Challenge 1: Select or create an instructional design process based the nature of the project
Criteria for successful completion of this challenge: Evidence of using an instructional design model (ADDIE, Dick and Carey, Assure, Arcs, etc.) that aligns with a project. Reflection must address: How you determined which instructional design model to use and why – list specific examples (state of development, using learning objectives as a reference point, resources available, input from your company, etc.).
Artifact
Design Document for Sailing School Member Class
Reflection
Reflection on Selecting an Instructional Design Process for the Sailing Safety Workshop
(1) For the competency “Instructional Design and Development Process,” I have selected my final project—the development of a sailing safety workshop module at Island Sailing Club—as my artifact. This project required me to select and apply an instructional design model that aligns with the nature of the project, ensuring that novice sailors effectively acquire the necessary skills to navigate the Columbia River safely.
(2) I chose the Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model as the instructional design process for this project. The decision to use this model was based on several factors:
- Complex Learning Objectives: The workshop aims to teach both intellectual skills (such as identifying “no-go” zones and plotting courses) and psychomotor skills (like docking and maneuvering a 22-foot sailboat). The Dick and Carey model excels in handling complex learning objectives by breaking down the instruction into detailed components, which was essential for this project.
- Structured Development Process: The systematic nature of the Dick and Carey model provided a clear roadmap from analysis to evaluation. This structure was crucial given the project’s need to align the new module with the existing curriculum designed by the club owner. For example, during the goal analysis phase, I identified specific subordinate skills required for safe sailing, such as recognizing river hazards and understanding safe procedures for avoiding river barges.
- Alignment with Learning Objectives: The model emphasizes the development of performance objectives that are directly tied to assessments and instructional strategies. This alignment ensured that each activity and assessment within the workshop was purposefully designed to meet the stated objectives. For instance, I created interactive map exercises and simulations that directly corresponded to the objective of identifying “no-go” areas.
- Resource Availability: The club owner, acting as a Subject Matter Expert (SME), provided invaluable input based on decades of sailing instruction experience. The Dick and Carey model facilitated the incorporation of his expertise into a systematic instructional design process. It allowed for collaborative development where his practical insights were integrated with proven instructional design principles.
(3) My decision was also influenced by my previous experience in training program development. As a sales manager, I often relied on systematic models to identify performance gaps and design targeted training. I found that models like Dick and Carey are particularly effective when the learning content requires precise sequencing and integration of both theoretical and practical components. For example, in sales training, I would align learning activities with specific sales objectives, much like aligning sailing exercises with safety objectives in this project.
(4) Reflecting on the project, selecting the Dick and Carey model proved to be instrumental in the successful design of the sailing safety workshop. The model’s comprehensive approach ensured that all instructional elements—from goal analysis to formative evaluation—were meticulously planned and executed. This experience reinforced the importance of choosing an instructional design model that not only fits the project’s complexity but also leverages available resources and expertise.
Moving forward, I am confident that applying the Dick and Carey model enhanced the effectiveness of the workshop. It allowed me to create a cohesive learning experience that addresses the unique challenges novice sailors face on the Columbia River. I plan to continue utilizing systematic instructional design models for future projects, adapting them as necessary to fit different learning contexts and objectives.
Supplemental Documents
Facilitator’s Guide
Implementation and Formative Evaluation Report
Workshop Agenda
Rubric for Assessment
Artifact 2
Challenge 1: Select or create an instructional design process based the nature of the project
Criteria for successful completion of this challenge: Evidence of using an instructional design model (ADDIE, Dick and Carey, Assure, Arcs, etc.) that aligns with a project. Reflection must address: How you determined which instructional design model to use and why – list specific examples (state of development, using learning objectives as a reference point, resources available, input from your company, etc.).
Examples: Demonstration of walking through an ID Model (ADDIE, Kirkpatrick, Backwards Design, etc.) on a project, The Evaluation Plan (EDCI 577), Case study (EDCI 672), Final Project (EDCI 569 if taken in Spring 2021 or later), work-related examples of using an ID model as a standard, starting point, or other projects, etc.
Reflection
For the competency “Select or create an instructional design process based on the nature of the project,” I have chosen my case analysis, “Developing a Role-Playing Simulation on Aging,” as an artifact. This project presented several unique challenges involving conflicting visions among stakeholders, limited resources, and the need for a cohesive design that aligned with specific learning objectives. To address these challenges, I determined that the Dick and Carey model would be the most appropriate instructional design framework for this project.
The Dick and Carey model was selected due to its systematic and structured approach, which provided a clear pathway to reconcile differing stakeholder expectations and to create a cohesive, effective learning experience. This model’s strength lies in its emphasis on thorough analysis and iterative design, which were essential for managing the diverse interests of the stakeholders involved in this project.
I began by conducting a comprehensive needs analysis, which aligns with the first phase of the Dick and Carey model. This analysis was crucial to understanding the instructional goals of Dr. Colombo, who prioritized fostering empathy in students through an immersive role-playing experience. At the same time, Dr. McSweeny, as the co-manager and instructional designer, wanted to ensure that the simulation included structured elements such as prompts and feedback to guide student learning. By using the Dick and Carey model, I was able to define clear instructional objectives that reflected both stakeholders’ visions, providing a foundation for aligning the project goals.
During the design phase, I focused on developing a strategy that balanced constructivist immersion with cognitive scaffolding. The Dick and Carey model’s emphasis on specifying learning objectives and instructional strategies was instrumental in creating a detailed storyboard that accommodated both Dr. Colombo’s desire for an authentic role-playing experience and Dr. McSweeny’s need for structured instructional elements. This structured approach allowed me to develop a cohesive design plan that ensured all stakeholders were on the same page, reducing conflicts and improving communication.
In the development phase, the iterative nature of the Dick and Carey model allowed for regular feedback loops, which were crucial given the practical constraints of the project, such as limited budget and time. The model’s focus on formative evaluation helped me identify and address issues early in the development process, particularly those related to the software limitations that impacted the realism of the animations. This iterative approach ensured that adjustments could be made to meet Dr. Colombo’s expectations for authenticity while staying within the project’s practical limitations.
The use of the Dick and Carey model also facilitated effective resource management. By breaking down the project into smaller, manageable components, I was able to assign specific tasks to team members based on their expertise and availability. For example, Suzie, the graduate student responsible for animation, was given clear guidelines and support to ensure that her workload was manageable, and her contributions aligned with the project’s instructional goals. The model’s structured approach helped mitigate the risk of overburdening team members and ensured that each phase of the project was completed efficiently.
Overall, the Dick and Carey model was instrumental in navigating the complexities of this project. Its systematic approach allowed me to align stakeholder expectations, manage resources effectively, and create a cohesive instructional design that met the learning objectives. Moving forward, I plan to continue using structured instructional design models like Dick and Carey when working on projects that involve multiple stakeholders and complex learning objectives. This experience has reinforced the importance of using a systematic approach to instructional design to ensure that all aspects of a project are aligned and effectively managed, ultimately leading to a successful learning experience for the end users.