Share which of the models you enjoyed the most and why, now that you’ve had the chance to learn about many design and development models in this unit and have noted their differences and similarities. Describe your preferences for each model, if you have more than one.
Comment with your analysis in the section below.
Robert Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction is a systematic instructional design model that provides a framework for creating effective learning experiences. Lessons can be engaging, effective, and well-structured to cater to different learning needs and styles.
I like that it gains the student’s attention by presenting a question or using multimedia. Students are informed of their learning targets and understand what they need to achieve. The model connects new information to what learners already know which helps with retention. Information is structured in a sequence that is clear which will aid in comprehension. Students are expected to practice the skills through exercises, activities and/or simulations with timely and constructive feedback. The assessments in the model allow instructors to gauge student understanding and adjust instruction if necessary. Lastly the model encourages students to transfer strategies to real-world situations which enhances long-term retention skills.
I also like Bloom’s Taxonomy, which is a hierarchical framework that classifies educational objectives into six levels of cognitive complexity. I appreciate that the model sets the tone with clear learning objectives representing a different cognitive skill. The skill development is characterized by lower-order thinking skills to higher-order thinking skills which some students have the most difficulty with. Such skills are: analytical thinking, synthesis and evaluation. The design allows educators to build on the cognitive complexity and assessments with learning objectives to provide a more accurate understanding and application of the lesson goals. Bloom’s Taxonomy can be adaptable to various subjects, levels and promotes critical thinking skills. Lessons can be differentiated and with the support of focusing on higher-order thinking tasks, it will encourage students to use such skills for real-world experiences.
Share which of the models you enjoyed the most and why, now that you’ve had the chance to learn about many design and development models in this unit and have noted their differences and similarities. Describe your preferences for each model, if you have more than one.
Instructional design and development as “the theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management, and evaluation of processes and resources for learning” (Reiser, 2002, p1). There are more than 34 design models listed on the Survey. Some of the models I enjoyed the most are ADDIE, Merrill’s First Principals of Instruction, the 5E model.
I like the ADDIE process, a learning development model for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation. ADDIE integrates the evaluation of learners’ needs, design and development of training materials. It is the foundation of all processes and can be used alongside other Instructional design options.
The 5E model, based on Constructivist theory of learning, is a carefully planned inquiry based sequence of instruction, Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate. It places students at the center of learning.
Merrill’s First Principals of Instruction is problem centered based on 5 principals with 3 levels of progression: Show task, Task Level, Problem progression
Principal 1- Problem Centered
Principal 2 – Activation
Principal 3 – Demonstration
Principal 4 – Application
Principal 5 – Integration
It is where existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge that is demonstrated then applied and integrated into learners real-world,
Evaluating a design model Choosing or designing the proper and most effective design model is a daunting task that must be executed using your computational thinking skills.
After reading all the models the ones I enjoyed the most are the 5es and backward design. I love the fact the the 5es not only engages the students in the matrials but it also boosts their critical thinking skills. I think that the backboard design is supper cool because it helps instructors to understand what the students really need to learn.
I liked the Backwards Framework since I thought it was a different and possibly effective way of planning and organizing to meet objectives. This is something that I do most of the time since I must work with the goals provided on the IEP to achieve them and that helps shape my instruction.
I also liked the Dick and Carey model since I saw it align somewhat to what we do in therapy or when working with students that are at risk for Speech and Language delays. You must, assess and plan instruction, teach and then reasses.
I feel familiar and comfortable with the Triple E Framework and 5 E model since we learned about them in 226 and I saw how well they can be used to create engaging and effective lessons. I really liked the criteria utilized to evaluate resources and lessons.
I find the backwards design model is the most effective way we can plan in our lessons and unit. When lesson planning, it is important to consider the question, “what is it that I want the students to learn at the end of this unit?” That means you’re already starting off with the expectation. Once you have your end goal in place, you are then able to think about what steps are needed for the student to successfully learn this at the end of this unit. Those topics then become your lesson focuses. This part of the backwards design model allows for exploration of ideas and supports that students might need in order to become successful in their learning.
Bloom’s taxonomy is a way to organize our questioning and move students through the process of learning. When I started teaching this was the guide to achieve learning objectives. I will continue using this model to guide my questioning to allow students the opportunity to achieve higher order thinking. As I continue my own learning, I would like to try using the backward design model and 5 E. Using the backward design to identify the learning outcomes and working backward to identify materials and technology students can use to achieve that objective will help me plan for what students need to learn and what they will use to achieve the goal. This will increase my students knowledge of skills and concepts. At the same time 5 E seems powerful. Having students working collaboratively to observe, investigate, analyze and draw conclusions, while I act as a facilitator, can help students dig into content and use their own creativity.
The model I like the most is 5E. It is something I am familiar with when I taught departmentalized math since the program we were using at the time incorporated 5E to teach each lesson. In my school administrators want students to construct knowledge and meaning from experiences. They also want students to learn by posing, investigating and answering questions.
The Backward Design and 5E models are my favorite. I think I was taught to design instruction using both of these models, I just didn’t have the language to explain my process at the time.
It just seems intuitive for me to think about what I want students to be able to do and how they can demonstrate their learning first. Then, I use 5E to make sure that the lesson is engaging and that students understand what they are doing so that they can apply that newfound knowledge.
I think backwards design would be one that I am interested in. Since my learning targets are structured as goals that will be met by the end if class why not structure the lesson from a goal detect barriers that would get in the way so i can focus the the deliverance , differsnation, digital tools, ect that I will need to meet that learning target. 5E is student centered and is used alot in the classrooms but I feel trying new stargties in the classroom will also help us think on demand for students when we need to accommodate/ strategize.
After reviewing the many different models, I realized that I would be interested in trying out backward design, because I like the idea of thinking about the end goal first and breaking down the different parts needed to achieve that goal. As well as the assessments that can be used to measure whether or not they have met the desired outcome.
Nonetheless I still prefer the 5E framework because it is more student centered and provokes students to critical think and drive the instruction. It allows for activation of prior knowledge and evaluation to get to the goal. It is also more of a sequential process, which can be helpful during the planning process of a lesson.
kattie, I agree! Backwards design is like using Computational thinking. I feel it would be a good strategy to try in the classroom .
There are so many different models out there.. I had no idea and I am part of continuous professional development through CSForAll. After looking at many of them, I still fall back on the ones I rely on. Backwards Design and 5E that I learned about in EDU 226 are more favorites. 5E is student centered which is great. My school also focuses on backwards design so it falls into place with our current philosophies. You can make real world connections and attempt to solve real world problems. It leaves room for creativity and taking chances. These methods also allow me to plan for units and stations within that focus on a variety of learning targets and skills.
I am amazed at all of the different models. After reviewing and getting some basic understanding I truly have a preference for the 5E, Backward Design, and Design Thinking Models. These are the models I am most familiar with and I agree with Vanessa, that 5E is the most student centered model. Each stage is always ties to the what the students will experience on their way to master of the learning goal. The model is flexible enough to use over several lessons/activities. I appreciate how Backward Designs asks your to first look at what are your learning goals for the students and then reflect on the process. Design thinking is strongly tied to my engineering curriculum.
I like backward design as well, I feel if we structured our learning targets as learned goals it can help us stargetize more when we are lesson planning.
I agree 5E is very flexible to be used with a variety or lessons/activities.
After reading about all the instructional design models. I prefer the 5E. I like the 5E because it is very student centered. Students are able to explore and test their own ideas. Then they can apply what they have learned in the Elaboration phase. It also integrates group work which is very engaging and helps students get ready for the future. In addition, GAGNE’s Nine Events is something that I am very familiar with. I often follow these steps when I do my lessons. I think engaging students and activation their prior knowledge are powerful steps in any lesson. Although, both are great instructional models. I believe the 5E is better because it is more student centered. My goal is to create a Flipped Classroom with lessons using the 5E instructional model.
I also prefer the 5E model as well because of that same reason, it is more student driven.
Now that I have learned more about instructional models I find that I like ADDIE and the 5E model the most. They both share similarities with the Video Game Animation process of brainstorming, designing a prototype, developing a working model, play testing and troubleshooting as well as giving Feedback . ADDIE involves Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation, whereas the 5E Model incorporates and emphasizes student inquiry base and active participation by encouraging them to engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate.
I like two models: Merrill’s Instructional Design Principles of Instruction and Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. Merrill’s is one I would consider because it places a strong emphasis on the learner, focusing on their needs, interests, and goals. It also lends to real world experiences in and outside of the classroom. This can help ensure that your instructional materials are relevant, engaging, and effective. I also like Gagne’s because it provides a systematic approach to designing instruction that can help ensure that I cover all the steps to create effective instruction and engage students. It can also be adapted to different instructional modes, including traditional classroom-based instruction, e-learning, and blended learning.
When I first started looking at the models, I thought I liked many of them or felt good about them. The model that I enjoyed the most at first was the Merrill’s Instructional Design Principles of instruction. I really liked how this ID is structured. I love structure. Merrill’s design has 5 principles.
“Learners are engaged in solving real-world problems. Existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge. New knowledge is demonstrated to the learner. New knowledge is applied by the learner. New knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world.”
However, I also liked Rapid Prototyping design also. With Rapid Prototyping, it is “a non-linear approach that produces a sample working model that is a scaled-down representative version of the whole course.” I love this idea. It means that you come up with a quick draft of an idea, you discuss it with the stakeholders then you revise and come up with a new workable solution. I love it. There isn’t time wasted on things that don’t meet the needs of the lesson. There is reflection in the beginning so that things are what they should be.
These 2 principles are how I would like to create and/or implement lessons in my classroom. I think it is important to try to find an efficient way to create engaging lessons for students.