THE GREAT DEBATE
ADDIE Model
Analyze – The first phase of content development is Analysis. Analysis refers to the gathering of information about one’s audience, the tasks to be completed, how the learners will view the content, and the project’s overall goals. The instructional designer then classifies the information to make the content more applicable and successful.
Design – The second phase is the Design phase. In this phase, instructional designers begin to create their project. Information gathered from the analysis phase, in conjunction with the theories and models of instructional design, is meant to explain how the learning will be acquired. For example, the design phase begins with writing a learning objective. Tasks are then identified and broken down to be more manageable for the designer. The final step determines the kind of activities required for the audience in order to meet the goals identified in the Analyze phase.
Develop – The third phase, Development, involves the creation of the activities that will be implemented. It is in this stage that the blueprints of the design phase are assembled.
Implement – After the content is developed, it is then Implemented. This stage allows the instructional designer to test all materials to determine if they are functional and appropriate for the intended audience.
Evaluate – The final phase, Evaluate, ensures the materials achieved the desired goals. The evaluation phase consists of two parts: formative and summative assessment. The ADDIE model is an iterative process of instructional design, which means that at each stage the designer can assess the project's elements and revise them if necessary. This process incorporates formative assessment, while the summative assessments contain tests or evaluations created for the content being implemented. This final phase is vital for the instructional design team because it provides data used to alter and enhance the design.
Connecting all phases of the model are external and reciprocal revision opportunities. As in the internal Evaluation phase, revisions should and can be made throughout the entire process.
Most of the current instructional design models are variations of the ADDIE process.
Dear Fellow Educators,
Welcome. This website was developed as a learning project for a Master’s in Educational Technology course. The purpose is to develop a case study for high school students to explore an issue in Educational Technology. The underpinnings of this activity focuses on the Political and Sociological motivations of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies that have become common in many schools.
Equitable access to technology is an important consideration for educators and the BYOD debate a timely discussion. We felt that the BYOD discussion met specific criteria for the development of a case study discussed by Lundberg (1993):
-
knowledge into action
-
reality into the classroom
-
ambiguous (as only real life can be), and
-
personal.
The decision to use a Debate structure was purposeful. In the development of an argument, students will need to work through the Analysis, Diagnosis and Action Planning (ADAP) model of case matrix steps recommended by Lundberg (1993):
-
gaining topic familiarity with the in the knowledge provided the multimedia resources in the development of the timeline for the
-
recognizing symptoms in the changing attitudes towards BYOD devices over the year
-
identifying goals are complex when understood through a variety of stakeholder perspectives
-
analysis in the infographics and bar charts provided statistics and working through the affirmative and negative debate points
-
diagnosis of the predicament of the BYOD issues
-
action planning is the next step for students is to address equity issues of BYOD within their own school context
As the designers of this this activity hail from across three time zones, and three different countries, the case content has purposely been kept global to facilitate learners understanding that issues of equity in BYOD programs go beyond the boundary of their local context.
Every teacher will have a different teaching context and curriculum guideline to adhere. This activity has been planned for Senior Years Students, specifically, grade 12 students. In the Manitoban context these activities can be aligned across the curriculum and within the Information and Communication Courses (see: http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/ict/framework.pdf)
The general learning outcomes (GLO) specified by the Manitoba Curriculum on page 6:
1.Human Relations: Students will demonstrate tolerance, teamwork, leadership, and responsible, ethical, and moral behaviour.
2. Literacy and Communication: Students will demonstrate effective communication skills in listening, speaking, reading, writing, viewing, and representing.
3. Problem Solving: Students will demonstrate appropriate problem-solving skills while seeking solutions to technological challenges.
4. Technology: Students will develop the abilities to use, manage, and understand information and communication technologies by exploring software, programming
The following are Specific learning outcome (SLO) from the Manitoba Curriculum Guidelines across the curriculum for Expanding learners (grade 6 to adult) more can be found online http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/overview/show_me/expanding.html
(Social Implications -2.3) Analyze advantages and disadvantages of ICT use in society. (Examples: lack of access, consequences of unethical use, ease of manipulating data, ease of communicating information, addictive/obsessive behaviour…) (pg 10)
(Motivation and Confidence 3.1) Synthesize knowledge and information to solve unique ICT problems. (pg 10)
2. Curriculum Connections
3. Instructional Design Model
ALT. (September 11, 2014). Altc 2014 Invited Speaker: Jim Fanning–Mobile Technologies: Getting it Right for Every Child (707) [Video file]. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsciTD1tPZU#t=147
Lundberg, Craig C. (1993). A Framework for Student Case Preparation. Case Research Journal, NACRA (p. 132 - 144)
Ministry of Education and Advanced Learning. (2014). Bring Your Own Device Guide (electronic). School Programs Division, Winnipeg, Manitoba. (Retrieved November 16, 2014, http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/byod/document.pdf).
Manitoba Education Citizenship and Youth. (2007) Senior Years Information and Communication Technology, Manitoba Curriculum Framework of Outcomes.
Manitoba Education Citizenship and Youth. (2006) Literacy with ICT Across the Curriculum
A Developmental Continuum Snapshot of the Expanding Learner. (Retrieved November 16, 2014, http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/resources/posters/expanding_pf.pdf).
United States Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, United States Government, “Dear Colleague Letter” October 1, 2014
The UN special rapporteur: on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (2011). Republic of Korea, Mexico. Frank La Rue.
ADDIE Model. (2014, July 24). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 01:55, November 17, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ADDIE_Model&oldid=618339994
Graphics
Dahlstrom, E. & diFilipo, S. (2013) BYOD and consumerization of it in higher education research, BYOE Infographic. Retrieved from
http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/byod-and-consumerization-it-higher-education-research-2013
Mitchell, T. (2013) The Disproportionate Impact of Poverty in North Carolina. North Carolina Justice Center. Retrieved from: http://www.ncjustice.org/?q=budget-and-tax/infographic-disproportionate-impact-poverty-north-carolina
Poverty in Canada. Retrieved from: http://tvo.org/whypoverty/info/poverty-in-canada
Poverty Rates in 1968, 1990, and 2012 by Age Group and Race. Institute for Research and Poverty. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved from: http://www.irp.wisc.edu/faqs/faq2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADDIE_Model#mediaviewer/File:ADDIE_Model_of_Design.jpg