1. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 1 Needs Analysis: (Leshin, Pollock & Reigeluth, 1992). 1. Analyze the problem Figure out the purposes for instruction, if any 2. Analyse the domains Figure out the specifics about the kinds of problems you have, the tasks that are involved in the learning problem, and set performance objectives to create instruction that will solve the problem (close the gap) If this all seems terribly systematic, well.. It is a systems approach. The research is developing in many ways, depending on the research approach and philosophical approach used (see Jan 30 notes!).

2. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 2 1. Analyze the problem 1.Define the problem 1.Describe the nature of the (training or education) problem 1.Training: find the performance gap 2.Education: find the knowledge gap 2.Identify the source of the problem 1.Is the cause of the gap organizational or individual? 1.Education: What is the rationale for the learner to acq. Knowledge? 2.Training: What might be causing the gap? What is expected? 3.Data gather: Focus groups, observation, surveys.. 1.Interpret the data to find problem elements 3.Determine possible solutions 1.Find a way to answer the questions asked in 1.2 (above) 1.From the data: decide if instruction can solve the problem (or not) 2.From the data: Is instruction needed with other solutions? 3.Analyse the risk, success est., cost, development pragmatics and implementation pragmatics for these solutions. 4.Communicate the results: 1.Identify problem areas, alternatives where inst. Could help. Support your findings with your data, descr. Of solutions, rationale for your decisions, a comparison of benefits and costs, & give alternate solutions Needs Analysis: (Leshin, Pollock & Reigeluth, 1992).

3. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 3 Needs Analysis: (Leshin, Pollock & Reigeluth, 1992). 2. Analyze the Domains (job or subject areas) identify and precisely state what the learner should be able to do or accomplish ( if you have determined that instruction would help (fill the gap), you want to identify and precisely state what the learner should be able to do or accomplish at the end of the instruction or task. Here performance objectives are written to provide the foundation for: –Determining what skills and mental models need to be used –Selecting the tasks to be taught –Developing measures that indicate whether the desired learning has taken place The steps can be: 1.Identify the tasks comprising each domain 1.Define the domain. Training: Welder, artist/Educ: “understands economics” 2.Identify all tasks that comprise the domain: 1.Training: Responsibilities, job descriptions / Job Analysis 2.Education: Subject area content and mental models recommended (curriculum) 2.Identify the performance deficiencies associated with each task 1.Training: observe output deficiencies / interview target learners 2.Education: Interview masters, interview teachers, administrators 3.Write the performance objectives for each task 1.Gives you a focus for selecting content, media, and instructional tactics 2.Gives you a focus for assessing knowledge / skill acq. After the learning event. 3.Alerts learners to the task at hand within instruction itself. 4.Develop the performance measures for each task

4. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 4 Analyzing Learners & Contexts Gagne/Briggs Jonassen/ Gardner/ Gagne/Briggs Rossett/ Tessmer/ Smith&Ragan/ Reigeluth/ Kazanas/ Shaumbagh &Magliaro/ Dick & Carey/ Kazanas/ Rothwell Leshin, Pollock & Reigeluth/

5. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 5 TASK PERFORMING JOB, TASK AND CONTENT ANALYSIS Once the Need is Known, we figure out the processes and tasks that may or may not allow the sub-optimal or “GAP” learning / performance situation (focus on the Task Analysis, the rest is extra information for your resource library) A Yellow Bar at the bottom means this is a resource page only Most of the information in this section is summarized from a collection of the following sources: Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

6. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 6 Update: EDER 673 History of ID ID Terminology Instructional Design Philosophies Learners and Learning Theories Context based designs ID Models: A peek Needs Analysis Task Analysis Ordering Content (elaboration) Media Selection Motivation Evaluation SMCR/Feedback Communication Model

7. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 7 Tasks occur in an organization… how well do designers know that which surrounds our prospective instruction…. Ed Admin. 700 on one slide Is the administration / work flow integrated or hierarchical? Bureaucratic - or less than bureaucratic? –Division of labor Technocratic - or less technocratic? –Division of expertise and related power regimes Is the organization open or closed? Is the organization pro-change or change averse? Is this a learning community or a “production” community? Is there a cultural component that is important? Do clear values support the mission/goals/policies? Who leads? –Employees –Supervisors –Committees After Sergiovanni, 1990, Drucker, 1997 Workplace Setting Analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

8. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 8 The Main Instructional Development Concern about the Work Environment is.. “The total surrounding context for the person or subject of interest”. Because The instructional design process is a change effort that is intended to meet or avert deficiencies in knowledge, skills or attitudes. (Kazanas, 1998, p. 103). Considering Organization resource constraints (time, money, people, $) and culture affect: 1.The length of time a project can take 2.Which media can be used 3.Which instruction & testing strategies can be used Workplace Setting Analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

9. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 9 Workplace Setting Analysis: How to Identify which factors matter.. Environments affecting ID development, delivery and application matter - especially if you are have a constructivist / inquiry designer epistemology. Focus on 3 environments: 1. Development Environment 2. Delivery Environment 3. Application Environment Workplace Setting Analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

10. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 10 Organization / ID Environment Assessment Characteristics Some High Performance Workplace Characteristics for Instructional Development (Work) Training and continuous learning Information sharing Employee participation Organization Structure Worker - Management partnerships Rewards systems exist and are understood Employee job security Supportive Work Environment (Dubois and Rothwell, 1996) Workplace Setting Analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

11. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 11 Setting Analysis Quality Check: As a Developer, Did I Get it Right? Was the analysis conducted? Was the analysis conducted at the proper time? Place? SWOT Analysis: Is instruction right for this organization? –Strengths of this org for T & D –Weaknesses of this org for T & D –Opportunities for T & D –Troubles foreseen with T & D in this context Designer Competency Check: Is the designer capable of explaining why they conducted a setting analysis and the reasons they chose to focus on certain features of the design, delivery and application environments? Workplace Setting Analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

12. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 12 Work Analysis in Context: Job, Task and Content Analysis in a Training Setting Needs Assessment (finds the gap) Learner Analysis (finds learner Characteristics) Organization Analysis (Identifies Training Constraints) Work Analysis (procedures in the Org.) Identify what worker does, how they do it, what mental and physical Requirements exist,what kinds of tasks are done, what Constitutes mastery or low performance, Create Perform. Objectives Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

13. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 13 Job Analysis (Planning for one) (good for job-specific training/instruction needs) 1.Who will do conduct it? 2.Why do it? 3.How will the results be used? 4.Who depends on these results? 5.What data collection & analysis methods should be used? Job analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

14. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 14 Job Analysis (Implementing the Plan or Doing It) (good for job-specific training/instruction needs) 1.Do the plan steps (previous) to collect info. About jobs under investigation 2.THE RESULTS 1.A Job description 2.A job specification 3.A task listing Job analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

15. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 15 Task Analysis: Task Language 2 Types of Tasks: 1. Cognitive Task: (Mental performance). Unobservable performance. (Knowing cannot be observed by Kazanas… Do not follow a prescribed order. IE: Choose a personal computer. 1.Also called a “transfer task” 2.Goal: Find a personal computer. 2. Action Task: (physical performance). Observable performance. Action causes change. Often a prescribed order. IE: Change a light bulb. 1.A series of behaviors involving person/person or person/object interaction 2.A series of behaviors that changes the person in some way 3.A series of behaviors that accomplishes a goal. –CRITERIA for evaluating an action task Task has a beginning and an end Task is performed in relatively short time periods Task can be observed Task can be measured Task is independent of other actions Task: A discrete unit of performance by an individual (typing a letter). TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

16. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 16 Task Analysis Knowing what they do, how they do it, why they do it… A task analysis is an intensive examination of how people perform work activities. Tasks: A discrete unit of work performed by an individual, it has a beginning and an ending. Subtasks : the smallest step into which a work activity can be divided. Elements: a step within a step… separate time-motions Task listing: A list of actions done in work. TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

17. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 17 Task Analysis: The Results 1. To determine the components of competency (competent performance) 2. To identify activities that may be SIMPLIFIED or IMPROVED 3. To determine exactly what a worker must 1.KNOW 2.FEEL 3.DO … to learn a specific work activity 4. To clarify resources /conditions needed for job competency 5. To establish minimum standards (expectations) for each task appearing in a job description. There are many techniques for Task Analysis: See: Leshin & Pollock, Riegeluth, Dick and Carey, Smith and Ragan, Kazanas…. And so on… TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

18. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 18 Task Analysis: 5 Steps 1.Identify Jobs or tasks to be analyzed 2.Clarify the desired results 3.Prepare a Plan to do the Analysis A.Implement the Plan B.Analyze the results 4.Break down the Task into component parts if need be. 5.Restructure the parts if necessary to achieve (learning / skills) outcomes TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

19. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 19 Step One: Identify the Task to be Analyzed by identifying the KIND of task Procedural: observable action processes (people & machines) –Example: Filling a gas tank Process: partly observable, bound to a particular process (people & people) –Example: Equitable hiring practices Troubleshooting: observe an outcome & trace it back to the observable action that led to the outcome ( people & machines or people & people) –Example: I always get 2 copies of email from her. Mental: Unobservable cognitive tasks (abstraction, compare/contrast). Sequences may be predictable. (person) TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

20. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 20 Step 2: Clarifying the Desired Results Ask yourself: What do you want from this task analysis? Watch that your level of detail is not too fine. Jackson (1986) suggests: 1. Find a task input 2. Find a task output 3. Figure out the steps between! Results can be: application of an intellectual skill (comparison), a cognitive strategy (memory), verbal information, motor skill or attitude. TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

21. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 21 Step 3: PLAN to do the Task Analysis 3 Questions to guide your Task Analysis Plan 1. Who will do it? 2. What task performance will be examined? 3. How will I collect & Analyze data? Remember the TIME and $$ it will take to analyze a task. Will INSIDE ID people or EXTERNAL ID people do the analysis? Sources of Information to consider when Planning a Task Analysis Performers (master, average, low) Nonperformers (managers, people affected, resource people, SMEs, future performers) Documents (reference by performers to do tasks (manuals, online guides often list the tasks quite well…often…) Environmental features: The conditions of instruction and learning TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

22. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 22 Steps 4 and 5: IMPLEMENTING the Task Analysis 1. Break the job down into its component parts 2. Compare the parts with correct performance criteria. 3. Restructure the parts to create an improved task performance –OUTLINE THE TEACHING AND LEARNING REQUIREMENTS –To summarize: To design OJT, –Do a task list –Analyze the task list –Use the task list to become the basis for performance objectives –Generate the instructional intervention to improve GAP tasks. TASK analysis Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

23. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 23 Another approach to Task Analysis: CONTENT Analysis We are still looking for a way to design instructional interventions that improve performance or learning…. This is the process of braking large bodies of subject matter or tasks into smaller instructionally useful units. Can be called “Chunking”. Focuses on the information or knowledge requirements rather than on sequences or procedures --- FOCUSES ON EXPERTISE OR EXCELLENT PRACTICE, then “backs out” the criteria for an optimal task: Åssumptions: –Learners must know before they can do –Work tasks might not be a good basis for instruction-- do all tasks boil down to a single set of tasks? –Different instructional content might apply for different tasks. CONTENT analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

24. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 24 A 6 Step Content Analysis 1. Identify the subject 2. Identify what subject experts know 3. See how people perform the mental activity by: 1.Asking them 2.Observing work related activity 3.Using other methods 4. Conduct a lit search on the subject 5. Develop a model of the subject 6. Describe the subject There is an idea that if you study the content of a mental process or job, you will likely find an order or sequence that dictates what part of the content must be known before others, and known well for subsequent learning to occur. CONTENT analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

25. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 25 Content Analysis Step 1: Identify the Subject (ie: teaching writing skills). use databases Step 2: Investigate what Expert performers (master teachers) know use interviews, questionnaires, observations, docs, internet to explain what a subject is and how it relates to the work, and how they would orient a new person to the work. Step 3: Investigate how people perform the activity Check mental performance by job shadowing, other methods (see Leshin). Clarify what knowledge is applied in what setting, how people organize that knowledge.. Sit with performers while they work. Step 4: Conduct a lit search on the subject: ID research too. Step 5: Create a model that fits the subject onto a performance plane… flowcharts, events networks, graphic models organize information visually. You want to know what is done, when, and how well it must be done to design interventions for performance improvement. (Dick and Carey, 1994). Step 6: Describe the subject in a way that will facilitate learning by others. Present what must be known my experts. THIS IS GROUND FOR SETTING PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES. NEXT. CONTENT analysis Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

26. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 26 Competency Assessment Another kind of Thinking about Performance Particularly skills-based performance Supplants Task Analysis today at times Competency can mean –Knowledge –Skills –Attitude Competency is a degree of excellence in performance, using exemplars as excellence criteria. Competency assessment is the process of discovering the competencies of exemplars. Competency models are derived from competency assessment. They can be created for job categories, departments or organizations. Organizational competencies can be defined too. Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

27. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 27 Competency Assessment Is popular as it is a more holistic way to approach training, as minute tasks and processes are less of a focus. A focus on knowledge, skills and attitudes is thought to be enough for the complex work world today. It is a model of intangibles (Kazanas & Rothwell, 1998). Approaches include borrowed (from another org.), process driven (doing a content and task analysis on a specific org. unit), isolating characteristics of exemplar performers and … verifying the model. MINIMUM competencies are assessed via focus groups with both expert and non experts. There are trends driven approaches, and rapid assessment approaches where outputs, competencies roles and quality requirements from work functions, responsibilities and behaviors emerge. Gaps are filled by working on the gestalt by using behavioral interviewing in the group. (Delphi). Optional Reading Kazanas, W., & Rothwell, W. (1998). Mastering the Instructional Process, (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction. (4th Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins

28. © E. Kowch 2003 iD 28 Adieu for this week, EDER 673 ! Instructional Design (iD) Next Week (March 6- March 13) Ordering and sequencing content: Elaboration Theory (blueprinting) Readings due for Next Class (March 6, 2003): 1. The Elaboration Theory: Guidance for Scope and Sequence Decisions. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models - An Overview and Current Status (pp.425-454). 2. Read / Use The Interactive Powerpoint on this topic, available from the Course Home Page. From, Culnan, A. (2003). Elaboration Theory. Unpublished M.Ed. Ed Technology Assignment. See the Home Page by Friday, 7 PM Feb. 28th for more detail and reading resources on this topic -- beyond the class material covered tonight. See the New Discussion Thread (Groups) in WebCT for your ID Model Peer Feedback (Rubrics are attached in your email and in the new Thread) http://www.ucalgary.ca/~ekowch/673/673home.html Eugene G. Kowch Assistant Professor of Educational TechnologyAdieu for this week, EDER 673 ! Instructional Design (iD) Next Week (March 6- March 13) Ordering and sequencing content: Elaboration Theory (blueprinting) Readings due for Next Class (March 6, 2003): 1. The Elaboration Theory: Guidance for Scope and Sequence Decisions. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models - An Overview and Current Status (pp.425-454). 2. Read / Use The Interactive Powerpoint on this topic, available from the Course Home Page. From, Culnan, A. (2003). Elaboration Theory. Unpublished M.Ed. Ed Technology Assignment. See the Home Page by Friday, 7 PM Feb. 28th for more detail and reading resources on this topic -- beyond the class material covered tonight. See the New Discussion Thread (Groups) in WebCT for your ID Model Peer Feedback (Rubrics are attached in your email and in the new Thread) http://www.ucalgary.ca/~ekowch/673/673home.html Eugene G. Kowch Assistant Professor of Educational Technology http://www.ucalgary.ca/~ekowch/673/673home.html