for the five phase instructional deign model that includes analysis, design, development,
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

implementation and evaluation. Most of the current instructional design models are

spin-offs or variations of this model. The ADDIE model first appeared in 1975. It was

created by the Center for Educational Technology at Florida State University for the U.S.

Armed Forces (Branson, Rayner, Cox, Furman, King, Hannum, 1975; Watson, 1981). It

is frequently used in business and corporate training because it has been found to save

time and money due to of its ability to help catch errors while they are still easy to fix.

The first phase of the ADDIE model is analysis. During analysis the learning

problem is identified as well as the goals and objectives and the audience’s needs. The

analysis phase also takes into account existing knowledge, the learning environment,

and the timeline for the project. The second phase is design. During the design process

learning objectives are specified and storyboards and prototypes are made. The third

phase is development. This is where the actual creation of the content and learning

materials is put together based on the design phase. The fourth phase is

implementation. During this phase the plan is put into action and the plan for training the

learner and teacher is developed. The final phase is evaluation. During the evaluation

phase both formative and summative evaluation processes are used. Formative

evaluation is imbedded throughout the different phases and the summative evaluation

takes place at the end. This type of evaluation makes it possible to provide feedback

throughout the process, thus allowing corrections to be made as problems arise. In

summation the ADDIE model is designed to ensure that all learners will achieve the

desired goals through evaluation of the learner’s needs and the design and

development of instructional materials. The literature on ADDIE estimates that there are

well over 100 different variations of the ADDIE model in use today.(Castagnolo)
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

The second design model we will look at is Understanding by Design.

Understanding by Design is a framework for improving student achievement that was

developed by nationally recognized educators Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe. Their

work was published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development in

1998 so it is one of the more recently developed models for instructional design. The

Understanding by Design model is based on a three-stage "backward planning"

curriculum design process that includes design standards and rubrics. It is set up to

help teachers design, edit, critique, peer- review, share, and improve their lessons and

assessments.

The Understanding by Design model is built upon the "Six Facets of

Understanding" which include explain, interpret, apply, perspective, empathize, and self-

knowledge. Along with taking the six facets of understanding into account it centers on

the idea that the design process should begin with the desired results and then "work

backwards" to develop your curriculum and instruction. The framework for

Understanding by Design identifies three main stages: identify desired outcomes and

results, determine what constitutes acceptable evidence of competency (assessment),

and plan instructional strategies and learning experiences.(The Center for Teaching)

As a part of identifying desired results you first have to establish your learning

goals. You should take into consideration what the students should know, understand,

and be able to do. Then you have to prioritize and narrow down the content to make it fit

into the framework of the lesson, unit, or course. Next as a part of determining

acceptable evidence, you have to decide what you will accept as evidence that students

are making progress toward the desired goals of the course. When planning how you
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

will collect this evidence you might consider some of the following assessment methods:

essays, tests, term papers, short-answer quizzes, homework assignments, or lab

projects. It is very important to make sure that the assessments match our learning

goals so we can attain the evidence we want. After you have identified the desired result

and determined the acceptable evidence, you can begin planning the learning

experiences and course of instruction. This part of the process is where you get to

decide how you’re going to teach the content, basically what are the best exercises,

problems, or questions for helping your students to meet the learning goals you have

set for them. By following the Understanding by Design model you will be building your

lessons, units, and course by a backwards design process which will enable you to

focus on the six facets of learning, thus creating enduring understanding for the

students.

The third model we will look at is the ASSURE model. The ASSURE Model is a

six-step guide for planning and delivering instruction developed by Robert Heinich,

Michael Molenda, and James D. Russell in the 1990′s. This model highlights its ability to

incorporate technology and media into the design process. The six steps used for

planning include: analyze learners, state objectives, select instructional methods and

materials, utilize media and materials, require learner participation, and evaluate.

During the first step of this process you need to analyze the learners. You will

need to consider general characteristics, socioeconomic levels, prior knowledge and

learning styles. Once you know your students, you can begin developing your

objectives or desired learning outcomes. Then you can begin selecting instructional

methods, media, and materials. Before utilizing the materials and selected media with
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

your class be sure to preview them to make sure they are appropriate and work

correctly. The fifth step in this process is required learner participation. It is important to

make sure that the student is always actively involved in the learning process. The final

step in this process is to evaluate and revise if necessary. The premise of the ASSURE

model is that in the end, as you evaluate, you continue to revise and re-teach until the

students have become successful learners.

When taking a closer look at these three models of design we can find there are

many similarities and difference between them. The ADDIE and ASSURE models are

more closely in line with each other whereas Understanding by Design stands on it own

a little more. The most obvious in differences is the number of steps involved in each

process. ADDIE implements five steps where as Understanding by Design only uses

three steps and ASSURE uses six steps. Both ADDIE and ASSURE begin their process

as a front end analysis and design whereas Understanding by Design uses a

backwards design approach. ADDIE and ASSURE both begin with an analysis stage

which allows for consideration of the learner’s back ground and environment. This

stage is not allotted for in the Understanding by Design model. ADDIE and ASSURE

also have a stage to focus on implementation which allows for effective use of media

and technology to be addressed. This also is a stage that is not addressed in the

Understanding by Design model. Another similarity between ADDIE and ASSURE is

that they are both based on Robert Grange’s Conditions of Learning. Understanding by

Design in comparison has developed its own six facets of understanding. In a final

comparison of the three models we can look at methods of evaluation. ADDIE and

ASSURE address evaluation in the final stage whereas Understanding by Design

COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

addresses it in the second stage. Regardless of what stage evaluation is addressed, all

three models provide for formative and summative assessment. It seems that all three

models have their strengths and weaknesses. Most schools in our area are turning

toward the Understanding by Design model due to its ability to pinpoint the desired

outcome up front which helps to increase test scores. I think many teachers naturally

include some of the stages from ADDIE or ASSURE in an attempt to bridge the gap

between teaching the test and providing for the needs of the whole child.

Regardless of which model you prefer it is important that instructional design be

considered when planning and implementing your lessons, units, and courses. The

advantages of using an instructional design model include the formality of it, the fact

that it is a proven method, and it provides data for evaluation. Without a formalized

approach to design teachers would be reinventing their own method over and over

again; whereas over the last fifty years, instructional design models have been proven

to be an effective method of teaching and learning. Finally it is important as teachers

that we collect data for evaluations and this type of feedback is built into instructional

design models and allows for comparison across courses and disciplines.(Cogsim)

In the ideal world planning and implementing an instructional design model

should be a group effort including the teacher, media specialist, and technology

specialist. The grade level teachers should be the leaders of the group having an idea

of what the content or curriculum area is that they are needing to plan for. The media

specialist and technology specialist should act as consultants in the area of planning.

First the group would identify the content and curriculum standards to be taught and

suggest means of evaluation. Then grade level teachers would provide an analysis of
COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

sorts of the audience and the strengths, weaknesses, and potential obstacles they

might encounter along the way. As the group discusses ways to implement the lesson

the media specialist and technology specialist would brainstorm what media and

materials might be most useful to help the students develop an understanding of the

materials and subject matter. I see the relationship of the three positions working as a

partnership where each part has its own individual job. In the end it is up to the grade

level teacher to present the materials and carry out the planned assessments.

Currently as the music specialist I am not directly involved in the planning of

instructional design units with the grade level teachers. After the initial planning is done

the plans are posted for all of the supporting teachers to have access to and we find

ways to integrate the grade level standards and units of study into our curriculum. In

the future, as a media specialist I would like to be very involved in the planning process.

I am very well versed in the Georgia Performance Standards and have a good idea of

what materials and resources could be used to help support teaching across all areas of

the curriculum. I would also like to be able to develop collaborative lessons with the

grade level teachers so I could insure that information literacy is being taught as well. In

conclusion it is critical that we as educators embrace instructional design in one form or

another and become designers of student learning so that we can ensure understanding

takes place.





COMPARISON & BRIEF ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODELS

References
at Learning Theories. (n.d.). at Learning Theories. Retrieved February 13, 2011,

from http://www.learning-theories.com?addie-model.com

Branson, R. K. (1975). Interservice procedures for instructional systems development .

Tallahassee: Center for Educational Technology, Florida State University.

Heinich, R. (1996). Instructional media and technologies for learning . Englewood Cliffs,

N.J.: Merrill.

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2011). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and

Technology . Boston: Pearson.

The ADDIE Model - Why Use It?. (n.d.). EzineArticles Submission - Submit Your Best

Quality Original Articles For Massive Exposure, Ezine Publishers Get 25 Free

Article Reprints. Retrieved February 13, 2011, from http://ezinearticles.com/?

The-ADDIE-Model---Why-Use-It?&id=859615

Understanding by Design | Center for Teaching | Vanderbilt University. (n.d.). Center

for Teaching | Vanderbilt University. Retrieved February 13, 2011, from http://

cft.vanderbilt.edu/teaching-guides/pedagogical/understanding-by-design/

What. (n.d.). Welcome to CogSim Educational Consulting. Retrieved February 13, 2011,

from http://www.cogsim.com/idea/idea/isd.htm

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design . Alexandria, VA.:

Association for supervision and Curriculum Development.