The ISD Model

For this lesson, you will respond to the following initial EDTC 6010 blog question: What is your personal assessment of the ISD model? Critique it. Describe the strengths (if any) and weaknesses (if any) of this model? What activities of this model have you used in your experience as an instructor?

The ISD Model, to me, is an extremely strong one. I honestly cannot find any areas in which it is lacking, so I will focus on the strengths. One strength is all of the parts of the analysis phase. It is so very important to take into account WHO is being taught and what the students' needs are. Also, one must know exactly WHAT is being taught. What aspects of the concept are important, what content is not needed, what might the students already know? I love that the ISD model also looks at WHERE the instruction will take place. Obviously the setting makes a huge impact on the instruction. I once took a "distance learning" course that was in an audio tape format. It was very obvious to me that the instructor did not do much analysis, especially when it came to the setting of the course. He spoke too fast, in the most monotonous voice one could imagine, and the tape quality was horrible. There could be absolutely no background noise, or one could forget about understanding the tapes. I had hoped to listen on my commutes to work, but that was not possible. I ended up dropping the course. With just a little thought (and knowledge of the ISD model), that instructor could have provided us with a better "setting" for learning.

I really like that in the design phase, attention is paid to not only the methods of instruction, but also the strategies that will help students achieve the goals set forth. I have encountered older curriculum materials that seemed to have a "one-size fits all" approach, and did not provide for remediation or enrichment. That can be very difficult for instructors, as we often need suggestions or help in meeting the needs of so many diverse learners. Without careful consideration of each part during the design phase, a lesson or unit could be lacking in effectiveness. In working with an intern in my classroom a few years ago, her first lessons were wonderful, engaging, fun for the students, but a few seemed to lose sight of the performance objectives, and how we could help ALL students meet those objectives. Once she was able to focus her attention on those objectives...she was able to create lessons that were engaging and VERY effective. I think as educators, at the beginning of our careers we worry so much about how effective we will be when we are actually IMPLEMENTING the lesson, instead of how effective the lessons we develop will be for our students. At least that was the case for me and some other teachers I have discussed this model with.


Finally, probably one of the biggest pieces in creating instruction is the evaluation phase. Everyone is familiar with that big SUMMATIVE piece, that final exam, the essay, the project. Yes, those are very important, but I like that ISD model shows us that the formative evaluation is just as important, if not more so. I mean, what is the point in giving a high school history class an exam on the Civil War if most of the students still have not grasped WHY the war happened? How can one move on to long division, if 1/2 of a 4th grade class still cannot understand what division is? An instructor would be well aware of any issues in the students learning and mastery if they include formative evaluation in their instruction. I can still remember an incident when I was doing my student teaching. I was teaching a whole science unit on the ocean. The kids were LOVING every activity. We had great discussions. They were turning in their experiment logs and doing the homework. I was required to give a basic test from the science curriculum materials (although the teacher and I felt it was lacking). I though for sure the students would ace that test. I didn't bother to assess whether or not they were getting those bits of information during the unit, and I had about a 50% failure rate. That was from a class of students who were performing very well on the experiments and participating like crazy in in-depth discussions about the various topics we covered. Even though the exam was truly NOT a great summative evaluation, the students should have been able to pass it. Had I been evaluating and adapting the uni as necessary throughout, I firmly believe 90% of the students would have achieved As on that test. I think that all instructors and all people who design instruction should follow the ISD model at all times. It could mean the difference between a lesson that just goes through the paces, and a lesson that results in true learning or mastery.