Discovering Instructional Design 14: the Three-Phase Design Model
In the field of education, instructional design has traditionally been applied using established models, typically using a top-down approach, that focus on explicit definitions of audience, environment, strategies, activities and outcomes. However, when different traditions of design are considered, more creative and organic elements are emphasised, which also embrace a ‘bottom-up’ strategy.
Kays, E, & Sims, R. (2006).
The growth of e-learning has motivated educators to re-examine the theory and practical application of instructional design models to the task of courseware design, development, and delivery.
As we have seen, the ICARE model takes a ‘traditional’ linear systems approach to course design, but has also been used as the basis for migrating content to an online environment. As we know, migration is a directed, systematic movement of a group of objects, organisms, or people. If we step outside the ICT world for a moment, what else can we say about migration? We know that it is time-consuming, resource-intensive, and risky, with no guarantee that the migrant will reach their destination, and if they do, that they will survive and thrive in their new environment. Returning to the world of digital technology, Gregory Muira (2007) asserts that there are a number of other disadvantages associated with migration:
- Migration addresses the possible obsolescence of the data carrier, but does not address the fact that certain technologies which run the data may be abandoned altogether, leaving migration useless.
- It’s time consuming – migration is a continual process, which must be repeated every time a media reaches obsolescence, for all data objects stored on a certain media.
- It’s costly – an organization must purchase additional data storage media at each a migration.
Migration can be confused and messy
As a result of these disadvantages, technology professionals have begun to develop alternatives to migration, such as emulation. However, emulation per se is not an effective solution for educational technologists – we know the issues and complications inherent in attempting to replicate the classroom or instructor-led environment in an online milieu. So whither instructional design in the Digital Age?
One well-developed approach is Sims and Jones’ Three-Phase Design (3PD) Model. Three-Phase Design is
an enhancement to the traditional design process [that] focuses on the creation of functional course delivery components,with evaluation and improvement activities integrated with scaffolding (support) for the teacher and learners to provide a dynamic teaching and learning environment in which resources and strategies can be developed or modified during the actual delivery stage.
(Sims & Jones, 2002 p.8).
As illustrated in Figure 1, the process is supported by a “team” (p.8) consisting of an academic (A), a developer (D), and an educational designer (ED) who all contribute to each part of a learning program’s iterative progression through the model. The authors’ consider that the “ultimate goal” of the model is to disintermediate the Developer and the Educational Designer, enabling the Academic to function as an independent Developer and Educational Designer over time.
Figure 1. The 3PD model including ADDIE components (after Sims & Jones, 2002)
I would assert that in its stated goal, and to a certain extent in it’s execution, that the 3PD model is a direct-line antecedent of the Rapid E-Learning approach to courseware design, development and delivery. It’s important to point out thought that Sims and Jones themselves view online course creation
not …as a short-term development process, but rather as a long-term collaborative process which would “generate and evolve into focused communities of practice with shared understanding and a philosophy of continuous improvement” the value of 3PD would be realised through a three-step process of develop functionality, evaluate/elaborate/enhance and maintain rather than the more traditional sequence of design, develop, implement, evaluate.
(2003, p. 18)
Three-Phase Design also integrates the three “essential competency sets for unit or course development” (Sims, in press) – design, subject matter exposition, and production, in a cohesive rather than disparate fashion. Here, development is not driven by a an overarching and inflexible process, but rather it is the context of the learning materials which determines the development in a targeted and effective manner. The approach is based upon the assumption that learning takes place in an online an collaborative environment. Sims and Jones state that 3PD “proposes four critical factors:”
- Instructional design must align with institutional expectation, contemporary pedagogies, and available resources and skills
- Skills building is facilitated through the scaffolding process to enable those less proficient in design and development to develop the appropriate competencies.
- A team-based approach is used to develop communication and collaboration among group members. Sims and Jones (2002) point out that the growth in social media reinforces the importance of this factor.
- Scaffolded support is incorporated into content design-time to enable instructors and staff to confront new and learning paradigms.
Next time: A closer look at 3PD’s phases
___________
References:
Kays, E, & Sims, R. (2006). Reinventing and reinvigorating instructional design:A theory for emergent learning. Proceedings of the 23rd annual ascilite conference: Who’s learning? Whose technology? Internet: Available from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p197.pdf Accessed 3 June 2009
Muira, G. (2007). Pushing the Boundaries of Traditional Heritage Policy: maintaining long-term access to multimedia content. IFLA Journal 33: 323-326.
Sims, R. (2006). Beyond instructional design: Making learning design a reality.Journal of Learning Design, 1(2), 1-7. Internet: Available from: http://www.jld.qut.edu.au/ Accessed 3 June 2009.
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2002). Continuous Improvement Through Shared Understanding: Reconceptualising Instructional Design for Online Learning. Proceedings of the 2002 ascilite conference: winds of change in the sea of learning: charting the course of digital education. Internet: Available from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland02/proceedings/papers/162.pdf Accessed 3 June 2009
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2003). Where practice informs theory: Reshaping instructional design for academic communities of practice in online teaching and learning. Information Technology, Education and Society, 4(1), 3-20.
Sims, R. (in press). From three-phase to proactive learning design: Creating effective online teaching and learning environments, in J. Willis (Ed), Constructivist Instructional Design (C-ID): Foundations, Models, and Practical Examples.
Sims, R. Analysis of Three Instructional Design Models. Internet: Available from: http://www.de-research.com/PhDFinalPapers/CT_3IDModels.pdf Accessed 1 June 2009
–
June 15 2009 05:00 pm | e-learning
4 Responses to “Discovering Instructional Design 14: the Three-Phase Design Model”
3PD Approaches to Evaluation: Discovering Instructional Design 16 | E-learning Curve Blog at Edublogs on 19 Jun 2009 at 3:09 pm #
[...] we have seen in our look at the Three-Phase Design (3PD, in this model evaluation is not viewed as a post-delivery activity (Sims, 2008 p.5): the nature of [...]
3PD Approaches to Evaluation: Discovering Instructional Design 16 | E-Learning Curve Blog on 19 Jun 2009 at 5:10 pm #
[...] we have seen in our look at the Three-Phase Design (3PD, in this model evaluation is not viewed as a post-delivery activity (Sims, 2008 p.5): the nature of [...]
ASSURE Model: Discovering Instructional Design 18 | E-Learning Curve Blog on 24 Jun 2009 at 5:07 pm #
[...] we saw when we investigated the Three-Phase Design Model, a number of stakeholders including subject matter experts, educationalists, and technical experts [...]
ASSURE Model: Discovering Instructional Design 18 | E-learning Curve Blog at Edublogs on 24 Jun 2009 at 5:10 pm #
[...] we saw when we investigated the Three-Phase Design Model, a number of stakeholders including subject matter experts, educationalists, and technical experts [...]