Kemp 1994
Kemp 1994
Kemp 1994
INSTRUCTION
Second Edition
JERROLD E. KEMP
Professor Emeritus
San Jose State University
GARYR. MORRISON
University of Memphis
STEVEN M. ROSS
University of Memphis
Merrill,
an imprint of Prentice Hall
Upper Saddle River, NewJersey Columbus, Ohio
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Kemp.Jerrold E. .
Designing effective insu'uction / Jerrold E. Kemp, Gary R.
Morrison, Sleven M. Ross. -- 2nd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-13-262080-4
1. Instructional systems--Design. 2. Curriculum planning.
1. Morrison, Gary R. II. Ross, Steven M., 1947- . III. Title.
LB1028.38.K46 1998
371.33-dc21 97-7380
CIP
This book was set in New Baskerville by Custom Editorial Productions, Inc., and was printed and bound by
R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company/Harrisonburg. The cover was printed by Phoenix Color Corp.
II
-
© 1998, 1996 by Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Simon & Schuster/ A Viacom Company
Upper Saddle River, NewJersey 07458
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permis-
sion in writing from the publisher.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
ISBN 0-13-262080-4
INTRODUCTION TO THE
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN PROCESS
"What benefits can result from applying the instructional design process?"
Revision
Evaluation Learner
Instruments Characteristics
Instructional
Delivery
Instructional
Objectives
Content
Sequencing
Formative Evaluation
Project Management
T
he preceding questions represent the important concepts treated in this
introductory chapter. Understanding them is the basis for systematic instruc-
tional planning.
1
2 CHAPTER 1
need has given rise to the instructio~al design process, a planning method that
results in successful learning and performance. Learning is haphazard; instruction
is planned. Thus, our goal as designers is to create sound instruction that will lead
to appropriate learning.
Before examining the elements of the instructional design process, it is useful
to have a basic understanding of curriculum and its relationship to instructional
design. Developing curriculum is often considered the starting point for instruc-
tional planning.
A DEFINITION OF CURRICULUM
The purpose of education or training is to provide a series of structured learning expe-
riences. These may involve classes in an elementary school, courses in a secondary
school or a higher education institution, or a training program in a business setting.
The term curriculum refers to the subject content and skills that make up an
educational program. A school or curriculum includes the course offerings; at a
company, the training programs may represent the curriculum. Curriculum design
is a process of formulating a specific educational platform that defines the beliefs of
what should be in the curriculum (Henderson & Hawthorne, 1995).
The emphasis of a curriculum depends on philosophical, social, and cultural
forces that affect the school in terms of the broad society and the specific commu~
nity it serves. For a business concern, a training curriculum reflects the organiza-
tion's management policies, strategic plans, and identified needs. One caution we
offer is to avoid building a curriculum in business that serves no other purpose
than to offer a series of courses. All courses should serve to improve employee per-
formance, thus supporting the mission and goals of the organization. The following
questions help determine a curriculum:
1. What is the purpose or mission of the institution or department or the
strategic plan of the organization?
2. What goals for education or training are necessary to serve the mission or
plan?
3. How can instruction be categorized and organized to accomplish the goals?
Answering these questions can help in selecting subject areas, courses, instruc-
tional themes, or content categories. See Figure 1-1 for examples.
FIGURE 1-1
Organizing subject contents for curriculum
Education
Subject Areas Courses Themes Across Courses
Physical science Physics Patterns of change
Earth science Chemistry Scale and structure
Life science Geology Stability
Biology Systems and interactions
Training
Training Areas Content Categories
Management development Managing change
Employee development Effective presentations
Product development Project management
Marketing development Negotiating skills
Field training Product troubleshooting
Economic analysis
technology, systematic analysis, and management methods. Dewey (1900) saw a need
in the early part of this century for a science that could translate what was learned
through research into practical applications for instruction. This science would make
decisions about instructional practices that are based on sound research rather than
intuition. Snellbecker (1974) and others have proposed that instructional design is
the linking science described by Dewey. We agree with Snellbecker and see instruc-
tional design as the process for designing instruction based on sound practices.
The ID approach considers instruction from the perspective of the learner
rather than from the perspective of the content, the traditional approach. It
involves many factors that influence learning outcomes, including:
• What level of readiness do individual students need for accomplishing the
objectives?
• What instructional strategies are most appropriate in terms of objectives
and learner characteristics?
• What media or other resources are most suitable?
• What support is needed for successful learning?
• How is achievement of the objectives determined?
• What revisions are necessary if a tryout of the program does not match
expectations?
There are other issues that also influence student learning. These issues are
inherent in the instructional design process. This process is applicable for
designing instruction in public education, higher education, and skills training.
4 CHAPTER 1
The information, concepts, and procedures presented here can aid teachers and
instructors, instructional designers, and planning teams-anyone who wants to
develop effective, appealing instruction.
How would you answer this question: "If you were about to start planning a
new unit in a course or training program, to what matter would you first give atten-
tion?" Here is how various individuals might answer:
Primary grade teacher: "I think first about the children. How important is the
topic for them? Then, how well prepared are they to study it (physically,
emotionally, intellectually)?"
High school teacher: 'Td start by writing down what I want to accomplish in
teaching the unit. This becomes the goal around which I'll plan the
instruction. "
College professor: "My approach is to list the content that needs to be covered rel-
ative to the selected topic. This would include the terms, definitions, con-
cepts, and principles that I feel need to be communicated to my students."
Instructional designer in industry: "It's important to start by listing the compe-
tencies I expect trainees to have after receiving instruction on the topic.
These would be the outcomes or objectives to be accomplished."
The foregoing replies represent a sampling of approaches that might be taken
as different individuals initiate their instructional planning. There could be other
replies to the question. For example, one community college instructor always starts
by writing the final examination for a new unit! He believes that passing the final
exam is the students' greatest concern. Therefore, he writes questions that indicate
what should receive emphasis in his teaching. His reasoning seems plausible.
As you read the replies to the question, and formulated your own answer, two
conclusions should have become apparent. First, a number of different considera-
tions appeal to educators and instructional designers as each starts planning. Second,
each of us selects an order or sequence of our own in which to treat these elements.
FIGURE 1-2
The fundamental components
of instructional design
FIGURE 1-3
Components of the instructional design plan
--------
Planning
Revision
Instructional
Problems
Instructional
Strategies
Formative Evaluation
Project Management
starting point. Recall the answers to the question asked of various persons earlier in
this chapter. Individuals may proceed through the instructional design process in
their own preferred way, starting with one element or another and following whatever
order they consider logical or suitable.
In Figure 1-3, the elements are not connected with lines or arrows. Connec-
tions could indicate a sequential, linear order. The intent is to convey flexibility yet
some order in the way the nine elements may be used. Also, some instances may not
require treating all nine elements. For example, in some programs evaluation
instruments may not be necessary.
Another reason for using the oval form is that a flexible interdependence
exists among the nine elements. Decisions relating to one may affect others. As
instructional objectives are stated, items of subject content may be added or
reordered. Or, while instructional delivery methods are being chosen, the intent of
an instructional learning objective may become clearer than :\s initially stated and
require revision. Consequently, the procedure permits and encourages flexibility in
the selection of elements, the order of their treatment, and back-and-forth activity
among the elements. This procedure allows for additions and changes as the
instructional design plan takes shape.
INTRODUCTION TO THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN PROCESS 7
Many instructional design models identifY and use features similar to those
described in this book. Such models are often represented by a diagram with boxes
and arrows as a series of steps in a set order, as shown in Figure 1-4. The intent of
such a model is to establish a 1-2-3 sequential order. In actual use, the process often
is not so linear. The open, circular pattern seems more appropriate and useful.
When starting to design instruction, if you feel somewhat insecure with the open,
flexible format, follow the logical arrangement, starting with instructional problems.
Then move to learner characteristics, and proceed clockwise through the nine elements.
As you gain experience with using this instructional design plan, you no
doubt will establish your own arrangement of components for the design of a
course. But even when following a sequence with which you are comfortable, you
will need to make adjustments. Romiszowski (1981) refers to this as a heuristic,
p'TOblem-solving approach. With each project, you modifY your strategy, based on how
things work in each situation.
The word element is used as a label for each of the nine parts of our instruc-
tional design plan. This term is preferable to the terms step, stage, level, or sequential
item, which are expressions in keeping with the linear concept.
Another part of our diagram is the indication of revision around the elements.
The two outer ovals illustrate the feedback feature, which allows for changes in the
content or treatment of elements at any time during development. The treatment
of elements may require revisions when, for example, data about learning are col-
lected during instructional tryouts (called formative evaluation) or at the end of a
course offering (called summative evaluation). If you want learners to succeed,
accomplishing instructional objectives at a satisfactory level of proficiency, then you
will want to improve any weak parts of the program as they are discovered.
Various expressions are used to label systematic instructional planning. In
addition to the term instructional design used in this book, you will find reference to
the following in the literature:
• Instructional systems
• Instructional systems design
• Instructional systems development
FIGURE 1-4
A typical instructional design model
8 CHAPTER 1
directions, and emphasis of a program, instructional design work usually starts with
identification of the instruction or training needs to be served. Units or topics com-
prising a course are then selected. This selection is followed by the development of
instructional components related to the various planning elements.
Premise 4: While planning, every effort should be made to provide for a level of
satisfactory achievement for all learners.
A study by Bloom (1976) concluded that up to 95% of all public school stu-
dents can accomplish what is required of them if each individual has suitable acad-
emic background, appropriate instruction, and sufficient time for learning. Other
research has shown that if a student is prepared to learn and puts forth the effort to
study but is unsuccessful in learning, a more careful design of the instructional plan
can help overcome this shortcoming. This conclusion applies to training as well as
to education. It justifies the need to test a plan before its implementation, as indi-
cated by the revision oval in Figure 1-3.
naming; recognizing; and other memory or recall of subject content. The ID process, in
keeping with the goal to be accomplished, logically emphasizes more advanced intel-
lectual thought processes that build on basic factual information. This emphasis may
include learning related to comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
In many academic subject areas, learners achieve major learning outcomes
only after they have completed a class and enroll in an advanced course or begin
working on the job. Instructional design includes procedures for directly and indi-
rectly evaluating postcourse behavior and content application outcomes.
These answers to the critics may seem unconventional. Many educators and
trainers, based on their beliefs and experience, might not accept them. Often
people must become dissatisfied with present practices or results before they recog-
nize the need for change and improvement (e.g., getting beyond passive learning
and rote memorization to attaining higher-level objectives and providing more
meaningful educational experiences). At that point, they are probably ready to
explore a fresh approach to instructional planning. Providing explanations and
offering opportunities, as described in this introductory chapter, can help counter
criticism of the instructional design process.
SUMMARY
1. Curriculum includes subject matter, skills, and courses that comprise an
educational program.
2. The key elements of ID involve learner characteristics, objectives,
teaching methods and activities, and evaluation of learning.
3. A complete ID plan consists of nine elements arranged in a flexible config-
uration and formative and summative evaluations for potential revisions.
4. A number of expressions may substitute for the term instructional design in
the literature and in practice. The expression instructional development
applies to the management of ID projects.
5. The ID process has the following qualities: it follows a systematic proce-
dure with specific details, it usually starts at the course development level,
16 CHAPTER 1
-
FROM HERE TO THERE
At last, you have finished your degree and you are now ready to start
practicing instructional design at your new job with a corporation in the
top Fortune 25. Your first day on the job, however, has a few surprises. Of
most concern is that the manager you thought you were going to work
for has transferred to a different division. Your new manager does not
have a background in instructional design, but rather has worked as a
chemical engineer and project manager for this corporation for the past
15 years. Needless to say, you are a little apprehensive about your
predicament, considering that you are the first instructional designer
hired by this corporation.
Shortly after the morning coffee break, your manager invites her
staff in for an introductory meeting. The staff includes three trainers
who have more than 35 years combined experience in teaching courses
for the corporation, an administrative assistant who schedules and
makes arrangements for courses, two engineers (who have worked in
the department for four years each) who write new curriculum, and you.
The meeting starts with each individual describing his or her back-
ground and role in the department. The other staff members can easily
impress the new manager with their mastery of company lingo and
number of hours of training they produce each quarter.
Turning slowly, the manager sizes you up and asks you to describe
your background and your role in hernew department. The manager and
other staff members are not impressed by your degree in instructional
INTRODUCTION TO THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN PROCESS 17
design or the fact that you received it from ·a leading program in the
area-probably because they have never heard of instructional design.
After a brief pause and a few frowns, one of the senior trainers asks you to
explain exactly what it is that you do-seems they all thought you said
"interior design" and thought you were there to spruce up their offices
and classrooms.
The next few minutes are critical. You can either win this manager
and staff over to a new way of viewing training, or you can overwhelm
them with your knowledge so they decide you are one of those intellec-
tual types. What will you say to this group that will help ensure your
longevity with the company?
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. (1976). Human characteristics and schoolleaming. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bodilly, S. (1996). Lessons leamed from New American Schools Development Corparation's demon-
stration phase. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Campbell, M., Farrell, G., Kamii, M., Lam, D., Rugen, L., & Udall, D. (1997). The Expedi-
tionary Learning-Outward Bound Design. In Stringfield, S. C., Ross, S. M., & Smith,
L.]. (Eds.), Bold new plans far school restructuring: The New American Schools Development
Corparation designs. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Canada NewsWire (1995). Speedy Muffler King announces second quarter results. [On-
line]. Available: www.newswire.ca/releases/August1995/03/c2085.htrnl.
Dewey,]. (1900). Psychology and social practice. Psychological Review, 7, 105-124.
Henderson,]. G., & Hawthorne, R. D. (1995). Transformative cuniculum leadership. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
Kearns, D. T., & Anderson,]. L. (1997). Sharing the vision: Creating New American Schools.
In Stringfield, S. c., Ross, S. M., & Smith, L.]. (Eds.), Bold new plans for school restruc-
turing: The New American Schools Development Carparation designs. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Prewat, R. (1995). Misreading Dewey: Reform, projects, and the language game. Educational
Researchel; 24(7), 13-22.
Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing instructional systems. New York: Nichols.
Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of cuniculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Sarason, S. B. (1995). Some reflections on what we have learned. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 4-85.
Snellbecker, G. (1974). Leaming them), instmctional thear» and pS)lchoeducational design. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
The value oftraining. (1995). [On-line]. Available at: http:/ / tidbit.fhda.edu/BII/NewsNotes.html.