![\"Figure](\"https:\/\/openstudio.pub\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2014\/09\/ADDIE-infographic-1024x830.jpg\")
<\/a> Figure 4.3.1 The ADDIE model.\u00a9 Flexible Learning Australia, 2014[\/caption]\n\nThere have been many books written about the ADDIE model (see for instance, Morrison,
<\/a> Figure 4.3.1 The ADDIE model.Morrison, Gary R. (2010) Designing Effective Instruction<\/em>, 6th Edition<\/em><\/a>\u00a0New York: John Wiley & Sons<\/p>\n\n 1. Take a course you are currently offering. How many of the stages of the ADDIE model did you go through? If you missed out on some of the stages, do you think the course would have been better if you had included these stages? Given the amount of work needed to work through each of the stages, do you think\u00a0the results would be worth the effort?<\/p>\n 2. If you are thinking of designing a new course, use the Flexible Learning Australia infographic to work through the four steps of analysis they recommend. Was this helpful? If so, you might want to continue with the other recommended steps.<\/p>\n 3. If you have previously used the ADDIE model, are you happy with it? Do you agree with my criticisms? Is it flexible enough for the context in which you are working?<\/p>\n I do not provide feedback on these questions as they are for you to think about based on your own experience.<\/p>\n\n<\/div>","rendered":" <\/p>\n There have been many books written about the ADDIE model (see for instance, Morrison, 2010<\/a>; Dick and Carey, 2004<\/a>). I give here just a very brief introduction.<\/p>\n ADDIE stands for:<\/p>\n This is a\u00a0design model\u00a0used by many professional instructional designers for\u00a0technology-based teaching. ADDIE has been almost a standard for professionally developed, high quality distance education programs, whether print-based or online. It is also heavily used in corporate e-learning and training. There are many variations on this model (my favourite is ‘PADDIE’, where planning and\/or preparation are added at the start). The model\u00a0is mainly applied on an iterative basis, with evaluation leading to re-analysis and further design and development modifications. One reason for the widespread use of the ADDIE model is that it is extremely valuable\u00a0for large and complex teaching designs. ADDIE’s roots go back to the Second World War and derive from system design, which was developed to manage the hugely complex Normandy landings.<\/p>\n Many open universities, such as the U.K. Open University\u00a0and\u00a0the OU of the Netherlands, Athabasca University and Thompson Rivers Open University in Canada, still\u00a0 make\u00a0heavy\u00a0use of ADDIE to manage the design of complex multi-media distance education courses. When the U.K. OU\u00a0opened in 1971 with an initial intake of 20,000, it used radio, television,\u00a0specially designed printed modules, text books, reproduced research articles in the form of selected readings that were mailed to students, and regional study groups, with teams of often 20 academics, media producers and technology support staff developing courses, and with delivery and learner support provided\u00a0by an army of regional tutors and senior counsellors. Creating and delivering its first courses within two years of receiving its charter would have been impossible\u00a0without a systematic instructional design model, and in 2014, with over 200,000 students, the OU was still using the ADDIE approach for many of its courses.<\/p>\n Although ADDIE and instructional design in general originated in the USA, the U.K. Open University’s success in developing high quality learning materials influenced\u00a0many more institutions that were offering distance education on a much smaller scale to adopt the ADDIE model, if in a more modest way, typically with a single instructor working with an instructional designer. As distance education courses became increasingly developed as online courses, the ADDIE model continued, and is now being used by instructional designers in many institutions\u00a0for the re-design of large lecture classes, hybrid learning, and\u00a0for fully online courses.<\/span><\/p>\n One reason it has been so successful is that it is heavily associated with good quality design, with clear learning objectives, carefully structured content, controlled workloads for faculty and students, integrated media, relevant student activities, and assessment strongly tied to desired learning outcomes. Although\u00a0these good design principles can be applied with or without the ADDIE model, ADDIE\u00a0is a model that allows these design principles to be identified and implemented on a systematic and thorough basis. It is also a very useful management tool, allowing for the design and development of large numbers of courses to a standard high quality.<\/p>\n The ADDIE approach can be used with any size of teaching project, but works best with large and complex projects. Applied to courses with small student numbers and a deliberately simple or traditional classroom design, it becomes expensive and possibly redundant, although there is nothing to stop an individual teacher following this strategy when designing and delivering a course.<\/p>\n A second criticism is that the ADDIE model is what might be called ‘front-end loaded’ in that it focuses heavily on content design and development, but does not pay as much attention to the interaction between instructors and students during course delivery. Thus it has been criticised by constructivists for not paying enough attention to learner-instructor interaction, and for\u00a0privileging more\u00a0behaviourist approaches to teaching.<\/p>\n Another criticism is that while the five stages are reasonably well described in most descriptions of the model, the model\u00a0does not provide guidance on how to make decisions within that framework. For instance, it does not provide guidelines or procedures for deciding\u00a0how<\/em>\u00a0to choose between different media, or\u00a0what<\/em>\u00a0assessment strategies to use. Instructors have to go beyond\u00a0the ADDIE framework to make these decisions.<\/p>\n The over-enthusiastic application of the ADDIE model can result in overly complex design stages, with many different categories of workers (faculty, instructional designers, editors, web designers) and consequently a strong division of labour, resulting in courses taking up to two years from initial approval to actual delivery. The more complex the design and management infrastructure, the more opportunities there are for cost over-runs and very expensive programming. It is a very good example of the industrial approach to course design.<\/p>\n My\u00a0main criticism though is that the\u00a0model is too inflexible for the digital age. How does a teacher respond to rapidly developing new content, new technologies or apps being launched\u00a0on a daily basis, to a constantly changing student base? Although\u00a0the ADDIE model has served us well in the past, and provides a good foundation for designing teaching and learning, it can be\u00a0too pre-determined, linear and inflexible to handle more volatile learning contexts. I will discuss more flexible models for design in Section 4.7<\/a>.<\/p>\n Dick, W., and Carey, L. (2004). The Systematic Design of Instruction<\/em><\/a> Allyn & Bacon; 6 edition\u00a0Allyn & Bacon<\/p>\n\nActivity 4.3 Using the ADDIE model<\/h3>\n
<\/a>
\u00a9 Flexible Learning Australia, 2014<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n4.3.1 What is ADDIE?<\/h2>\n
Analyse<\/h3>\n
\n
Design<\/h3>\n
\n
Develop<\/h3>\n
\n
Implement<\/h3>\n
\n
Evaluate<\/h3>\n
\n
4.3.2 Where is ADDIE used?<\/h2>\n
4.4.3 What are the benefits of ADDIE?<\/h2>\n
4.4.5\u00a0What are the limitations of ADDIE?<\/h2>\n
References<\/h2>\n