EDU561 Instructional

Design Assignment #1

By Adrienne Leiber

What is Instructional Design?

Instruction is the intentional facilitation of learning toward identified learning goals. (Smith & Ragan, 1999) The

following models are best ranked according to my own personal teaching style and training I have received. Based on my teaching/training the order is from most applicable

to least applicable.

9 Instructional Design Models Best Comparison to My Current Teaching Style

1. Model 3 -- Robert Gagné's Nine Steps of Instruction

6. Model 5—Merrill’s Component Display Theory

2. Model 4 -- John Keller's ARCS Model of Motivational Design

7. Model 7 -- van Merriënboer's 4C/ID Model and Instructional Design

3. Model 8 -- Rapid Instructional Design (RID)

8. Model 1 – ASSURE Model

4. Model 9 -- Combined Instructional Design Model

9. Model 2—ADDIE Model

5.  Model 6 -- Reigeluth's Elaboration Theory for Instructional Design

Model 3 -- Robert Gagné's Nine Steps of Instruction

• I ranked this model first because, I feel in my classroom this model best suits my teaching style. We have our own lesson deign template that we are to follow in our elementary building. The steps listed below are very similar to those we have chosen to follow. Everything is about chunking our time and keeping the flow of the lesson going forward.

• Steps include gain attention, inform learner of objective, stimulate recall of prior knowledge, present the material, provide guidance for learning, elicit performance, provide feedback, assess performance, and enhance retention and transfer.

Model 4 -- John Keller's ARCS Model of Motivational Design

• Attention can be gained in two ways: perceptual arousal and inquiry arousal.

• I ranked this model 2nd because I think that I make use of several of the methods laid out to grab the students attention such as humor, specific examples, and inquiry. This is normally the introduction to my lesson. These things are also used throughout the lesson to get my students back on tasks or draw their attention from daydreaming.

• In my unit design I would like to incorporate incongruity and conflict, because I think that the students would realize the facts were not correct and tell me how they should be. Showing me what they have already learned or retained from my lessons.

Model 8 -- Rapid Instructional Design (RID)

• I chose this model to be 3rd because it is similar to model 3. The steps are just condensed more and the only major difference is that there is not an assessment. Again this model chunks time and continues the lesson with good flow. This would apply to a short lesson that doesn’t necessarily need a formal assessment such as an experiment. You can evaluate based on observation.

• Phases include preparation, presentation, practice, and performance.

Model 9 -- Combined Instructional Design Model

• This model is ranked 4th for the reason that in this model we are again chunking the information or a lesson and sequencing the information so that the students are able to build from prior experiences. Next we would build interest in the topic this could be the short video that we use from www.brainpopjr.com to introduce a unit. To organize objectives I would use a KWL chart to see what my students already know and what they are eager to learn about. I can use this to plan my lessons so that I am not teaching a level they have already learned about. This would make my students depth of the topic deeper.

Model 6 -- Reigeluth's Elaboration Theory for Instructional Design

• I ranked this model 5th since this model still involves information chunking or being epitomized. I did find it hard to relate my own classroom experiences/style to this model. It seemed to me to be very complex or it was worded so that it made it hard for me to see myself using it with 2nd graders. I do believe that I am teaching my students to synthesize ideas so that they have a deeper understanding of the lesson and are able to retain more.

• There are 7 steps to this model sequencing, organize, summarization, synthesize, analogy, cognitive-strategy activator, and learner control.

Model 5 -- Merrill's Component Display Theory

• This model is made up of 3 parts content/performance dimension comprised of the desired level of student performance and type of content, four primary presentations, and a set of prescriptions relating the level of performance and type of content to the presentations forms.

• Since it is designed to work with Model 6 Reigeltuh’s Theory I ranked it 6th just behind it. I feel that I do use the two dimensions of content and performance just not quiet as they set forth. I use procedures often in my classroom to help accomplish goals or problems. I also use remembering or recalling from memory a particular piece of information.

• Overall, I feel this model does not quite fit my classroom or myself.

Model 7 -- van Merriënboer's 4C/ID Model and Instructional Design

• There are four components to this model and they are learning tasks, supportive information, JIT information, and part-task performance.

• I currently do not utilize typical learning technologies for task support: Simulated/real task environments and development portfolios. However, I am looking to include simulations into my unit design.

• A lower ranking was needed as I do not incorporate this whole model, but I do believe that I apply the component part-task practice which is based on strengthening. I exercise repetition and drill for learning facts in math or in spelling/phonics.

Model 1 – ASSURE Model

• The steps of this model include analyze, state obj., select methods and media materials, utilize media and materials, require learner participation, and evaluate and revise.

• I placed this model second to last as I think that we are trying in my grade level to modify existing materials and prepare our environments to better teach our students, but we are not there yet. We are struggling with limited time with technology /the knowledge of the right tools to use.

• We also currently do not systematically plan our lessons so that they efficiently integrate the use of technology and media in our classrooms.

Model 2—ADDIE Model

• There are five phases analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation.

• I chose to rank this model last as I do not feel that this model currently demonstrates where I am at in my teaching career/style. I am just now getting into using technology to support the lessons that I teach daily. I am not to the point of fully committing to design all lessons around technology. Although I will continue to work toward more integration of educational technology in my classroom.

Model Comparison

Model 3

• Models 3, 4, and 9 give the best representation of my teaching style/training. I am really rely on chunking my lessons into no more than 15 minute intervals so that I am able to keep the attention of my second grade class. In science this simple to do because we usually only have a 30 minute block for the day. I introduce the topic/lesson then they have their group work for the last section. If attention is lost or I need something to grab their attention from the get go Model 4 comes into play. I like to use humor, it relates well with my age group of kiddos. Model 4 does not have the layout for a lesson only getting the lesson started. So I would use Model 3 to present material and provide guidance for learning. I need to step back from teacher-directed during my unit plan and let the students direct more.

Model 4 Model 8

Model Comparison

Model 3 Model 4 Model 8

Model 8 ties into my unit plan of Sound by giving them the opportunities for hands-on trials and the use of journaling in their lab books to provide individual reflection on articulation. Model 8 does not give a form of analyzing or evaluating so I would rather pull the assessment from Model 9. Here the students are being provided a specific feedback for their responses. I need to assess performances more in science as a whole subject. I could make my own assessments based on class experiments/lab book data and quiz them at the end of the unit.

References

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional Design. New York City: Wiley & Sons, INC.