ADDIE

ADDIE: a nice point of reference for people to work from and perhaps a high-level framework or scaffolding for just about any project.

It seems to me that any respectable, common-sensed individual, who is tasked with designing some kind of instruction would end up following something similar to ADDIE without having ADDIE.

For example, without knowing the specifics of ADDIE, I jotted down some steps I would take to design instruction. My result was as follows:

Define the problem and it's surrounding factors
Plan a solution while continuously evaluating based on the need.
Develop and test (i.e. evaluate) the solution to see if it meets the needs. If needed or perhaps it is better said this way: when and as many times as needed, adjust the plan and redevelop.
Help get what you developed into place and functioning properly
Continously evaluate and adjust the solution as needed

As I look at other "models" from other fields (see below) I wonder if ADDIE is really all that different. If it is not then it would be problematic for a discipline, that is already being questioned as to whether it is a real discipline, to espouse it as a central piece. Not that having a "discipline" really matters in the end but if we feel IDT is helpful and good, which we do, then it would serve others to see it as a discipline.

Construction Management
Pre-Planning, Conceptual Design, Schematic Design, Design Development, Construction Drawings (or Contract Documents), and Construction Administration

Project Management (see green diagram)


Software Development
Waterfall model (see below)


Or the SDLC.
Market research
Gathering requirements for the proposed business solution
Analyzing the problem
Devising a plan or design for the software-based solution
Implementation (coding) of the software
Testing the software
Development
Maintenance and bug fixing

I'm not saying that the above is as good or better than ADDIE but it leads to Molenda's comment:
"Anyone is free to impute whatever attributes they want to this label [ADDIE]…as they do." (Molenda, May/June 2003)

It is somewhat disturbing to me, yet somehow I am still okay with it, to read that "...ADDIE is a foundational
element of the field of IDT." http://www.indiana.edu/~idt/shortpapers/documents/IDTf_Bic.pdf

It is so high-level that it is difficult to say what it can really do or how it can help over another similar process for design. I come back to my point that it seems like each instructional designer has their own ADDIE. It may be a 10 step or 8 component process but each designer can fit those pieces into ADDIE and have a rationale discussion with others who are familiar with ADDIE and have a point of reference to work from. I think that is the main use. Not to down play that but if that really is the main use I don't know that there is great need to define it, analyze, and try to understand it in great detail...since those details are different for practically every designer.

ADDIE Dangers:
Analysis paralysis
Design - Who establishes the constraints and when do you know if you have a "good" design?
Development - Took us long enough to get here
Implement - "not created here" syndrome
Evaluate - Based on what?

A few other non-related side points:

I think you could still use ADDIE and have the following result which is an argument for the need for ADDIE.
"You could develop your instruction casually, starting, say, by drawing some diagrams of the automobile/submarine/forklift dashboard with all the dials and gauges. There's a high risk that you might discover later, however, that the diagram isn't really needed, or that it doesn't have just the right features or labels, or that it includes too much information for the learners. In short, it will cost time and effort to fix it." http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/EDTEC540/EDTEC540BB/Module3/mod03.htm

My sister always used to listen to a song by Sarah McLachlan called Adia. As I read about ADDIE the first couple of lines of the song came to mind:

Sadly these words from a song that I heard constantly coming from my sister's room came to mind after I re-read my notes:
ADDIE I do believe I've failed you.
ADDIE I know I've let you down.

Isn't that Sarah McLachlaugn or someone like that?

Keys to a Good Dissertation

A dissertation should be 1) scholarly 2) significant and 3) original.

Be wary of horse-race research--pitting two methods or paradigms against each other, pulling the trigger, and seeing who wins. This is great for physics, biology and other types of research but in the sociology/educational realm positivists dont' like them because it is hard to control variables, qualitative folks don't like it because the situations aren't that clear cut to the point that you could assign a couple of factors to the study and get the information you need. Plus you miss a lot of important things from their perspective.

One important factor that you should analyze in doing research is your background--values, beliefs, theoretical grounding, etc. Then look at how that impacts your research question and the methods you will use.

Don't throw methods together udner minimal constraint.

Variables (Furlong ch 3 and 4)

3 Criteria to Establish Causation
1. Antecedence (timing, Variable A happens before variable B the effect so that it is a potential impact to create the effect.)

2. Systematic covariation (i.e., contiguity) – Cause and effect has to be “joined” or physical and temporal together-ness.

3. Eliminate other possible causes (How can you say you've ruled out everything? You can't; you can just do what you can and then make a convincing argument.)

Independent Variable (IV=cause) --> Dependent variable (DV=effect)
So 1) IV precedes the DV 2) They happen close to each other in time and space 3) other possible causes are eliminated then we can say that data support IV --> DV.

If you don't have the 3rd (eliminate other possible causes) then you can merely correlate your variables.

SCIENCE IS PHILOSOPHICAL:
Concept of causation is philosophical (x causes y). You don't see the cause you measure things that indicate a cause.

Aristotle's 4 Causes
Material: substance something is made of (material exists)
Efficient: sequence of events across time (energy expended with material to put material into a for, pattern or essence)
Formal: pattern, form, or essence of something (blueprint for a chair)
Final: goal or purpose of something (know the object is for sitting)

These seem

Behaviorism and Cognitive Information Processing Notes

Behaviorism:
Black box: the mind - don't go there. Look at outward behaviors and what causes them and what the results of the consequences are of the behaviors.
Feedback loop and conditioning.
Stimuli (environment antecedent) -> Organism -> Behavior (response) -> Consequences -> Affects behavior
Strength -> you can do empirical research to see if it works in a certain context. Research has showed it to work in certain areas (military, child timeouts, etc.)
Weakness -> people don't respond to stimuli the same way (intrinsic motivation)

Cognitive Information Processing:
You are like unto a computer: sensory memory (visual, auditory; very very short term); short-term memory--like computer RAM (more conceptual-to stay there needs to be rehearsed; chunking).

Learning in this means you have input that goes through the process of different types of memory until it makes it into your long-term memory.

How to get stuff from short to long-term memory? Check out the article.

Educational Philosophy Meanderings

Epistemology and ontology:

My learning/teaching philosophy is definitely affected by my background in biology and in having done field research. Empirical evidence, objectivism, are inherit in some of the classes and activities. However, having been involved in learning other things and teaching I also have some roots in constructivism and situated theory. As I read through the different philosophies I inevitably would read a section and start thinking, “I like this stuff and it seems to jive with my take on learning.” And then, I would also inevitably hit some of the descriptors and think, “I am definitely not in agreement with that. For example, cognitive constructivism, “From the cognitive constructivist perspective, there is a real world that we experience...however, this world cannot be directly known, which broadens the nature of the ontology to realism. That reality exists is not denied…” (Up until now I like this) “…however, what we know of the world is only an interpretation based on our experiences.” Even that is okay but I violently disagree with the next statement, “As such, cognitive constructivism is subjective and relativist, providing for no absolute in what is right or wrong…”

Constructivism:

I picked this topic to see what it really is. I’ve heard about it a lot and kind of assumed it was a learning theory/philosophy. I was somewhat mistaken, particularly in the former. Why? Because constructivism is “not yet one theory but a multitude of approaches.” Drischoll, (200). It can be a set of values.

Looking at methods associated with constructivism can help one get a feel for it:

Discovery learning

Generative learning

Goal/problem-based learning

Collaborative learning

Approaches that are constructivist…what are their underlying assumptions?

1. Knowledge is constructed by rather than transferred to the learner

2. Embed learning in complex, realistic, and relevant environments (learn by doing; learn to deal with complexity, or the real world, by learning in complexity.

3. Provide for social negotiation as an integral part of learning (social interaction).

4. Support multiple perspectives and the use of multiple modes of representation (many perspectives and “models” gives you a better view of what is going on).

5. Encourage ownership in learning (anxiously engaged).

6. Nurture self-awareness of the knowledge construction process (metacognition).

Where is the research on constructivism- and situated-cognition type approaches?

Situated cognition: knowing and doing cannot be separated.

Knowledge as a tool. Irrelevant when divorced from context and then all to often misused when it is plugged back into context.

Community of practice…disciplines, professions, or manual trades are communities or cultures. Often students are asked to use the tools without being able to see or adopt the culture and enter the “community.”

Authentic activity.

Students create their own solution paths.

RSS

RSS

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
Root-sum-square
Rock Star Supernova
or
Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site Summary
Who knows which bolded phrase is right, both I suppose, but the top three could be just as fun!

RSS feeds are amazing little tools. However I rarely use them. I think one of the keys to using RSS feeds is to get the right ones. When I found about them I said hey these are great and I'll keep up with what's going on in the world. I subscribed to a three news feeds. The next day my reader had HUNDREDS of feeds. Lame! Going through that will take as much time as hitting the front page of a few news websites! Back to the drawing board. I am going to try TED talk since I have seen some lectures on that site that I liked. I have some classmates' blogs on there and I am going to try for ONE news RSS.

A plug for igoogle. On igoogle I have a reader app, an app for translating stuff into Spanish, a currency converter and many other fun little gadgets. Since I see that more often it is way more helpful for me to have my RSS feeds going there via my reader than logging into my reader. Try it out! http://www.google.com/ig.

Personal Learning Environment

Personal learning environments are just what they say they are:

Environment: What a particular location is made up of including all the things and conditions found there.

Learning: The act, process, or experience of gaining knowledge, skill, or becoming something.

Personal: You own it, you run it, content, look and feel, who sees it what you put there etc.

PLE: A particular location that you own and control that facilitates your learning including all the things and conditions found there. Most PLEs are not isolated but are open and can be shared with those you choose or those who choose to go there. A blog, a wiki, a website, a network site, igoogle, and many other types of places could be a PLE for you. However, these are not just personal environments so for most of us the Facebook page only partially counts. These locations are centered on learning.

Criteria for deciding whether you have a PLE:

• Did you stop using it when your class/project was over?
• Can you look at it and answer the question, what have you learned lately?
• Why did you create this environment?
• Is it controlled by you or by another organization?
  

I have started PLEs that simply turned into assignment boards. I have started other PLEs that ultimately ended up being controlled by others. Maybe this time I'll be a little more successful.