EDU 654 Methods for Online Teaching & Learning – A Course Reflection

I am unable to explain why my mental picture of instructional design was that of a solitary task.  The designer would have an insular existence while going through the design and development process.  Connecting with others only to conduct research, or to review a final learning design with a training group.  However, I no longer hold that view, and the course EDU 654 Method for Online Teaching & Learning is the reason I now consider the instructional design process as a true collaborative effort. 

It is that collaboration that fed the successful outcome for the partnership project.  My community grew by one with Shelby as my partner, and then by four when the rest of the class joined in for discussion that always resulted in me learning something new.  The free offering of different course design and teaching as it related to peer reviewed literature ignited my creative juices leaving me excited about the thought of what I could incorporate in my course design.  In that collaborative community I learned about so many learning applications that offered flexible interaction for any student demographic such as VoiceThread and Vacaroo. 

A frame game like Bingo can be designed around key words in an organizational plan, and played by attendees to the meeting as they are intensely focused on hearing those key words in the senior leaderships call to action speech.  I can easily see including simulations in the online sexual harassment training, and to keep what is clearly a team shared effort moving forward I plan on trying the project management tool Asana to best manage the work and keep the team members on task. 

Following graduation, I will definitely take a break from classroom learning for several months. Then to stay at the top of my professional game I will periodically attend instructional design learning workshops.  I will conduct internet searches for the latest learning applications, and develop a network of other instructional designers/trainers to make myself aware of effective best practice efforts.  Completion of this course, or even graduation from a program does not mean the learning stops for it is only the beginning of the endless quest to expand my knowledge of online teaching and learning methods.

EDU 654 Creativity & Multimedia

EDU 654 Blog Post #3 - Using Technology: Sense of Community

Using the Technology: Sense of Community

What makes a learning management system (LMS) a platform that can deliver a sense of community (SoC)?  Is it a splash page with a colorful banner and a funny little character like the one on this blog page?  Or, is it the inclusion of apps like Padlet and Voki embedded in the learning modules?  While these can have a positive and energizing impact, it is the instructor that sets the stage and leads the way. Shackelford and Maxwell (2012) found:  

The instructor must be aware of the importance of his or her communication in showing students how to engage in behaviors that build community in an online course. Students observe instructor behavior and learn from it, taking cues in such areas as initiation of conversations, acceptance of opposing viewpoints, offering of encouragement, and use of tact in disagreements.

Synchronous discussion webinars not only give the instructor and students the opportunity to bond, it also encourages spontaneous critical thinking.  Morrison (2012) found most instructors wanted students to become interested in the topic, motivated to explore and ask questions, learn and think by means of discourse and discussion, and finally to think critically, apply the knowledge to other areas, draw conclusions and demonstrate knowledge. 

The virtual classroom is the perfect space for individualized learning, but the social interaction to support the community that exist within that space is discussion.  Having discussions among a large number of students can make participation challenging.  Akcaoglu and Lee (2016) found that by manipulating group size, students' perceptions of cohesion, and sociability were positively increased in asynchronous class discussions. 

In my current training environment, I do get a chance to use colorful splash pages, synchronous discussion as the classes are designed as hybrid learning, and there is a carve out for asynchronous discussion.  It is my plan to expand the utilization of different learning apps to keep my training participants both engaged and learning something new about technology.

References

Akcaoglu, M., Lee, E. (2016).  Increasing social presence in online learning through small group discussions.  International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3).  Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2293/3680

Morrison, D. (2012).  Critical thinking in the online classroom.  Online learning insights a place for learning about online education.  Retrieved from https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/critical-thinking-in-the-online-learning-classroom/

Shackelford, J. L., & Maxwell, M. (2012).  Contribution of learner–instructor interaction to sense of community in graduate online education.  MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 8(4).  248-260.

EDU 654 Blog Post #2 - Asynchronous and Synchronous Facilitation

Asynchronous and Synchronous Facilitation

            The online classroom was a concept that I was skeptical of as an online learner, while at the same time eager for the challenge to become a participant in the virtual classroom.  When I began studying for my first graduate degree the online classroom still had that new car smell.  It was in 2005 and the instructors in my health science program were either fully committed to online facilitation, or they simply tried to copy and paste their face-to-face (F2F) course into a learning management system (LMS).  Simply put the instructors had either lifted anchor and set sail to the shores of the online classroom, or remained tethered to the beach. 

            The same analogy can be used for the consideration of asynchronous and synchronous facilitation.  Steven Tello, associate director of distance learning, continuing studies, and corporate education at the University of Massachusetts-Lowell found that asynchronous discussions are:

most appropriate for lasting, thoughtful contributions to an entire class or course team. They are ideal for the sharing of course resource and materials, both as postings within a course and as a place to share documents and media files.  Threaded discussions can be organized around lessons, topics, teams, or whatever makes the most sense within one’s course (para. 9). 

The social learning tool Flipgrid offers a discussion platform for all levels of learning.  As a student I have used Flipgrid and found it allowed for spontaneous engagement as opposed to the LMS discussion board.  This YouTube video gives a less than 2-minute peek into what Flipgrid is about.

            Hanna et al. (2013) found the use of synchronous online teaching tools will likely increase in the future as they provide opportunities for immediate group interaction, decision making and consensus which are important aspects of the collaborative process.  As this video short explains Cisco Webex allows for a class to assemble at the same time live collaborative learning is best.  

            In my current organization the learning structure remains tethered to F2F facilitation on land.  It is my goal to move the needle on the training and development into the 21^st century online learning environment. As a student I have used Flipgrid and Webex and found both fun and engaging.  If you have suggestions of asynchronous and synchronous tools please share for, I am receptive to new ideas.

References

Kelly, R. (2004). The connection between instructional interaction and student persistence.

Online Classroom, p7-8. 

Hanna, E., Soren, B., Telner, D., MacNeill, H., Lowe, M., Reeves, S (2013).   Flying blind:

The experience of online interprofessional facilitation.  Journal of Interprofessional Care, 27(4), 298-304.  doi: 10.3109/13561820.2012.723071

EDU 654 Blog #1 - Learner Content

Learner Content

Traveling during a late January winter blast helped my thought process about adult learning course content creation come into full focus. Like frigid temperatures educators that have resided only in the academia universe become frozen in what they believe is the best course content for any occupational learning track.  On the flip side occupational subject matter experts are as bound to their opinion that teaching a skill the same as it has been taught for centuries is the best learning format.  Both sides can successfully argue that their perspective is efficient and effective; but only if there are no evolutionary advancements in education and technology. 

Within my organization I am charged with designing and developing vocational pathway training that provides career advancement opportunities.  The learning is often a hybrid model of organization led training workshops, community college classroom studies, and on-the-job learning.  The ingredients of the learning recipe are not always easily blended as each learning provider deems their course content and delivery method to be the best.

A report of the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Labor, National Institute of Literacy, and the Small Business Administration (1999) found that to best serve the needs of workers and employers, educational institutions must address employers’ needs for both general and industry-specific training just as employers must explore ways to expand and update the skills of their workforce by adopting new and changing technologies.

It is easy to imagine how an employer can lose worker morale and productivity when ineffective training is offered, but what do you think happens when an educational institution fails to provide what needs to be taught?  This video on ineffective teaching can provide some insight.

As instructors we must commit to getting to know our audience.  Andriotis (2016) suggest when developing a needs analysis to focus on three areas: time investment, attitudes, and expected outcomes.  The student will feel more motivated to participate in a course that is specific to their individual needs, and the employer will learn of similar cross departmental needs and requirements. 

I find the best approach to creating mutually beneficial learning content is to ask questions and listen to the answers from both sides.  This approach correlates with the findings of Stefaniak and Baaki (2013) that instructional design should be customized so that it is apparent to the learner (and the employer) that they need the instruction.  

References

Andriotis, N. (2016).  Know your audience!  A smart guide for analyzing your learners’ needs. 

In Enfront.  Retrieved from https://www.efrontlearning.com/blog/2016/10/guide-learners-needs-analysis.html

Melbourne, A. (2014).  Ineffective teaching.  YouTube.  Retrieved from

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbPdltnk7oU

Stefaniak, J. E., Baaki, J., (2013).  A layered approach to understanding your audience.

            Performance Improvement, 52(6), 5-10.  Doi: 10.1002/pfi.21352

U.S. Department of Commerce, U. S. Department of Education, U. S. Department of Labor,

            National Institute of Literacy, and Small Business Administration.  (1999).  21^st century

            Skills for 21^st century jobs.  Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 

EDU 658 Reflective Blog Post

EDU 658 Instructional Design Application 

Pamela L. McGimpsey 

Coming from a family whose craft is teaching I grew up hearing about the development of lesson plans all day every day.  It was not uncommon for my mother to spend her summer and holiday breaks creating learning outlines that included bulletin boards, art projects, and live presentations of student reports.  This was of course before the virtual world of learning came onto the scene.  While I appreciated her efforts and outcomes as much as her students, I never fully valued the amount of time she spent on creating one course.  But EDU 658 Instructional Design Application forever changed my respect level for those training professionals who are also instructional designers.

Like an architect I took the first step in designing a course of learning.  With fingers to my laptop keyboard I tapped out a planning document.  At the conclusion of the second draft I believed my intended course plan was pure perfection.  There was nothing I was going to change.  With positive momentum I pushed forward to design the course Splash page.  The visualization for this page was simple, exciting, and full of color.  Unfortunately, I failed to include in my course development plan the absolute need to become familiar, comfortable, and confident with the Canvas learning management system (LMS).  After hours of stumbling around what was a virtual LMS learning pit I put together a creation that opened to a thud on my monitor.  A welcomed peer review provided the most beneficial feedback that resulted in converting my original Splash page into a vibrant and easy to understand course cover page.  Thus, my perfect cover page was changed and for the better.

The inclusion of Powtoon, Padlet, and Google Sheets proved perfect supplements to my course learning designed as an entry level supervisory training for those in the manufacturing industry.  For someone who does not warmly embrace technology I became brave enough to first try and then include these new to me applications in my Canvas based course.  Excitement coursed through my veins as I created visually impactful and engaging learning elements. 

During the 16-week course of EDU 658 Instructional Design Application I learned that by pairing online learning with face-to-face class time a course can become a richer learning experience for the student and the instructor.  For each step of the design process I was the student stretching my artistic boundaries to craft a course that will inspire the learners it touches to engage in every element this learning program offers.  I am very proud of the final product of this course as it is the first in what will be a long line of exceptionally designed learning programs. 

Pamela's Note Card Confession / Reflective Blog Post

This Note Card Confession is my Reflective Blog Post for it perfectly summarizes my course study take away for EDU 651.70: Foundations of Distance Education.  

I hope you enjoy...

Social Media: The Role It Plays in Online Learning

                                      Social Media: The Role It Plays in Online Learning

                                                       Pamela L. McGimpsey

                                                     Lenoir-Rhyne University

            The role of online learning in the instructional design of course development continues to be a subject of extensive interest and research.  Numerous studies have found students appreciate the flexibility, convenience, and that level of classroom anonymity afforded to the online learner.  As technological advances make the delivery of learning management systems like Blackboard, Moodle, and Canvas easier to navigate for instructor and student, these virtual learning environments are no longer the only platform for online learning.  Social media’s Facebook and Twitter are now being considered to become part of the realm of online teaching because it encourages active participation and relationship building. 

                                                       The Role of Social Media

            Fitting into the mold for the constructivist approach for teaching and learning social media presents a setting for individuals not only to chat about a favorite activity, but it can also provide a stage that supports the online learning community.  Whittaker (2014) led a preliminary study into the success of Facebook as a “closed group” community of 44 students enrolled in an undergraduate Animal Science degree program that also required compulsory face-to-face learning activities.

 

Five themes emerged from the data gathered: other, course content query, administrative query, problem solution, and joke.  Of those themes problem solution had the largest number of responses with 40% being from the administrator answering a direct question, or providing guidance to where additional information could be found.  Students posted 60% of the responses in support of each other.  A student posting example:  “At the end of the day a power calculation requires an indication of the type II error that’s acceptable.  Generally you would find a common acceptable type II error would be 20% so requires a power of 80%” (Whittaker, 2014, p. 142).

In 2011, Tay and Allen argued “it is the particular pedagogic application of social media – not the technology itself – that will lead to a constructivist learning outcome. Whereas social media might afford us possibilities for collaboration, shared content creation, and participation in knowledge building, those possibilities need to be actualized through the effective integration of social media into learning environments” (p. 156).  Stated simply, social media becomes part of the complimentary pairing with the contemporary learning management system that allows students to collaborate while working as individuals. 

The 140 character world of Twitter can also build an educational support community as Feliz, T., Ricoy, and Feliz, S. (2013) found as they investigated the use of Twitter as a resource to develop a learning community.  A total of 39 people participated in the research ranging in ages between 21 and 50; all with very different backgrounds, training, and experience.  Though students overall generated a large number of tweets, most tweets originated from the younger study participants. 

Older students (age 41-50) and those aged between 31 and 40 showed a lower level of participation.  This agrees with the findings of another study (Espuny, Gonzalez, Lleixa, and Gisbert, 2011), which noted that knowledge of social media increases as age decreases.  Moreover, in the present research it was found that the students with the worst academic results tended to show lower participation in the Twitter social network.  Occupation does not; however, seem to have an influence on the level of participation. (Feliz et al., 2013, p. 212)

Rutten, Ros, Kuijpers, and Kreijns (2016) found for students in pre-vocational education that when compared with virtual learning settings social network sites “offered a stronger environment for practicing online career skills, but students do not show more online career behavior in these environments” (p. 140).  While the authors admit the findings of this explorative study has limitations the end result of student engagement with social media being accepted as a learning platform is an outcome that illustrates “how different digital environments can be used effectively in schools to teach students how to use an SNS for career purposes” (Rutten, et al., 2016, p. 149).

                                                         Conclusion

Available literature on the topic of social network systems and the role they currently play in online learning is limited.  Each article researched for this literature review closed with the same synopsis.  Social media paired with learning management systems can be a complimentary integration of a hybrid learning platform generating a student community that will serve to positively enhance the educational experience for learners and instructors.  Additional research is necessary to study the long term impact of social networks on online learning. 

References

Feliz, T., Ricoy, C., Feliz, S., (2013).  Analysis of the use of Twitter as a learning strategy in

            master’s learning.  Open Learning, 28(3), 201-215.

Tay, E., Allen, M., (2011).  Designing social media into university learning: technology of

            collaboration or collaboration for technology.  Educational Medial International,

48(3), 151-163.

Rutten, M., Ros, A., Kuijpers, M., Kreijns, K., (2016).  Usefulness of social network sites for

            adolescents’ development of online career skills.  Educational Technology & Society,

            19(4), 140-150.

Whittaker, A. L., Howarth, G. S., Lynn, K. A., (2014).  Evaluation of Facebook to create an

            online learning community in an undergraduate animal science class.  Educational

            Media International, 51(2), 135-145.

Online Learning: Student Perceptions and Expectations

Pamela L. McGimpsey

Lenoir Rhyne University

Online Learning: Student Perceptions and Expectations

            There have been numerous studies on the benefits of online learning compared to face-to-face instruction regarding design, content, and student participation; with less research focusing on the students understanding and assumption about the online classroom.  With lesson plans requiring students to include more time engaged inside a virtual class it must be taken into consideration the student’s expectations of the online course in which they enroll.  What do learners anticipate when engagement with instructor’s and fellow students is regulated to asynchronous discussion?  Is there a desire for studies to be more rigorous?  Does the need for peer-to-peer affiliation impact student outcomes?  Research suggest an affirmative answer to these questions is causing focus be paid not only to the method of delivery of course learning, but also to the students’ perceptions and expectations of the learning they seek.

Online Learning Perceptions

An initial expectation of online study is that it offers flexibility for the student to attend class at the time and location that best fits into the individuals schedule while meeting course attendance requirements.  Horspoll and Lange (2012) sought to better understand why 119 students chose online over face-to-face instruction finding “47% of respondents indicate they took the course online to reduce their commute to campus.  Second to this response, 36% reported scheduling issues.  Close to a third of students mention taking the course online to accommodate work demands” (p. 78).  

However, flexibility brings with it the opportunity for students to self-pace.  Frimming and Bordelon (2016) found:

Uneven progress through a course presented problems not only for individual students, but also for classmates when students were expected to work together on group projects and in class discussions.  Whether some students advanced too far in the course schedule or were unable to keep up, classmates often felt frustrated by being “out of sync” with peers. (p. 354)

Asynchronous discussion by definition allows for conversation to be developed, stored, and retrieved at the convenience of the speaker and participants at anytime and anywhere.  Miers et al. (2007) collected qualitative data from 48 students participating in 10 online groups evaluating their experience and found asynchronicity was less than advantageous and caused frustration:

I just found it frustrating, because you put a message onto the board and then you have to wait for somebody to get back to you…it’s not like being in class or when you meet for coffee…and you can go through things and you can say to people, “I don’t understand that, and do you understand it?” and somebody will explain to you. (U-AN-2 interview). (p. 534)

While the technological tools for learning are the same for all students, the level of desired learning is different for undergraduate and graduate students.  Holzweiss, Joyner, Fuller, Henderson, and Young (2015) surveyed 86 graduate students pertaining to what helped them learn in the online environment.  The findings revealed graduate students “desired a deeper level of learning that requires more instructional forethought and planning” (p. 311).  In addition to research, writing, and discussion forums study participants also noted critical thinking and problem-solving assignments as best learning experiences.   

Does the need for peer-to-peer affiliation impact student outcomes?  The findings of Seiver and Troja (2014) indicate that it does; “the students who were least likely to want to take another online course were those who scored highest in the need for affiliation” (p. 98).  Horspoll and Lange (2012) found online students ask many more questions than face-to-face students. 

A possible explanation for this finding could be that in face-to-face courses, the physical presence of other students in the classroom may prohibit some form asking questions out of concern for embarrassment in front of their peers.  In an online meeting, students may feel more comfortable asking questions as the online format creates an illusion of anonymity from peer judgement. (p. 82)

Conclusion

            As online learning becomes more integrated into academic and professional learning models the review of the literature lends support to the need for continued research as it pertains to student perception and expectation with online learning.  As Seiver and Troja (2014) found students will take advantage of this learning format, and “instructors who strive to encourage students who have different personalities, needs, and motives will be sought after by students” (p. 103).

References

Frimming, R. E.,  Bordelon, T. D. (2016).  Physical education students’ perceptions of the

            effectiveness of their distance education courses.  The Physical Educator, 73, 340-351.

Holzweiss, P.C., Joyner, S. A., Fuller, M. B., Henderson, S., Young, R. (2014).  Online graduate

students’ perceptions of best learning experiences.  Distance Education, 35(3), 311-323.

Horspool, A., Lange, C. (2012).  Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: Student

perceptions,  behaviours and success online and face-to-face.  Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 73-88.

Miers, M. E., Clarke, B. A., Pollard, K. C., Rickaby, C. E., Thomas, J., Turtle, A. (2007).  Online

            interprofessional learning: The student experience.  Journal of Interprofessional Care,

            21(5), 529-542.

Seiver, J. G., Troja, A. (2014).  Satisfaction and success in online learning as a function of the

            needs for affiliation, autonomy, and mastery.  Distance Education, 35(1) 90-105.

Are Achievement Outcomes for Online and Face-to-Face Learning Equal

Are Achievement Outcomes for Online and Face-to-Face Learning Equal

Pamela L. McGimpsey

Lenoir Rhyne University

Are Achievement Outcomes for Online and Face-to-Face Learning Equal

Online learning may have become prevalent in the mid-1990’s, but distance learning started long before the ease of internet access.  A correspondence program mailed to learners wanting to expand their knowledge base was an accepted practice for decades before the World Wide Web and a laptop.  With continued advancements in technology, a deepening acceptance by instructors of online teaching, and an expanding pool of computer literate students the presence of the virtual classroom will continue to expand.  As more colleges, universities, and the public sector incorporate online learning programs into their respective curriculum and training one frequently asked question remains. Are achievement outcomes for online and face-to-face learning equal?  This literature review takes into consideration peer reviewed articles that examine online learning achievement by students.

Online Learning Achievement

As educational institutions continue to increase the integration of online study into individual program curriculum the concern over optimal outcomes continues to be a looming issue.  Perry and Pilati (2011) found that research over the past 10 years however, supports that singular worry is becoming increasingly less debatable.

            The most comprehensive review of online effectiveness is carried out by the U.S. Department of Education (Means and others, 2010) that examined over 1,000 empirical studies of online learning reported in the literature from 1996 through 2008.  While the study reached a number of conclusions the most pertinent are listed:

          ·            Students who took all or part of their class online performed better, on average, than those taking the same course through traditional face-to-face instruction.

          ·            Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely online instruction, where “advantage” refers to the learning effectiveness of the various instructional approaches (that is, hybrid online instruction was more effective than purely online).

          ·            The effectiveness of online learning approaches appears quite broad across different content and learner types.  The effectiveness of online learning was similar for undergraduates, graduates, and professionals and was independent of the subject being learned (p. 16-17).

Palacios and Wood (2016) specifically sought to determine differences by racial/ethnic affiliation in students’ academic success and course retention for community college men.  Findings demonstrate that Asian, Black, Latino, and White men enrolled in online and face-to-face courses found that face-to-face was the most effective modality for all men.  “However, for most groups as mentioned, there were no clear patterns in which online modality was better than others with regard to success, except for Black men; for those men, asynchronous with multimedia was identified as the second most effective online modality pertaining to success” (p. 652).  Though specific to men of color enrolled in community college, the finding that weaving asynchronous with multimedia into the online modality finds increased success even in a subset of the study group supports findings by Means and others (2010) that hybrid online instruction enhances learning over online alone.  

Dell, Low, and Wilker (2010) analyzed the online and face-to-face learning of undergraduate and graduate students to find any differences between submitted course works.  The primary outcome found no significant disparities between submitted works for online students and face-to-face students; but, a secondary outcome revealed while class content, instruction, readings, activities, assignments, and discussions were consistent between sections, instructors for online learners needed to focus on providing quality instruction.  “Interaction among the learners and with the instructor is important in face-to-face and online formats.  Active learning, application of knowledge; effective interaction; facilitation of self-regulation and self-efficacy; and high expectations are all important methods of instruction” (p. 25). 

Not only does effective interaction become an integral piece to consistently achieving desirable online learning outcomes, as in the aforementioned, as Means and others (2013) found in The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature, “the advantage over face-to-face classes was significant in those studies contrasting blended learning with traditional face-to-face instruction but not in those studies contrasting purely online with face-to-face conditions” (p. 2).

Conclusion

The review of the literature is consistent in providing evidence to support the success of online learning in comparison to face-to-face.  However, while evidence is noted to the benefits of a blended online learning model that includes multi-media, and face-to-face further investigation is warranted.  Additional study should also be conducted into how interaction or lack of impacts online learning.    

   

References

Dell, C. A., Low, C., Wilker, J.F., (2010).  Comparing Student Achievement in Online and Face-to-

            Face Class Formats.  MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 30-42.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., Jones, K., (2010).  Evaluation of Evidence-Based

            Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies.  U.S.

            Department of Education.  Retrieved from

https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Baki, M., (2013).  The Effectiveness of Online and Blended

Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature.  Teachers College Record

115(030303), 1-47.

Palacios, A. M. G., Wood, J. L., (2016).  Is Online Learning the Silver Bullet for Men of Color?  An

Institutional-level Analysis of the California Community College System.  Community

College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(8), 643-655.  doi:

10.1080/10668926.2015.1087893

Perry, E. H., Pilati, M. L., (2011).  Online Learning.  New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 

            128(2011), 95-104.  doi: 10.1002/tl

Instructional Design Model Mashup: ADDIE + Merrill’s First Principals

The ADDIE Model and Merrill’s First Principals are very complementary to each other, thus making for the perfect Instructional Design Model Mashup.

Brown and Green (2016) outline three simple steps that comprise the most commonly used approach to creating instruction:

(1) Determine what practical or theoretical knowledge is to be taught, and how will the instruction be delivered.

(2) Design the program.

(3) Review the effectiveness of the training. 

These simple steps describe the ADDIE Model and/or process of training development.  Although many ID practitioners use ADDIE as a prescriptive model for developing instruction, it is actually a means of describing the essential components of any instructional design model (Molenda, 2003).

The explanation of the acronym ADDIE:

A – Analyze

Establish learning goals and objectives.  Determine learner needs.  

D – Design

Will learners have some knowledge of required course work? 

Who will provide theoretical training – employer, community college, industry training vendor? 

What format is the course study – classroom, online? 

D- Develop

Evaluate learning objectives to determine if program rigor needs enhancement to achieve desired outcome. 

Create training so trainer and learner consult on learning outcomes.

I – Implement

Train the trainers on program content and how to best implement.

Train the learners on what they should expect during training – course study, lab time, assessments.

E – Evaluate

Review training effectiveness to confirm if obtained instruction objectives. 

Make necessary program revisions to course study, trainer engagement. 

Assess overall program performance.

Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction is designed to be engaging from beginning to end, and is a more detailed version of the ADDIE Model.  Merrill (2002, pp. 44-45) suggests there are five basic principles that hold true for the design of any instruction. 

Problem –

Learners are informed of training goals and objectives.  Learners also become acquainted with the training model – content, duration, performance expectations.

Activation –

Training is designed for specific course and/or occupational study (i.e. chemical operator, certified medical assistant). 

Training provider and format is dependent on student’s prior course knowledge.            

Demonstration –

Training side-by-side with program trainer’s students can build upon their current knowledge base. 

Learners are engaged in course study and/or skill they are expected to master.

Application –

Trainers provide theoretical and practical examples for learners to commit to memory then expand upon. 

The learner continually has the opportunity to practice what is learned and receive feedback on their performance.

Integration –

Training is designed to give learners the opportunity to transfer all they have learned to the environment in which they work. 

Learners are also given the opportunity to create and defend an original work process that could become a new best practice.

Illustrated below: Instructional Design Model Mashup: ADDIE + Merrill’s First Principals

Gagne’s Nine Elements of Instructional Design vs. Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction

Critique and Compare Instructional Design Models:

Gagne’s Nine Elements of Instructional Design vs. Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction

Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction

Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction (GNEI) is a pointed progressive outline of how to maximize learning by developing instructional design to identified mental conditions – Gaining Attention (Reception); Informing Learners of Objective; Stimulating Recall of Prior Learning; Presenting the Stimulus (Self Perception); Providing Learning Guidance (Practice); Eliciting Performance (Responding); Providing Feedback (Reinforcement); Assessing Performance (Retrieval); and Enhancing Retention & Transfer (Generalization). 

Each of the nine events is easy for the learner to comprehend and for the instructor to act upon as this Chalk Square Media You Tube video demonstrates. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxPt75bU6rc&list=PLP7XhBeZ13pY1cCeHcDJX03rlL7IIu0t1&index=1

Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction

The image for Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (MFPI) represented in the Canvas learning module best visualize how the Problem principle takes center stage to the four equally important side stages -Activation, Demonstration, Application, and Integration – each principal building upon the previous while resolving the training issue in the core Problem principal.    

The difference in my mental version of the referenced image is the four side principles revolve around the lead principal (see Figure 1.1).  This visual demonstrates how MFPI instructional design can move with ease from Problem, to Activation, to Demonstration, to Application, to Integration. 

Figure 1.1 Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction Revolving Stage Industrial Design Plan

This You Tube video by Hugh McCutchen offers a fun review of MFPI.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUYwz_VZalw

Both Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction and Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction are similar in making certain the Learner knows the:

Ø  Objective of the training

Ø  Utilization of prior knowledge

Ø  Providing learner guidance

Ø  Practice and/or apply learning

Ø  Transfer learning to real world contexts

The most notable difference between the two instructional design models is really none at all considering Merrill’s First Principles is a concise version of Gagne’s Nine Events resulting in the same projected outcomes (Figure 1.2).  Similarities are highlighted yellow.

GNEI Event	GNEI Learning	MFPI Principle	GNEI & MFPI Learning
Gaining Attention (Reception)	GNEI gains attention to the task with a live demonstration of chemical mixing to purify drinking water.
Informing Learners of Objective (Expectancy)		Problem and task centered	Takes the problem or task of a chemical operator – and makes clear Learner expectations are to become highly skilled chemical operators.  Attainment of problem/task is outlined in 3 components: (1) 3-years of course study, (2) hands on laboratory, and (3) production floor on-the-job learning.  Combination of the 3 components will result in the successful development of a chemical operator.
Stimulating Recall of Prior Learning		Activation	This specific training program is targeted to those with interest in chemical sciences.  Thus instruction is designed to utilize existing knowledge in chemistry and advanced math. Because existing knowledge is tapped the Learners confidence in his/her ability to successfully master the task is elevated.
Presenting the Stimulus (Self Perception) Providing Learning Guidance (Practice)	*Exception - Specifically with Providing Learning Guidance (Practice) no new knowledge is introduced.	Demonstration	Development of practical and theoretical knowledge is equally weighted in this 3 component learning model. Learners work side-by-side with training mentors to build upon their current knowledge base.
Eliciting Performance (Responding) Providing Feedback (Reinforcement) Assessing Performance (Retrieval)		Application	Course study and on-the-job learning are purposely woven together in this model to enable Learners to practice and master what they learn. The Learner continually has the opportunity to practice what is learned and to receive feedback on their performance.
Enhancing Retention & Transfer		Integration	Training is 100% designed to give Learners the opportunity to transfer all they have learned to the environment in which they work as chemical operators.  Learners are also given the opportunity to create and defend and original work process that could become a new best practice.