I come across discussions frequently about the question, “Is ADDIE dead?” Is the acronym which stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE) too slow for today’s fast moving world? Are there better or faster ISD models? Are their models that are more effective? More efficient? Etc. These debates are always interesting to read.
I believe the more practical question to ponder as a practicing instructional designer—Do I go through all of the phases of the ADDIE process when I design instruction?
First lets recall the adage that most practicing designers in the field know—Good, Fast, Cheep… pick only two. The adage gets us into the mindset of constraints. When designing instruction one must remember that we can only “pick two” when it comes to thinking about:
- Quality of design in an instructional event
- Time it takes to design/develop an instructional event
- Cost to design/develop an instructional event
Side Bar: Check out Wikipedia’s discussion of the Project Triangle from an engineering perspective. It is pretty interesting and applies to those designing instruction as well.
To answer my above question, do I go through all of the phases of ADDIE when I design instruction? No. Here is why. The following information is provided from WikiBooks > Instructional Design > Rapid Prototyping:
[As a designer I am often confronted with the above constraints (mostly time) and there for implement the use of] rapid prototyping methodologies because:
- using working models of the final product early in a project tends to eliminate time-consuming revisions later on, and
- design tasks are completed concurrently, rather than sequentially throughout the project.
With rapid prototyping, the steps are crunched together to reduce the amount of time needed to develop training or a product. The design and development phases are done simultaneously and the formative evaluation is done throughout the process.