As I’ve engaged with multiple instructional design models I’ve been able to relate to all of them in one way or another as I think about my personal instructional methods. The Universal Design for Learning framework and the ADDIE framework are both very new to me, but I feel that I can relate to these two models the most out of all the instructional designs we are studying.
I also love the Universal Design for Learning Guidelines. I believe this framework would be a great way for beginning instructors to ensure they are providing strong, effective instruction. I don’t believe this framework encourages the reflective piece that is found in the ADDIE framework. It is so important to think through why you are doing what you’re doing. The ADDIE framework encourages analyzing and evaluating course instruction. The UDL guidelines address the need for reflective practices for the student, but not necessarily the instructor. I also like how the ADDIE framework has the instructor think through the goals and learning objectives, and these important aspects of effective instruction are not mentioned in the UDL guidelines.
For me, I feel that I follow the ADDIE framework as I think through and design instruction for my students. I feel that I follow the UDL design more closely when I am actually designing and developing course material and activities. However, both of these instructional frameworks are missing the idea of starting with the end in mind and designing acceptable evidence before starting instruction! :) We need the Understanding by Design framework mixed in here as well! Looks like we need a new framework with a whole lot of letters!
I agree! The most effective model would most likely be one that leverages the strengths of several different models. I would love to see what the ADDIE / UDL / UbD model would look like. I certainly follow certain parts of all three of those models, so it would be a useful exercise for me to sketch out what an instructional design process would look like if it were to use the best features of those three models. Your emphasis on engagement is exactly why I like UDL so much. It seems to be one of the only models that explicitly emphasizes learning engagement.
ReplyDeleteAwesome post, Angie. Even though I have had very limited experience in the classroom, I can also tell I have used most of these instructional design models without even knowing it. I agree with you 100% that ADDIE is missing and extra E. I often find myself getting too caught up in the content that I forget to ensure students will be engaged.
ReplyDeleteI believe UDL is being more widely used in schools today. I know that in my placement school the principal was all about differentiation and providing students with multiple choices so they could learn at their readiness level. This is something that isn't found too much in the ADDIE model. Like Dr. Linton, I too am interested in seeing what a combination of these two models would look like.
What I have found in interacting, reflecting, and critiquing all these models is that one does not include everything a teacher needs for effective instruction. I say that because each learner is SO different. One student could benefit from instruction from an ADDIE perspective, while others tend to learn more from UDL. Some may even be in between. This is what I find to be the hardest part of this job. How do you manage this as a veteran teacher? In your instructional design do you typically provide choice or focus more on engagement?