HPT and ISD

Clark Quinn discussed the Great ADDIE Debate and summarized the alternatives to exclusively using ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation):

The obvious question came up about what would be used in place of ADDIE.  I believe that ADDIE as a checklist would be a nice accompaniment to both a more encompassing  and a more learning-centric approach.  For the former, I showed the HPT model as a representation of a design approach considering courses as part of a larger picture.  For the latter, I suggested that a focus on learning experience design would be appropriate.

Using an HPT-like approach first, to ensure that a course is the right solution, is necessary.  Then, I’d focus on working backwards from the needed change (Michael Allen talked about using sketches as lightweight prototypes at the conference, and first drawing the last activity the user engaged in) thinking about creating a learning experience that develops the learner’s capability.  Finally, I’d be inclined to use ADDIE as a checklist to ensure all the important components are considered, once I’d drafted an initial design (or several).  ADDIE certainly may be useful in taking that design forward, through development, implementation and evaluation.

I think of HPT (human performance technology) as an enabler to get to first base in instructional systems design (ISD). Without the proper analysis of the organizational needs, constraints and performance factors, a “learning” project may be doomed from the onset, because too often, training is a solution looking for a problem.

Here are some images from past presentations that support Clark’s post and may be helpful.

Link to original post

Leave a Reply