Second Model Status Report

Training Model Designed for A Guarantee Company

Orientation: Presciptive.
My training model is a prescriptive model. It describes how to carry out analysis, how to identify training objectives, how to design and implement the training and how to conduct evaluation, the non-training interventions are considered as well. In general, the model outlines how the training/learning environment should be constructed and developed in order to achieve desired outcomes (Employees engage in their work/develop related competency/perform appropriately / increase of e working efficiency).

Knowledge structure: hProcedural
It is important to determine the type of tasks the model is intended to support: either procedural (how to reach a goal), or declarative (why we reach a goal) (Edmonds, Branch and Mukherjee, 1994). There are three major tasks for this model: explain company’s policies to the novice employees, regulate employees’ business performance, and help them develop professional competencies. The training focuses on training employees how to achieve desired learning objectives, so it should be a procedural model.

Expertise Level: Novice
This is a model appropriate for the novice instructional designers. The training model consists of three major parts: how to design and provide efficient and effective internal training, how to help employees select the most appropriate external training course, and how to develop non-training interventions. The model explains in detail on how to perform in different parts.

Structure:Novice/System-Based
As I have mentioned above, this model is appropriate for the novice instructional designer. Moreover, the model draws from the ADDIE model, and provides detailed step-by-step guidelines for the systematic design of instruction.

Context: business context
This training model is intended to be applied in a new guarantee company, so it is a business training model.

Level: unit-level
Considering the number of the participants is not big, and the training topics and tasks are specified, the training will be applied upon the unit-level.

Class Reflections and Model Update

Romi advocates a systemic approach in his book to the development of the instruction. Being systemic implies taking into consideration all the factors that may be contributing to a particular situation. A systemic view attempts to see how the decisions are influenced by, and also influence the related “macro-level” decisions that are taken at a more general level, and also resultant “micro-level” decisions that have to be taken in order to implement whatever we deicide.

I’m very interested in Molenda, Pershing & Eeigeluth’s “Program Design and Development-chapter 13” in the module 7, because their ISD model and my ID model have the similar concentration -- that is the business system. They mentioned that “the changing business environment forced instructional designers begin to focus on the business impact of their work, and caused them to expand that boundaries of their models to incorporate features of the larger environment that affect and are affected by instruction”. “For training to be transferred and applied to the workplace it must be accompanied by changes in the work place, such as job redesign, incentive systems, supervisor support and new tools…Non-training interventions, such as job aids, self-directed work teams have to be developed along with training interventions…”

This chapter makes me consider how to use the systemic approach to develop my ID model. Here is my updated model.

Choose an ID Model

To choose an appropriate ID model for a given situation, I think I will consider the following factors:
1. The context of the model, whether the context is K-12; higher education; business or government.
2. The type of tasks/knowledge, procedural (knowing how) or declarative (knowing that), the model in intended to support. Procedural model tends to focus on short sequences, practice with correct feedback, criterion-referenced evaluation, etc., while the declarative model tends to emphasize discovery-type instruction, norm-referenced evaluation, etc. Determine the knowledge that the model is going to serve can help me create more effective ID model.
3. Required Expertise. The competency of the practitioner who attempts to apply and/or develop my ID model needs to be considered. The model provide step-by-step description of the process of designing instruction which would be more useful for a novice or inexperienced practitioner to employ, while the model provides broad heuristics which might be more appropriate for an expert practitioner.
4. Level. The level of the instruction should be well considered. Depending on the size of the target population, the instruction level can be: module, lesson, course, institutional and mass.
5. The five phases of ADDIE model —Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. These five phases will become the guideline for me to build my ID model.

I don’t think I will choose one specific model that I have leant for the particular situation; instead, I think will take appropriate pieces from different models in order to fit the situation.

The Edmonds, Branch and Mukherjee’s article

The Edmonds, Branch and Mukherjee’s article:

Type of Orientation: Descriptive and Prescriptive
Descriptive models describe a given learning environment and speculate how the variables of interest will be affected in such an environment. Prescriptive models outline how a learning environment can be altered or constructed in order to affect the variables of interest in a certain way or bring about the desired outcome (Reigeluth, 1983; Landa, 1983).

Type of Knowledge: Procedural or Declarative
Procedural theories tend to focus on examples, non-examples, short sequences, lower verbal load materials, practice with correct feedback, and criterion-referenced evaluation.Declarative models tend to emphasize analogies, discovery-type instruction, and norm-referenced evolution.

Required Expertise: Novice, Intermediate or Expert.
ID models vary in the amount of expertise required by individuals to apply the model. Some models (e.g. Dick and Carey model, 1990) provide algorithmic steps and procedures which are appropriate for novice instructional designers while other models (e.g. Wedman and Tessmer’s Layer of Necessity model, 1991) provide only broad heuristics as reference points and rely more on experience and prior knowledge, which are more suitable for an expert instructional designer.

Theoretical Origions: Hard system, Soft Systems or Intuition.
Hard systems identify problem and seek solutions to rectify those problems (Checkland, 1985b).Soft System models produced within the “hard” tradition not as “models of ‘X’ but only as models of the logic of ‘X’” (Checkland, 1985a, p.765)

Context:
K-12; Higher Education; Business, Government.

Level: Unit; Module; Lesson; Course; Institutional; Mass.

These pieces of knowledge facilitate my understanding of various ID models, and give me some good points on modifying my own model.

Andrews and Goodson's article

Andrews and Goodson's article: A comparative Analysis of Models of Instructional Design

Systematic approach in the design of instruction is a problem-solving process, which requires the identification of instructional problems or needs and corresponding solutions by means of effective and efficient teaching-learning activities based on relevant objectives (Waldron, 1973, p.2)

The requirement for the model: to prescribe the sequence of events and functions for the tasks that lead to effective instruction.

Proposes of instructional design models:

1. Improving learning and instruction by the problem-solving and feedback characteristics of the systematic approach.

2. Improving management of instructional design and development by the monitoring and control functions of the systematic approach.

3. Improving evaluation processes by the designated components and sequence of events.

4. Testing or building learning or instructional theory b theory-based design within a model of systematic instructional design.

Two ID model categorizations are presented:

First schema describes the tasks in ID model development: 1. Outcomes, 2. Tests, 3. Analysis, 4. Sequence, 5. Leaner attributes, 6. Strategy, 7. Media, 8. Development, 9. Tryout/revision, 10. Install/maintain, 11. Need, 12. Alternatives, 13. Constraints, 14. Cost.

Second schema categorizes the instructional design models by origin, theoretical underpinnings, purposes and uses, and documentation. People should not only select the most appropriate model for given purposes and uses but also identify at least the general type of theory basis for a given model.