There is nowadays a lot of interest in the field of Instructional Design. The focus is still on theories and methodology of Instructional System Design (ISD), which are the fundamentals of the field and are absolutely important for its application. However, most professionals are involved in the daily practice of instructional design (ID). The practice of instructional design has a slightly different approach, which tend not to follow strictly the linearity of many ID Models that have been created over the past thirty years. Success in applying the ID methodology lies on a systemic validation and revision of all phases performed along the process of developing instruction. Another element to be considered in the practice of ID, aiming effectiveness and high quality results, is the synergy of all components and the team, which will be acquired by fully knowledge of the process by all.
There are many ID models explained on books, many of them have their origin on the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) model. Most of them are linear, some follow a time-line graph format, which idealized the process, others also include a component of revision, which will happen in many steps of the process in a “one-way” format, and there are also those that are either too vague or too detailed to the point of being repetitive.
The model presented on this paper and applied at FGV-EAESP projects was developed by
Dr. William Coscarelli, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction from Southern Illinois
University at Carbondale. Professor Coscarelli uses the model on his “Systematic Approaches
to Instruction” class [
Needs Assessment: it will be determined what need to be done. It is a process for
determining goals, identifying discrepancies between goals and status quo and
establishing priorities for action [
At what levels are the students’ current knowledge and skills in the subject matter area? What background experiences do the students have I the subject matter area? Are the students likely to have any major misconceptions in the subject matter area? 2. What are the students’ attitudes?
What are the general attitudes of the students toward the instructional content are there any subtopics within the content toward which students are likely to feel very positive or very negative? 3. At what levels is the students’ language?
What is the language level of the students? What preferences for style of language (e.g. conversational or formal) do the students have? 4. What tool skills do they possess? Do the students have any sensory-perceptual deficiencies that will require special attention?
Can the students handle the instructional materials and equipment?
Hierarchical Task Analysis: it will be identified what learners have to know to
complete accomplish the task. The hierarchical approach is used to analyze goals that
are classified as intellectual or psychomotor skills [
Objective: the specific learning objectives are defined. The objective has the purpose of
informing what the student will be able to do when finishing the task. The ABCD
format developed by the University Consortium of Instructional Development and
Technology [
A. Who will do the task? B. What is the observable, measurable, and thus clearly defined performance? C. What level of learning, materials, instructions, environment, time, or other constraints will be imposed on the learner’s performance?
D. What is the standard of performance, e.g., quantity, accuracy, or reference?
Information Processing Analysis (IPA): step in which the sequence of elementary
operations used to solve any problem of a given task will be defined. The IPA has three
components: operators, discriminators, syntactic structure [
Learning Task Analysis: learning tasks that can be described by two types, tasks that
student must memorize or remember and tasks that are to be used or applied will be
identified. Robert Gagné [
Tactics: instructional strategies are defined. They describe the general components of a
set of instructional materials and the procedures that will be used with those materials to
elicit particular learning outcomes from students. [
Criterion Referenced Test: test items will be developed aiming appropriate testing
strategies that will connect learning objectives with content learned. The
criterionreferenced test will measure a person’s competence against a given standard. The
testing includes pre and post-tests [
Formative Evaluation: information is gathered on the adequacy of the instructional program and then the information is used as a basis for further development and adjustments.
Analyze & Revise: the most important procedure during the whole process of analysis, design, development and implementation. Revisions and new analysis are constant and do not follow revisions and new analyses are constant and do not follow any linearity during de process.
Although the model is characterized by a linear process, it also allows greater flexibility in the management and order of the design activities. The linearity is broken by two factors. First, the daily working process is performed by a team composed by members from a diverse educational background who have share rich working experience. In the initial meeting, an instructional designer, a SME’s, a programmer, a web designer were present in order to analyze and discuss the project, the learner, the content, and the delivery strategies. The second and most important factor is the process and practice of constant revision and analysis. The design and the development started and during those concurrent phases the outcomes are validated and analyzed again. The model allows for a systemic looping for revision and analysis of all phases, because the phases are inter-related from the beginning through the end of the process by the arrows, which are represented in a “two-way” format. Moreover, the three first analyses (context, learner, and hierarchical) are not placed strictly in a linear format, they are also inter-connected and offer flexibility in terms of depth and time, to internal changes during the revisions.
Instructional theory is composed by extensive and distinct facts and principles from different
theories. According to Seels and Glasgow [
Another difference between theory and practice is on the order of events. When analyzing
and applying an instructional design method, the tendency is to follow each phase linearly as
if there would have a beginning, a middle and an end of the process. According to Sara
McNeil [
The process of module development of the PGL is divided in three main aspects that are
interrelated in order to attend all the content development needs. The three aspects are
instructional design, subject matter/content expertise, and production/technology. The PGL
Model has four components, the component “evaluate” is surrounded by “analyze”, “design”,
and “develop”, which are connected by “two-way arrows” to indicate a systemic revision of
the phases. Similarities are present in both models, mostly what concerns revision and
evaluation. The training provided by the PGL program for the local school instructors
involved in the project has been considered of great importance by the coordination of the
program at FGV-EAESP. Due to the fact that every team member was already familiar with
the methodology, the process of analysis worked smoothly. Each school sent to FGV-EAESP
a proposal and from that point, a process of systemic validation and revision of the phases
started to take place. The results of those revisions have shown that the outcomes were very
positive. The schools have also evaluated students individually and have filmed students
sitting in front of the computer learning the content developed by the PGL Program. There are
two components of the Coscarelli [
Demystifying ID: it is of great relevance for the project to work that every single team
member understands what instructional design is and identify his/her participation and the
importance of his/her contribution in each one of the phases. The demystification starts by
defining ID and explaining how it works. The definition has to be of easy understanding such
as “instructional Design is the systematic process of translating general principles of learning
and instruction into plans for instructional materials and learning.” [
SME’s Guide: the following instructions have been adapted from a guide that the instructional design team has developed for the instructors involved in the self-instructed course development from FGV-EAESP: 1) General Recommendations: The self-instructed on-line course should have content with the following characteristics: detailed, objective, and content divided into “chunks”. This format has the purpose of facilitating student’s understanding because no interaction between student and instructor will take place. Important: each concept or topic has to be followed by an example and reinforcement exercise. Writing objectives: a course should have two types of objectives – general and specific. The general objective or goal has the purpose of informing the learner of the overall course’s intent. Example: “the course’s objective is to expand participant’s knowledge about the evolution of recent concepts about the creation and maintenance of brands and to describe the process of developing brands.” Specific learning objectives, also known as final objectives, have the purpose of informing what the learner will be able to do after accomplishing the module. Example: “at the end of this module you will be able to define the concept of branding and identify the attributes of brand equity.” Evaluation exercises: there are two types of exercises, the first is the reinforcement exercise and the second is the test item for the final evaluation. The reinforcement exercise comes right after the topic’s explanation. The test items for the post-test (final evaluation) will be placed at the end of the module or course. Types of testing items: true/false items; matching items; multiple-choice items (with multiple answers or single answer); and fill in items. The format suggested is flexible. The ID team is available to answer questions and help during content development. 2) Course Presentation: Write an introduction summarizing the main points of the course.
Write general learning objectives. 3) Course Content:
Divide content into 6, 9, or 12 modules e define a title for each module. 4) Modules Divide modules into topics. Write specific/final learning objectives for each module. Write short and straight to the point paragraphs that will be followed by an example and illustration when applicable. Include reference material: glossary, images, articles, complete bibliography, cases, examples, literary fragments, national and international websites (URLS). Write reinforcement exercises (see guidelines above). Write positive feedback for correct and incorrect answers. Write a summary at the end of the module according to the final objectives. Example of a simple flowchart to help content structuring (Figure 2).
Bloom Taxonomy: is being currently used at FGV-EAESP as a reference to write learning objectives. The Bloom Taxonomy, also known as the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, is a classification system that classifies learning outcomes into three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The cognitive domain presented here describes the thought processes that constitute various intellectual abilities [12]. The five classes of the Bloom Taxonomy are presented in a pyramid format in order to illustrate that to reach the top, skills from a lower level have to be accomplished first (Figure3).
The Classification Table has the purpose of allowing instructors and educators to communicate with more precision, goals and outcomes to their students. Moreover, it allows instructors to write learning objectives that are more consistent with instructional goals, design learning activities, and develop evaluation items according to the objectives. The first column of the table illustrates each major classification and its subordinated skills. The second column shows the process to accomplish the skill and the third column possible outcomes as a result of the learning process (Table1).
Constant Validation: the process of validation and revision starts by building trust among instructional designer, SME (instructor) and TA. Sometimes SME’s feel vulnerable because through the process of design his content and maybe his lack of full-understanding of the process will be exposed. An instructor when teaching a face-to-face class may use his body movement and spontaneous examples to explain a concept, which will not happen when he develops activities and explanations for a web-based instruction or self-instructed course. The channel of communication must be open and sincere in order to have a trusting relationship. After building trust, the validation will take place smoothly. It will happen during all the phases of the instructional design process.
The practice of instructional design in the PGL program and self-instructed courses has revealed the importance of a blended and flexible design. The ID model presented in this paper works as a reference and a guideline for the application of the ID methodology due to its two main characteristics: practice-oriented and its systemic loops for analysis and revision. Moreover, the successful outcomes are results of well-integrated team members working and valuing revisions in order to constantly improve all the phases that were accomplished along the process. Such intense validation was performed because team members have been welloriented about the ID process through workshops, well-designed guidelines, reference material such as Bloom’s Taxonomy, and by the use of ID models that are directed toward a systemic process of revision and analysis. Finally, courses and modules that have been developed through a systematic and systemic approach of instructional design have shown to be more effective, which for sure will be the bases for the design of content aiming to ensure the common standards of learning objects. [12] Bloom, B. S., et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain, New
York:Longman. 1956.
Fundamentals of Branding Concept Module 2 Branding Identity
Design and Dev. of Brands
Brand Equity
Brand Score Card
modules) ** Module: each one is divided into topics
Knowledge: memorize and recall facts, principles, terminology, etc.
• Knowledge of facts and specific terminology. • Knowledge of trends and sequences. • Knowledge of classifications and categories. • Knowledge of criteria. • Knowledge of methodology. • Knowledge of the universals and abstractions in a field (principles, generalizations, theories, and structures). Comprehension: it implies elementary use of knowledge items such as: • Translation (paraphrase, retelling, language translation). • Interpretation (summarization). • Extrapolation (extending information for inferring or predicting) Application: in order to apply knowledge, one must know it first (Level 1) and comprehend (level 2).
• •
Abstraction of knowledge in form of rules and generalizations.
Application and use of abstractions in various concrete or abstract learning situations.
Process to recognize to repeat to identify to label to name to order to collect to list to arrange to match to memorize to translate to interpret to explain to describe to report to tell to indicate to restate to review to apply to resolve to demonstrate to prepare to build to dramatize to make to illustrate to calculate to complete to practice to modify to change to classify to solve
Outcomes labels names facts definitions concepts translation argument explanation description story indication diagram illustration collection map game or puzzle model report photography lesson
Analysis: entails breaking a whole idea down into its component parts, analyzing the elements of an idea, the relationship between those elements or the organizational principles on which that idea is based , i.e., the structure of the idea.
Analysis of elements.
Analysis of relationships
Analysis of organizational principles Synthesis: Knowledge that has been broken down into its component parts can be reassembled to form a new whole (if the ideas are reassembled to produce the same idea, it is only analysis behavior). A new operational plan or set of relationships derived from the old implies synthesis level performance.
Production of a unique communication. Production of a plan or proposed set of operations.
Derivation of a set of abstract relations. Process to analyze to connect to relate to distinguish to classify differentiate to structure to diagram to interpret to criticize to categorize to remove to compare to dissect to investigate to explain to select to test to project to construct to consolidate to aggregate to compose to formulate a hypothesis to arrange to imagine to invent to create to infer to produce to integrate to modify to substitute to plan to prepare to generalize to write
Evaluation: it is the highest-level cognitive behavior and presupposes the completion of all lower-level tasks on a body of knowledge, that is, one cannot evaluate an idea unless one is able to comprehend, apply, analyze, and synthesize.that idea..
• •
Judgements in terms of internal evidence (logical accuracy and consistency) Judgement in terms of external criteria (commonly accepted measures or references) Process to appraise to argue to judge to criticize to select to decide to select to predict to evaluate to measure to discriminate to recommend to persuade to compare to rate to support to assess to estimate