EDT 8220 - Instructional Design (ID) Concepts and Theories
![Dart Board w/Darts on Target B&W](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/pexels-photo-358075.jpg?1512168277)
1. Learning Objectives
Upon completion of this workshop, learners should be able to perform the following tasks:
1. Describe three different teaching strategies
2. Explain the difference between goals and objectives
3. Name the four questions a needs analysis seeks to answer
4. List the five general phases of systematic design
Upon completion of this workshop, learners should be able to perform the following tasks:
1. Describe three different teaching strategies
2. Explain the difference between goals and objectives
3. Name the four questions a needs analysis seeks to answer
4. List the five general phases of systematic design
![ADDIE Graphic](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/published/addie.jpg?1512166015)
2. The Systematic ID Process and ID Problem
The systematic instructional design process encompasses the analysis of learning goals and needs combined with the creation of a system to meet those needs (Brown & Green, 2016). It involves the creation of instructional material and activities along with testing and evaluation of the instruction and activities themselves (Brown & Green, 2016). A general description of this process is known as ADDIE, which describes five general design phases: analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate (Brown & Green, 2016).
Using a systematic process benefits an instructional design team by establishing guidelines to ensure uniformity, consistency, and quality of product (Brown & Green, 2016).
The specific design challenge for this assignment involved supervisors at aircraft maintenance depots who were not properly documenting aircraft maintenance worker training using a training database known as the Training Scheduling System (TSS). This resulted in inaccurate training documentation compromising mission effectiveness. An associated problem involved varying degrees of basic computer skills among the supervisors.
The systematic instructional design process encompasses the analysis of learning goals and needs combined with the creation of a system to meet those needs (Brown & Green, 2016). It involves the creation of instructional material and activities along with testing and evaluation of the instruction and activities themselves (Brown & Green, 2016). A general description of this process is known as ADDIE, which describes five general design phases: analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate (Brown & Green, 2016).
Using a systematic process benefits an instructional design team by establishing guidelines to ensure uniformity, consistency, and quality of product (Brown & Green, 2016).
The specific design challenge for this assignment involved supervisors at aircraft maintenance depots who were not properly documenting aircraft maintenance worker training using a training database known as the Training Scheduling System (TSS). This resulted in inaccurate training documentation compromising mission effectiveness. An associated problem involved varying degrees of basic computer skills among the supervisors.
![Airman Performing Analysis](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/2-needs-analysis.jpg?1512166126)
3. Description of Needs Analysis
The initial step in addressing the depot training issues was to perform a needs analysis.Because an instructional designer is tasked with solving a training problem and providing solutions, a needs analysis helps get to the root of the problem by gathering existing state information (Brown & Green, 2016). Instructional designers gather this information by conducting interviews, making observations, and reviewing available artifacts (Brown & Green, 2016).
A needs analysis attempts to answer the following questions:
1. What change is being requested?
2. Who is making the request?
3. Where will the change occur?
4. Is instruction the most effective method to drive this change?
(Brown & Green, 2016).
The needs analysis for depot supervisors and their employees used surveys combined with observation protocol. Supervisor and employee surveys created in the survey tool Qualtrics can be viewed by selecting the following links:
Supervisor Survey: Training Scheduling System (TSS) Survey for Supervisors
Worker Survey: Training Scheduling System (TSS) Survey for Employees
During the observation phase, protocols were also used in addition to survey instruments for additional data collection. You can review the depot supervisor and employee needs analysis including protocols by downloading the document below:
The initial step in addressing the depot training issues was to perform a needs analysis.Because an instructional designer is tasked with solving a training problem and providing solutions, a needs analysis helps get to the root of the problem by gathering existing state information (Brown & Green, 2016). Instructional designers gather this information by conducting interviews, making observations, and reviewing available artifacts (Brown & Green, 2016).
A needs analysis attempts to answer the following questions:
1. What change is being requested?
2. Who is making the request?
3. Where will the change occur?
4. Is instruction the most effective method to drive this change?
(Brown & Green, 2016).
The needs analysis for depot supervisors and their employees used surveys combined with observation protocol. Supervisor and employee surveys created in the survey tool Qualtrics can be viewed by selecting the following links:
Supervisor Survey: Training Scheduling System (TSS) Survey for Supervisors
Worker Survey: Training Scheduling System (TSS) Survey for Employees
During the observation phase, protocols were also used in addition to survey instruments for additional data collection. You can review the depot supervisor and employee needs analysis including protocols by downloading the document below:
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/rtf.png)
TSS Need Analysis.docx | |
File Size: | 17 kb |
File Type: | docx |
![Maintenance Worker Reviewing Tasks](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/3-task-analysis.jpg?1512166207)
4. Description of Task Analysis
Task analysis is a systematic process of gathering information about content and tasks that make up the instruction being developed (Brown & Green, 2016). A task analysis helps solve problems for an instructional designer and includes content examination needed to solve performance problems combined with input by a subject matter expert (SME). Task analysis also helps course designers view content from the learners prospective (Brown & Green, 2016).
Training certification of depot supervisors included tools required to perform maintenance tasks, computer access, observation of aircraft maintenance tasks, electronic documentation tasks in TSS, performance of trainees, and maintenance task validation steps.
You can review the depot supervisor and employee task analysis by downloading the document below:
Task analysis is a systematic process of gathering information about content and tasks that make up the instruction being developed (Brown & Green, 2016). A task analysis helps solve problems for an instructional designer and includes content examination needed to solve performance problems combined with input by a subject matter expert (SME). Task analysis also helps course designers view content from the learners prospective (Brown & Green, 2016).
Training certification of depot supervisors included tools required to perform maintenance tasks, computer access, observation of aircraft maintenance tasks, electronic documentation tasks in TSS, performance of trainees, and maintenance task validation steps.
You can review the depot supervisor and employee task analysis by downloading the document below:
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/rtf.png)
TSS Task Analysis.docx | |
File Size: | 18 kb |
File Type: | docx |
![Adult Learners](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/4-learner-analysis.jpg?1512166325)
5. Description of Learner Analysis
The learner analysis helps instructional designers interpret and understand learner characteristics to aid in the design of effective instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). This is accomplished by a preliminary evaluation of the target population, and is considered an essential element of the instructional plan (Brown & Green, 2016).
For supervisors at the aircraft maintenance depots, a learner demographics questionnaire was distributed to depot supervisors using Qualtrics to survey leaner intent, biases and beliefs, and feelings toward their job and knowledge of the TSS application. The survey can be viewed by selecting the following link:
TSS Learner Demographic Questionnaire
A description of the depot supervisor population was also created and identified characteristics including target population, commonalities and differences between participants, range of abilities between participants, and reasons participants would attend training.
A full version of the learner analysis can be viewed by downloading the document below:
The learner analysis helps instructional designers interpret and understand learner characteristics to aid in the design of effective instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). This is accomplished by a preliminary evaluation of the target population, and is considered an essential element of the instructional plan (Brown & Green, 2016).
For supervisors at the aircraft maintenance depots, a learner demographics questionnaire was distributed to depot supervisors using Qualtrics to survey leaner intent, biases and beliefs, and feelings toward their job and knowledge of the TSS application. The survey can be viewed by selecting the following link:
TSS Learner Demographic Questionnaire
A description of the depot supervisor population was also created and identified characteristics including target population, commonalities and differences between participants, range of abilities between participants, and reasons participants would attend training.
A full version of the learner analysis can be viewed by downloading the document below:
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/rtf.png)
TSS Learner Analysis.docx | |
File Size: | 17 kb |
File Type: | docx |
![Goal Image Graphic](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/1-extra.jpg?1512166442)
6. Learning Organization and Delivery
Goals and Objectives
Once learner needs are defined, tasks analysis is assessed, and the learners themselves have been analyzed, learning organization and delivery is presented. This step begins with creating learning objectives and goals.
Learning goals are the overarching desired end result of the training prescription that describe a general or overall statement about the intent of instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). An example of a goal specific to TSS course instruction could be “Students will recognize the mission value of timely TSS task inputs”.
Learning objectives are more specific in nature, and describe an actionable end state that the student should be able to perform at the end of instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). An example of a learning objective specific to TSS could be “By the end of this course, supervisors can demonstrate the steps involved to input maintenance worker training dates in field X of the training update screen in TSS”.
Goals and Objectives
Once learner needs are defined, tasks analysis is assessed, and the learners themselves have been analyzed, learning organization and delivery is presented. This step begins with creating learning objectives and goals.
Learning goals are the overarching desired end result of the training prescription that describe a general or overall statement about the intent of instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). An example of a goal specific to TSS course instruction could be “Students will recognize the mission value of timely TSS task inputs”.
Learning objectives are more specific in nature, and describe an actionable end state that the student should be able to perform at the end of instruction (Brown & Green, 2016). An example of a learning objective specific to TSS could be “By the end of this course, supervisors can demonstrate the steps involved to input maintenance worker training dates in field X of the training update screen in TSS”.
![Learning Environment](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/6-learning-environment.jpg?1512166534)
Learning Environments
A learning environment is the dynamic of learner, content, and instructor (Brown & Green, 2016). While there are various types of learning environments, including learner, knowledge, assessment, and community centered environments, the learner-centered was chosen for depot supervisors (Brown & Green, 2016).
This environment was recommended due to the varied demographics of the target audience in terms of career experience. A learner-centered environment focuses on existing skills, knowledge, and attitudes to discover existing relationships to content, discover common misconceptions, and generate new or improve content perceptions (Brown & Green, 2016).
A learning environment is the dynamic of learner, content, and instructor (Brown & Green, 2016). While there are various types of learning environments, including learner, knowledge, assessment, and community centered environments, the learner-centered was chosen for depot supervisors (Brown & Green, 2016).
This environment was recommended due to the varied demographics of the target audience in terms of career experience. A learner-centered environment focuses on existing skills, knowledge, and attitudes to discover existing relationships to content, discover common misconceptions, and generate new or improve content perceptions (Brown & Green, 2016).
![Direct Teaching](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/published/7-teaching-style.jpg?1512166587)
Teaching Styles
The teaching style chosen for depot supervisors was a direct teaching-directed learning environment (Brown & Green, 2016). This style was chosen based on past results of open-ended teaching methods at the depot, which proved insufficient based on its inherent lack of structure.
Directed learning environments align with traditional Air Force classroom training due to step-by-step nature of software application learning. This environment was also familiar to depot supervisors due to the structured nature of planned activities required to meet learning objectives (Brown & Green, 2016).
The teaching style chosen for depot supervisors was a direct teaching-directed learning environment (Brown & Green, 2016). This style was chosen based on past results of open-ended teaching methods at the depot, which proved insufficient based on its inherent lack of structure.
Directed learning environments align with traditional Air Force classroom training due to step-by-step nature of software application learning. This environment was also familiar to depot supervisors due to the structured nature of planned activities required to meet learning objectives (Brown & Green, 2016).
![Group Learning Image](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/8-teaching-strategies.jpg?1512166698)
Teaching Strategies
There were three specific teaching strategies chosen for this course based on the target audience:
Questions, Cues, and Advanced Organizers. This instructor-led activity was used to ask participants questions regarding their prior knowledge of basic computer and TSS application use ahead of formal instruction. It also helped determine student prior knowledge, provide verbal/visual cues to preview presentation content, and prepared students to receive new information with an open mindset (Brown & Green, 2016).
Ten and Two. This activity followed questions and cues by providing no more than ten minutes of formal instruction regarding specific basic computer use or TSS application use, followed by two minutes of student discussion to synthesize presented information and compare notes (Brown & Green, 2016). The instructor asked questions to clarify misconceptions and offer clarification on presented material (Brown & Green, 2016).
Cooperative Learning. Cooperative learning is an instructional activity that involves five elements: learners working together to succeed, face-to-face interaction with all members contributing to group success, group and individual accountability, small group skills, and group processing which includes decision making and conflict resolution (Brown & Green, 2016). The instructor incorporated cooperative learning activities during the hands-on portion of basic computer use and TSS instruction. These activities including working together on TSS software navigation and data input with peer validation were followed and training documentation was successful.
There were three specific teaching strategies chosen for this course based on the target audience:
Questions, Cues, and Advanced Organizers. This instructor-led activity was used to ask participants questions regarding their prior knowledge of basic computer and TSS application use ahead of formal instruction. It also helped determine student prior knowledge, provide verbal/visual cues to preview presentation content, and prepared students to receive new information with an open mindset (Brown & Green, 2016).
Ten and Two. This activity followed questions and cues by providing no more than ten minutes of formal instruction regarding specific basic computer use or TSS application use, followed by two minutes of student discussion to synthesize presented information and compare notes (Brown & Green, 2016). The instructor asked questions to clarify misconceptions and offer clarification on presented material (Brown & Green, 2016).
Cooperative Learning. Cooperative learning is an instructional activity that involves five elements: learners working together to succeed, face-to-face interaction with all members contributing to group success, group and individual accountability, small group skills, and group processing which includes decision making and conflict resolution (Brown & Green, 2016). The instructor incorporated cooperative learning activities during the hands-on portion of basic computer use and TSS instruction. These activities including working together on TSS software navigation and data input with peer validation were followed and training documentation was successful.
![Survey Image](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/editor/9-evaluation.jpg?1512166826)
7. Description and Explanation of Evaluation
Course results and feedback from supervisors who attended the course were obtained using the Qualtrics survey tool. The evaluation of learner achievement and ID project success are described below.
Evaluation of Learner Achievement
Analysis of post-training survey results embedded in TSS learner evaluation questions revealed that 55% of the supervisors responded in a positive manner regarding the effectiveness of classroom based training. On the positive side of the 7-point Likert scale, 10% agreed and 3% strongly agreed which accounted for 68% of all total positive feedback. The remaining 32% fell in the median or negative categories. While not a landslide success, the results appear overall positive considering this demographic possesses a background of hands-on skills unrelated to administrative tasks that required the use of a computer to accomplish their daily tasks for the majority of their careers.
Course results and feedback from supervisors who attended the course were obtained using the Qualtrics survey tool. The evaluation of learner achievement and ID project success are described below.
Evaluation of Learner Achievement
Analysis of post-training survey results embedded in TSS learner evaluation questions revealed that 55% of the supervisors responded in a positive manner regarding the effectiveness of classroom based training. On the positive side of the 7-point Likert scale, 10% agreed and 3% strongly agreed which accounted for 68% of all total positive feedback. The remaining 32% fell in the median or negative categories. While not a landslide success, the results appear overall positive considering this demographic possesses a background of hands-on skills unrelated to administrative tasks that required the use of a computer to accomplish their daily tasks for the majority of their careers.
![Course Graduation](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/published/10-project-success.jpg?1512171211)
Evaluation of ID Project Success
The survey data revealed that the depot maintenance supervisors are overall uncomfortable with using computers to accomplish their daily tasks. Another consideration is the non-quantifiable, verbal feedback received from course attendees. This feedback ranged from appreciation to their leadership for providing this training opportunity, to those who think training documentation should be left to someone other than maintenance supervisors. While verbal feedback is valuable, organizational funding and employee time allocation should be based on data driven decisions. Therefore, it is recommended that the initial first year of semi-annual training continue with a follow-on refresher course offered once per year based on the post-course survey feedback.
Additionally, depot leadership may want to consider appointing a subject matter expert well versed in IT, computer skill, and TSS application to assist depot supervisors when they fall behind in employee task certification. This would also provide an added benefit of providing just-in-time teaching to supervisors who forget learned concepts between training sessions.
The survey data revealed that the depot maintenance supervisors are overall uncomfortable with using computers to accomplish their daily tasks. Another consideration is the non-quantifiable, verbal feedback received from course attendees. This feedback ranged from appreciation to their leadership for providing this training opportunity, to those who think training documentation should be left to someone other than maintenance supervisors. While verbal feedback is valuable, organizational funding and employee time allocation should be based on data driven decisions. Therefore, it is recommended that the initial first year of semi-annual training continue with a follow-on refresher course offered once per year based on the post-course survey feedback.
Additionally, depot leadership may want to consider appointing a subject matter expert well versed in IT, computer skill, and TSS application to assist depot supervisors when they fall behind in employee task certification. This would also provide an added benefit of providing just-in-time teaching to supervisors who forget learned concepts between training sessions.
Evaluation Report
The full document version of learner achievement and evaluation of ID project success can be viewed by downloading the document below:
The full document version of learner achievement and evaluation of ID project success can be viewed by downloading the document below:
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/rtf.png)
TSS Learner Eval and Summative Eval Report.docx | |
File Size: | 23 kb |
File Type: | docx |
![Bubble Sheet Image](/uploads/7/0/1/9/70199053/published/11-quiz.jpg?1512167030)
8. Assessment
Now that you've reviewed the content of this workshop, test your knowledge of the systematic ID design process:
Now that you've reviewed the content of this workshop, test your knowledge of the systematic ID design process:
Thank you for taking the time to review this workshop. If you have questions regarding it's content, please email me at: [email protected]
Reference
Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2016). The essentials of instructional design (3rd edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2016). The essentials of instructional design (3rd edition). New York, NY: Routledge.