Eclectic Instructional Design

Csikszentmihalyi states, “creativity generally involves crossing the boundaries of domains” (1996).  I believe the same is true of learning theories and their associated methods.  My process allows the characteristics of the project (learning needs, audience, content, and context) to guide the selection of learning theories and methods.  Blending learning theories and design approaches enables me to construct rich, personalized, and memorable learning experiences that are human-centered and results-orientated.  

Learning Theories

There are four main learning theories, and all have a place in instructional design.  The choice of view or combination of theories depends on the characteristics of the project.  

The behaviorist learning theory is focused on observable behavior, practice, and reinforcement.  Behaviorist theory shines from an instructional design standpoint by breaking down large tasks/jobs into smaller, more digestible tasks.  An example of the behaviorist theory in action is microlearning and point-of-need training that can be delivered on the job, at the time of need, in 10 minutes or less- thanks to mobile learning.  The behaviorist theory scales down tasks to allow learner absorption; likewise, the cognitive load theory scales down large amounts of information into digestible chunks to avoid overloading a learner's working/short-term memory.  I keep these theories at the forefront of my mind throughout the design process.  

The cognitivist learning theory has been my primary theoretical influence because it aligns with most of the instructional design projects I have worked on, wherein shifts in perspective are the learning objective.  I utilize Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction as quintessential evidence-based strategies for creating effective learning experiences.  

The social learning theory tells us that learning is affected by social influences, including consequences; we learn by observing.  In training, social learning can look like collaborative learning, group interactions, mentoring, and coaching- social learning theory is essential and growing in workplace training and development.  

Lastly, the constructivist theory centers around the belief that learners attempt to make sense of their experiences by organizing them into pre-existing categories in their brain- categories constructed by their prior knowledge and experiences.  In a nutshell, learners make sense of new information by associating it with old information, referred to as learner-driven knowledge creation (Honebein & Sink, 2012).  The constructivist theory can be applied in instructional design when authenticity is needed.  Translated into practice, virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR)- allow the learner to experience a new scenario in a virtual yet realistic environment wherein the learner can practice skills that might not otherwise be possible in the real world due to risk (i.e., police/military/soft skills).   VR and AR allow learners to simulate experiences and gain skill practice that they might not have had the opportunity to do otherwise.  

The learning theories listed above induce learning strategies, methods, experiences, and learning environments that are consistent with the view (Honebein & Sink, 2012).  With an eclectic eye, learning theories and their associated methods become a toolbox to meet instructional design needs and an opportunity to enrich experiences and improve learning outcomes. 

Design Models

I select an instructional design process based on the nature of the project, and in most cases, I prefer to use a blended model approach.  I can modify the process as project parameters change and provide a rationale for doing so.  I lean toward the overall format of the ADDIE model; the structure and well-defined phases are beneficial on large collaborative projects when organization is imperative.  

On all projects, I believe that targeted knowledge and skill enrichment are achieved with thoughtful advance work at the beginning of the instructional design process, which saves time and money and ensures a successful end product.  Agile and Design Thinking have been instrumental to my analysis process.  The Align phase of Agile helps me determine if a training solution is needed by aligning strategy, stakeholders, and the learner.  To better understand the learner as user and identify user pain points, I like to fold in the Empathize and Define phases of Design Thinking by conducting interviews, surveys &/or creating user personas.  Once I have a clear picture of the target audience and the training need(s), I jump back to Agile and assess the Five Moments of Need to determine a learning approach (new, more, apply, change, or solve). 

Once in the product design phase, there are several design models that I gravitate toward based on learning theory targets and project parameters.  Outside of an enhanced ADDIE model,  I utilize the Backward Design Model for its ability to focus on the learning objectives and eliminate superfluousness in course design, and I adhere closely to Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction for evidence-based strategies to increase learner knowledge and skill acquisition.  On all projects, interaction design is important to me; the product must be logical, easy to use (flow), and enjoyable for the learner as user.  

Formative evaluation before implementation brings me back to Design Thinking for the Test phase (test, collect feedback, and make improvements).  Learning objectives must be measurable to discern through summative evaluation if our learning product is successful and revise if needed.  

Fun and surprise can be easily incorporated into any learning product and should be.  Gamification and gamified elements enhance engagement and increase learner motivation.   

Above all, my design philosophy is driven by ensuring my learning products are:

1. Simple, focused/intentional

2. Accessible, available to all learners

3. Meaningful, data-driven

4. Inclusive, acknowledges, respects & promotes diversity

Thank you for taking the time to read my design philosophy.  As I continue to grow as a designer (and human being), I endeavor to continue learning and adjusting my approach to meet the needs of learners.  My website and design philosophy are living documents that will evolve with me along my journey.  Reach out if you have any questions or would like to discuss further.

References

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention.  HarperCollins Publishers.

Honebein, P. C., & Sink, D. L. (2012). The practice of eclectic instructional design.  Performance Improvement (International Society for Performance Improvement), 51(10), 26-31.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21312