The ISD Model . . . It Works!

I find that the Instructional Systems Design (ISD) model described by Reiser & Dempsey in the EDTC 6010 course text represents a very sound basis for facilitating the design, development and delivery of quality instruction. The model with its four phases, Analysis, Design, Development & Implementation, and Evaluation, is comprehensive in that it encompasses all of the activity required for effective instructional development. At the same time, it is also flexible enough to accommodate different learning theories and the instructional design activities arising out of them.

I find no fault with the ISD model because I believe it is based on the natural progression of activity that accompanies effective human problem-solving or innovation. In fact, the four phases, when undertaken in the order presented, have been shown to produce effective results in a variety of context: scientific research, computer software development, even home improvement projects (at least the way I do mine). In general terms we have:
> Analysis – what is the problem or issue to be addressed? What do we know about it? What do we need to know about it or what do we want to do? Who or what does it impact?
> Design: How should the issue be addressed? What is the plan of action?
> Development/Implementation: Experiment; code and test; hammer and paint. Produce and use.
> Evaluate: Does it work? How well? Does anything need to be tweaked?

I have employed all aspects of this model in my experience as a teacher, whether in planning an individual lesson or in laying out an entire semester (with the implementation and evaluation portion of the phases of the process occurring at a later point in time). As a computer systems analyst, I have used the model phases formally to execute and manage large projects; but I have also employed it informally to organize my activity on projects involving single program development or enhancement.

The ISD version of the generic model is no less effective when applied to the context of instructional activities. So, yes, you could say that I am a strong proponent of the ISD model. After all …it works!

My "Take" on How People Learn

It has been a long-standing belief of mine that there is no single answer to the question, how do people learn?. In fact, I am convinced that not only do individuals vary from one another in how they learn or acquire knowledge, but also that within a single individual there are often different learning paradigms that come into play based on the subject matter or the skills set that is being studied. In my own teaching I have incorporated a variety of techniques including traditional lecture, individualized instruction, gaming for drill and practice, guided discovery, etc. I am open to considering the methods being espoused by various learning theorists and borrowing, combining, adapting which ever techniques will best accommodate my students as well as serve my instructional objectives or goals.

When I consider the learning theories that have been presented, I am reminded of a story that has been told of three blind wise men who were charged with determining the true nature of an elephant. The first wise man, positioned at the head of the elephant, reached out and grabbed hold of its trunk. After a moment of tactile exploration, he declared that the elephant was like the trunk of a great tree. The second wise man, located behind the elephant, grabbed hold of its tail and declared that the elephant was more like a rope.
The third wise man, standing beside of the elephant explored its side and declared that it was like a great wall.

To me, the various learning theories are like the conclusions of the three blind, wise men.
Each theory focuses on some particular aspect(s) of learning, yet no one of them has the total picture. If I had to choose, I would be more comfortable with objectivism and cognitive learning theory. I believe that knowledge about the world in which we live exists independently of the learner. Mankind is uniquely equipped to pass this knowledge along to others in ways that make it unnecessary for each individual to learn everything by experiencing it. This is how we raise our young. This is how we transmit and sustain out culture. Mankind certainly would not have advanced as far as it has if each individual born into this world had to learn about that world by interpreting and constructing meaning based on individual experience.

But regardless of which theory one espouses, there is no reason that the instructional design techniques and methods based on one theory or another cannot be adopted and used by someone holding a different point of view about how learning really takes place.