A qualitative analysis and comparison of the two contemporary models of instructional design

Authors

  • Gülçin Mutlu Necmettin Erbakan University

Keywords:

Addie model, instructional design, curriculum development, futureu instructional design model, işman instructional design model

Abstract

This study aims to qualitatively investigate the degree of correspondence between the generic instructional design model that is shortly called ADDIE and two other contemporary models of instructional design, FutureU and Işman Instructional Design Models. ADDIE is considered to be the ancestor of contemporary models of instructional design and it is thus believed to be reflected to certain degrees in the following models of instructional design. In short, this study aims to examine similarities and differences between the generic model and its two follower models by examining similarities and differences. These qualitative comparisons were centered upon the two main themes that were derived in respect to the basic principles of instructional design. The two main qualitative themes and thus the examination criteria for the study included a) what ADDIE components were included and how they were reflected and b) what structural characteristics these two models exhibit. The results showed that the two models represent a considerable number of similarities to the generic ADDIE model and the differences were only on the varied applications or adaptations of the firmly established dimensions already offered by the ADDIE model itself.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Gülçin Mutlu, Necmettin Erbakan University

Gülçin MUTLU graduated summa cum laude in English Language Teaching from DokuzEylülUniversity and completed her MA in TEFL at BilkentUniversity (with a Fulbright support). She is pursuing her doctorate degree at Middle East Technical University. She works as a lecturer of English Language at Necmettin ErbakanUniversity in Konya, Turkey. Her academic and research interests include student motivation and persistence, learning environment, listening and speaking skills and foreign language curriculum and instruction.

References

Andrews, D. H. & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A Comparative Analysis of Models of Instructional Design. Journal of Instructional Development, 3, 2-16.

Dick, W. & Cary, L. (1990). The Systematic Design of Instruction, Third Edition, Harper Collins

Fer, S. (2009). Social constructivism and social constructivist curricula in Turkey for the needs of differences of young people: Overview in light of the PROMISE project. In T. Tajmel & S. Klaus (Eds.), Science education unlimited: Approaches to equal opportunity in learning science (179-199). Munster: Waxmann Verlag co. Publisher.

Gagné, R. (1985). The Conditions of Learning and the Theory of Instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Gustafson, K, L. & Branch, R. M. (1997). Survey of Instructional Design Models (3rd ed.). Syracuse: ERIC Clearing House on Information & Technology.

Instructional Design Models (n.d.). Retrieved May 24, 2011, from http://www.cs.ucy.ac.cy/~nicolast/courses/cs654/lectures/IDmodels.pdf

Kabadayı, A. (2001). Bilişsel öğrenme biçemleri ve öğrenci merkezli bir yabancı dil öğretim modeli önerisi. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Konya: Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.

Kabadayı, A. (2016). A Suggested In-service Training Model Based on Turkish Preschool Teachers’ Conceptions for Sustainable Development, Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 18(1), 5-15, DOI: 10.1515/jtes-2016-0001.

Kemp, J. (1977) Instructional Design: A Plan for Unit and Course Development. Belmont: Fearon-Pitman Pub.

Köksal, M.S. (2009). An instructional design model to teach nature of science, Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 1-18.

Molenda, M. (2003). The ADDIE Model. Retrieved May 24, 2011, from http://www.indiana.edu/~molpage/The%20ADDIE%20Model_Encyclo.pdf

Magliaro, S. G. & Shambaugh, N. (2006). Student models of instructional design. Educational Technology Research & Development, 54(1), 83-106.

Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing Effective Instruction (4rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Piskurich, G. M. (2006). Rapid Instructional Design: Learning ID Fast and Right. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Posner, G. and Rudnisky, A. N. (1997). Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum Development for Teachers. New York: Longman.

Smith,P. L. & Ragan T. J. (2005).Instructional Design (3 rd ed.).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Whitmyer, C. (1999). Instructional Design for Online Learning. FutureU Press, Available at http://www.buildyourcourseonline.net/articles/instructional_design_for_online_learning.pdf

14-1

Downloads

Published

2016-12-31

How to Cite

Mutlu, G. (2016). A qualitative analysis and comparison of the two contemporary models of instructional design. Journal of Human Sciences, 13(3), 6154–6163. Retrieved from https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/4350

Issue

Vol. 13 No. 3 (2016)

Section

Education

License

Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi ISSN:1303-5134
International Journal of Human Sciences ISSN:2458-9489
 
is an "Open Access Journal" that uses a funding model that does not charge readers or their institutions for access. From the BOAI definition of open access, users take the right of read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles.

Authors can retain copyright, while granting the journal right of first publication. Alternatively, authors can transfer copyright to the journal, which then permits authors non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons can be consulted for flexible copyright licenses.

©1999 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.