Instruction is often perceived as an event. However, quality instruction is actually a system of events. Instructional design is essentially a cyclical process that analyzes needs, develops solutions, tries out those solutions, and revises. An instructional system includes identifying needs, developing goals, designing strategies, creating materials, and continually revising and editing these materials. The most important phase in this system is planning. Planning places your instruction on a solid foundation. In this chapter, this continual process is described in detail.

This text presents a unique instructional design model that is appropriate for instructional software. If you do not have experience in instructional design, you should review the contents of this chapter carefully. If you are an experienced designer, you will benefit from reviewing the material and integrating it into your own set of instructional design models.

In general, instructional design is like any design process; it is a method for planning and guiding the development of a product. Other design processes may create plans for cars or buildings; your goal is to design for instruction. The design model in this text includes three large phases: (1) planning, (2) presentation, and (3) and practice. Each phase offers opportunities to revise and revisit the instructional materials and assumptions. I am primarily concerned with planning in this chapter.

As demonstrated in Figure 2.1, planning consists of (1) analyzing needs, (2) identifying tasks, (3) creating objectives, (4) classifying objectives, and (5) creating test items. These stages are followed by the planning phase, which includes designing presentation and practice strategies that can be classified as attention management, cognitive load management, and structural management. Evaluation is not a separate phase because it is done concurrently throughout the entire design process. Evaluation has two components: (1) assessing the learner and (2) evaluating and revising the instructional materials.

Figure 2.1. Systematic Design of Instruction.

In the planning phase, you determine what problems need to be addressed with instruction and determine what the tasks are involved in addressing those problems. Once you have a good idea of what the problems are, you can begin to consider the learner. You will need to describe the goals to the learner. Each goal will then have to be classified. Classifying goals according to learning domains narrows down the number of instructional strategies that have to be considered in the presentation and practice phases, which should result in considerable time saving.

The development phase consists of creating presentations and practice sequences that instruct the learner. Finally, the evaluation phase consists of assessing the learner and gathering data from user tests to determine the value of the instructional product.

Each of these phases must be congruent and consistent with the other phases to ensure validity. Congruency means that each phase agrees with and supports the others. For example, a factory line has many people doing independent jobs; however, an industrial engineer has carefully planned each step to be congruent with the next. All of the steps in a congruent process contribute, seamlessly, to a coordinated conclusion. If we can maintain congruency between our instructional phases, we can be confident that our instruction, at least, will attempt to solve the problems we identified.

It might be beneficial to review what type of activity education is. Adler (1977) describes it as a cooperative activity as opposed to an operative activity. Operative activities are those that lead to outcomes that could not possibly occur with out the activity, operative activities are necessary interventions that cause outcomes. For example, heating a gas is an operative activity; heat causes gas to expand. All other things being equal, there is no chance for an ambiguous result with an operative activity.

Education, on the other hand, is a cooperative activity. Cooperative activities merely improve the probability of a particular outcome occurring. The most we can hope for, with any instructional intervention, is to make the achievement of learning goals more probable. The implication of this distinction is that selecting an appropriate instructional intervention does not guarantee results. There is no way to rank instructional strategies, techniques, and tactics on a continuum of best to worst before you have tried them out on particular problems. We do not know, beforehand, what will work for our particular goals and circumstances. This means that, if we are going to have any sort of quality control in our instructional materials, we must have a system that lets us know whether our interventions are working in the context for which they were designed.

Unfortunately, as much as we have learned about pedagogy, instructional design is largely reliant on trial and error. Instruction, while based on principles garnered from science, does not have the certainty of science. We try things, see how they work, and modify them if necessary. This is a systematic, continual, and iterative process. The advantage of this approach is that, regardless of where one starts, one will eventually end up with an appropriate and useful intervention if enough iterations can be developed. Without thorough usability testing, it is unlikely that any instructional product will perform as intended.

Using a systematic process of instructional design assumes that the first set of strategy choices may not reflect what the final product looks like. Your initial choices for designing an intervention come from a carefully cataloged set of options derived from both science and experience. Nevertheless, these are merely suggestions; they need to be tried out on a set of sample of learners who have similar characteristics as the target audience. This sample audience is the best source of feedback. Their performance and comments are critical for revising the materials.

A needs analysis is the first step of the planning process. At this stage, you need to determine what the need for instruction is. You need to determine whether problems exist that instruction can fix. Remember, you are only looking for needs that you can solve through instruction. Perhaps the biggest mistakes you can make as an instructional designer is to attempt to solve a non-instructional problem with an instructional intervention.

For example, a customer support representative at a call center might be consistently rude and insensitive to callers. It is important not to prematurely identify this problem as an instructional need. It may very well be a motivation problem. The representative may be aware of what constitutes quality customer service; however, he or she may have no incentive to behave in a manner that reflects that awareness. A needs analysis will help you uncover whether an instructional problem exists.

There are two primary sources for identifying needs. Van Merrienboer (1999) describes these as the "World of Work" and the "World of Knowledge." The world of work represents needs pulled from daily tasks, particularly needs associated with occupations. These needs become apparent when there is a performance discrepancy, new tools or techniques, or when new employees are brought into an organization. For example, a master plumber asks her new assistant to troubleshoot a malfunctioning valve. If the assistant is not familiar with the various things that can go wrong with a valve, and if he is not familiar with the tools involved in remedying the difficulty, then he will not be able to assist the master plumber. This scenario indicates a performance problem that can be addressed with an instructional intervention.

By surveying experts involved in a task, you can determine whether a need exists. There are likely to be several needs, requiring you to place them in order of importance. You do not want to spend your time on trivial tasks. Focus your resources on tackling problems that have the biggest impact. With experience, you will be able to judge how long it will take to develop instruction for different situations; at that point, it will be easier to rank order instructional needs.

It is particularly important to consider whether any need relates to a dangerous situation or to an economically important situation. For example, if you ask a new employee to operate a forklift without proper training and practice, there is a possibility that he could seriously injure himself or others. The risks of ignoring this type of training are too high to ignore. Likewise, if you ask a new employee to sort files on an adequately backed-up computer system, there is little chance for any large-scale destruction. In that case, it might be a reasonable decision to have an employee attempt to train himself for the task.

The world of knowledge is a bit different. In the world of knowledge, "a particular discipline or subject matter domain is analyzed and ordered . . . . the main output of the process is a highly structured description of the domain" (van Merrienboer, 1999, p. 5). Academic settings have organized knowledge into hierarchical structures. These structures are further organized into fields of study. It is assumed that, to participate in various types of inquiries or to participate in professions related to these domains, a learner must master a set of interrelated skills and knowledge. For example, the field of biology has a long and established history. Universities offer degrees in biology that consist of carefully organized courses. Each course covers a portion of the field. By engaging in these courses, a student develops a comprehensive understanding of the field as a whole.

Identifying needs in such an environment is largely an act of examining the established relationships and hierarchical structures in the field and determining whether the learners understand them. For an established field such as biology, these relationships are well known and updating a course of study is a matter of determining what new information is available and how to best integrate it with currently established ideas. Identifying instructional needs is largely an act of identifying what learners have mastered and comparing it to what they do not yet know.

Once you have identified needs that can be addressed with instruction, you will have to analyze the tasks involved in meeting those needs. The world of work and the world of knowledge have different methods for identifying tasks.

At this point, it is time for you to create learning objectives, detailed descriptions of what the learner should be able to do at the conclusion of instruction. Learning objectives are not descriptions of what will be done to the learner; but descriptions of what the learner will be able to do at the conclusion of instruction. We cannot begin to discuss instructional strategies until we have clearly articulated learning objectives that tell us what to expect out of our learners. Learning objectives give us, and the learner, a target to guide our actions. Without clearly defined objectives, there is no way to establish whether we have invested our time and effort wisely.

As we will see, instructional strategies are directly associated with learning objectives. There are an infinite number of possible instructional strategies we could try to implement; however, once we clearly state an objective, and once we classify that objective as a particular "type," then our choices of which instructional strategies becomes manageable.

Mager (1961) described three components that are required to be in each objective as follows:

This learning objective is very specific. There is little ambiguity as to what the learner should be capable of at the conclusion of instruction. The learning objective can be broken down as shown in Table 2.2.

Terms such as "understand" and "know" are inadequate for describing learning objectives because they do not specify what the learner should be able to do to demonstrate mastery. Specifics are important because they guide what type of instruction the learner will receive and they guide what kind of performances the learner is expected to produce. For example, we tried to state a learning objective as: The learner will understand how to operate the Series 7 Food Processor.

It is ambiguous what the learners will have mastered. Perhaps they will "know" that if you turn the device on the blade will rotate. However, they may not know how to select an appropriate blade for a particular task, they may not know how to add ingredients, they may not know how to clean and care for the device. It is unclear what the term "operate" suggests.

The objective could be revised into objectives such as:

The added detail makes it very clear as to what is expected of the learner.

The important point is to make objectives as useful as possible. Objectives should not be constructed for their own sake. The point is to make objectives a tool in your design process. If designed correctly, they will provide guidance for all of the other stages in the instructional development process. In general, the more specific you make an objective, the more useful it will become.

Learning objectives should follow closely from the task analysis. For example, the objectives below directly relate to the task analysis performed in Figure 2.3:

Likewise, learning objectives can be developed from a text analysis. For example, the objectives below are produced based on the previously mentioned biology studies.

The field of instructional design is based on the assumption that different kinds of learning exist and that different instructional strategies are required for each kind of learning (Gagné, 1985). This assumption addresses one of the most difficult problems instructional designers face. For example, if you are going to teach someone to shoot a basketball, what strategy would you use? Would you:

Likewise, if you were teaching someone to distinguish Georgian from Victorian architecture, would you:

Your choices are endless. However, by matching up learning objectives with learning domains, we gain a clearer idea of what strategies we should use.

Once instructional objectives have been identified, they then can be classified. Categorizing individual objectives allows you to work with them as a class—a set with similar characteristics. This is an enormous time saver. It is much easier to create instructional solutions for a small set of categories than to address each learning objective as a unique instance.

There are many ways in which to classify content. Bloom's taxonomy (1956) uses the categories of Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation to categorize learning objectives. Gagné's taxonomy (1985) used the categories Attitudes, Cognitive Strategies, Intellectual skills, Psychomotor Skills, and Verbal Knowledge. However, for online learning, I have chosen to use Merrill's (1983) category system. Merrill (1983) proposed a classification that emphasized the cognitive aspect of intellectual skills. He suggested that most learning objectives could be classified as enabling Facts, Concepts, Principles, or Procedures.

This classification system is very specific and uses the terms (Facts, Concepts, Principles, and Procedures) in specific ways that may not be familiar to you. For example, the term "concept" is often used as a synonym for an idea or a notion; however, in this classification system, the term is used to designate entities that have been grouped according to a set of attributes or characteristics. The term "principle" is often used to designate a basic truth; however, in the context of instructional design it describes a relationship between two or more "concepts." For example, in Table 2.3 I have classified a set of learning objectives and have included a brief summary of each category.

These categories are used to organize the instructional strategies in this text. The specifics of how and why you would classify a learning objective into a particular classification will be covered in Chapters 8 through 11.

It is sufficient at this point to state that the chosen classification for learning objective leads to a set of instructional strategies that have been shown to be successful in teaching that subject matter. This is a critical point because learning is dependent on instructional strategies more than any other variable; much more so than the media or the technology chosen to deliver instruction (Hannifin & Hooper, 1993).

If you misclassify an objective, you will be teaching the learner with misaligned strategies and thus ruining any hope for congruency among objectives, methods, and assessments. In other words, your instruction will have no coherence and is likely to be a hindrance in accomplishing your goals.

The last step of the planning phase is to write test items. It may seem counterintuitive to write these before you select instructional strategies and before you develop the instructional materials; however, because congruency among all of the elements is an important instructional design rule, it makes sense to make a clear connection between the learning objectives that we have identified and the test items. One of the biggest mistakes in instructional design is not to make this connection. For example, Table 2.4 demonstrates the relationship between learning objectives and test items.

Notice how the objective reflects the learning objective. Also, notice how the objective limits the scope of the test item. For example, learning objective 1 in the table clearly states that a diagram will be provided, but this description does not allow for a photograph of a microscope or another type of representation. Identifying cellular structures in diagrams is an easier task than it is with an actual photograph because a diagram is a stylized representation; the guidance from the objective is unambiguous.

Table 2.4. Connecting Learning Objectives and Test Items.

	Image from www.biotechnologyonline.gov.au/popups/img_cellwithlabels.cfm
Learning Objective	Test Item
1. Given a diagram that includes the cell structures (cell membrane, nucleus, endoplasmic reticulum, chloroplasts, and mitochondria) and a list of those structures, in two minutes you will be able label each one appropriately, with no errors.	Match the following structures with the diagram above: Cell membrane Nucleus Endoplasmic reticulum Chloroplasts Mitochondria
2. Given a set of thirty portrait photographs, within five minutes the customer representative will be able to sort the set into those demonstrating frustration and those demonstrating distraction, with an 85 percent success rate.	The facial features of this person indicate:
3. Given no assistance, you will be able to describe through both words and illustrations, the functions of the nucleolus and the nuclear envelope. The description should accurately account for the principles involved.	Describe how the nucleolus and the nuclear envelope function. Be sure to describe the nature of their cause an effect relationship, particularly, as it relates to ribosome storage.
4. Given a set of five videos of a customer service representative apologizing, the customer representative will be able list the stages of apology that are absent in each scenario, with an 80 percent success rate.	Which stage of apology is absent from Video 4: Regret Repentance Apologizing Forgiveness

The important ideas in this chapter include: