Chapter Five
Using Analytical Techniques to Determine Instructional Content
This chapter addresses the instructional designer's skills and abilities in identifying content that matches the requirements as identified in the needs assessment phase. In today's design environment, an increasing emphasis is being placed on analytical methods. Employers and clients expect instructional designers to do more than mindlessly plug content onto web pages or some other such low-level task for which little education or experience is required.
Koszalka, Russ-Eft, and Reiser (2013) identify the following essential performance standards that support this phase of the instructional design process: “(a) Identify the scope of required content in accordance with needs assessment findings (essential); (b) Elicit, synthesize, and validate content from subject matter experts (essential); (c) Analyze existing instructional products to determine adequacy or inadequacy of content, instructions, and learning (essential); (d) Determine the breadth and depth of intended content coverage given instructional constraints (essential); (e) Determine subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge (essential); (f) Use appropriate techniques to analyze various types and sources of content (essential)” (Koszalka, Russ-Eft, and Reiser 2013, 42).
As pointed out by the authors of The Standards, these skills involve higher-order cognitive skills, including the ability to critically analyze the information gathered to this point, synthesize, or bring together, relevant pieces of the puzzle in an efficient manner, and, finally, to evaluate the likely effect of the solution before the “go-live” decision.
Fortunately, this phase of the process is more likely to succeed if the proper groundwork has been laid ahead of time. This groundwork would include:
- A close working relationship with key stakeholders.
- A thorough needs assessment that has delineated instructional and noninstructional needs.
- A clear picture of on-the-job requirements and any constraints that might affect the application of newly acquired skills and knowledge.
- The identification of knowledgeable people who understand the instructional design process and will work closely in identifying content.
- A thorough understanding of existing resources (both training and nontraining) that have been, are being, or could be used to support the instructional process.
Identify Content Aligned with Needs Assessment Findings
When selecting or developing instruction, always be sure to check whether the content aligns with the needs assessment findings. That advice sounds simple. But the reality is that it is easy to lose sight of goals when in the midst of reviewing large amounts of information in the form of preexisting courses from other sources or of feeling time pressures to get products out.
One way to do that is to rely on a simple sequence. First, assess the needs. Second, clarify the instructional/performance goals or objectives. Third, prepare ways to measure the goals or objectives through tests or other methods. Fourth, prepare an outline of the instructional design that is intended to meet the needs by achieving the performance objectives/goals.
Elicit, Synthesize, and Validate Content from Subject Matter Experts
Although a later chapter will cover formative evaluation (by which drafted instructional products are pilot-tested), an important early step in instructional design is to check signals with subject matter experts.
How do we know an SME when we see one? That is a common question. It has no simple answer. But an SME is someone who is qualified to judge a problem with human performance or a proposed solution (such as training) based on:
- Education
- Experience
- Reputation inside and/or outside the organization gained by a track record of achievement.
SMEs may be accessed formally or informally. A formal approach is to establish a task force or committee for the preparation of an instructional program. SMEs are appointed by the organization's leaders based on their knowledge about the issue. An informal approach is to “ask around” for the “go-to” people who can help to solve a problem or address an issue. They may be asked to review an outline or look over draft materials to offer their advice.
SMEs are not always easy to work with. The best in-house experts may be busy people who do not eagerly accept additional work. For that reason, the approval of their immediate supervisors or other organizational leaders may be needed to get the SMEs to cooperate in reviewing materials. In some cases it may be necessary to recognize or reward them for their work in helping to review or develop instructional materials.
Analyze Instructional Products to Determine the Adequacy of Content, Instructions, and Learning to Determine Content Coverage
How does an instructional designer know that instructional products adequately address the content? Again, it is a simple question with no simple answers.
There are two ways to do it. One is holistically; the other is systematically. In a holistic approach, an instructional designer simply asks one or several SMEs to look over draft instructional products and answer one question: do the instructional products appear to meet the organization's needs? If the answer is “yes,” then no further action is required. If the answer is “no,” then the SME is asked to offer specific suggestions for improvement.
If a systematic approach is used, the instructional designers will prepare a checklist for use by SMEs to review the match between needs, objectives, measurements (such as test items), and content. SMEs are typically asked to rate the quality by which needs are met; the objectives address the needs; the instructional materials will help learners meet the objectives; and the measurements will help evaluate learner achievement. It is best to develop a separate checklist for each component of instruction (such as lessons) rather than the overall “course” or instructional product.
Determine Subordinate and Prerequisite Skills and Knowledge
Determining subordinate and prerequisite skills and knowledge really has to do with sequencing instruction. What should be treated first?
There are at least nine approaches to sequencing performance objectives and thereby sequencing the skills and knowledge planned to meet those objectives:
- Chronological sequencing
- Topical sequencing
- Whole-to-part sequencing
- Part-to-whole sequencing
- Known-to-unknown sequencing
- Unknown-to-known sequencing
- Step-by-step sequencing
- Part-to-part-to-part sequencing
- General-to-specific sequencing
Let us describe each one. It should be noted, however, that recent writings on instructional design have emphasized the importance of elaboration in which ideas are introduced at a basic level and then gradually built upon, much like a “pebble in a pond” (Merrill 2002).
Chronological Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced chronologically, the content is arranged by time sequence with the presentation of later events preceded by discussion of earlier ones. Chronological sequencing is typically used with history. Many academic experts who write college textbooks favor a chronological approach, beginning with the history of their discipline. Instruction is sequenced from past to present to future.
Topical Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced topically, learners are immediately immersed in the middle of a topical problem or issue. For example, today's newspaper headline may be of topical significance to a given performance objective, and it could be used as a starting point for instruction. Learners are then led back in time to see how the problem originated. They may sometimes be led forward to see what will happen if the problem is not solved. This sequencing method is sometimes called in medias res, a Latin phrase meaning that instruction begins “in the middle of things.”
Whole-to-Part Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced from whole to part, learners are first presented with a complete model or a description of the full complexities of a physical object (such as an automobile engine or the world globe), abstraction (such as steps in a model of instructional design), or work duty (such as writing a letter). Instruction is then organized around parts of the whole. For instance, learners are then led through each part of an automobile engine, each nation on a world globe, each step in a model of the instructional design process, or each task that makes up the work duty.
This approach to sequencing was first advocated by Ausubel (1962), building on the work of Gestalt learning theorists (see the description in Rothwell and Sredl 2000). Learners should be presented with an overarching logic to govern what they should know (Pucel 1989). In this way, they can see how each part relates to a larger conceptual system.
Part-to-Whole Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced from part to whole, learners are introduced to each part of a larger object, abstraction, or work duty. By the end of instruction, they should be able to conceptualize the entire object or abstraction or perform the entire duty. For example, learners could be oriented to an organization by visiting, investigating, and charting work activities in each department. They should eventually be able to describe the activities of each organizational part and thus (presumably) the entire organization.
Known-to-Unknown Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced from known to unknown, learners are introduced to what they already know and are gradually led into what they do not know. Herbart (1898) was among the first to advocate this approach to sequencing desired results of instruction, arguing that learners bring their experience to bear on what they learn. Consequently, he concluded that it is essential for instruction to build on what the learner already knows.
Suppose, for example, that it is necessary to train a novice on how to make an overhead transparency on a copy machine. A trainer wishing to save time would first pose two questions: (1) Does the novice already know what an overhead transparency is? and (2) Does the novice already know how to make paper photocopies? If the answer to either question is no, instruction will have to begin by providing this essential prerequisite information. But if the answer to both questions is yes, the trainer can begin by explaining that transparencies are simply placed in the paper tray of a photocopier and an original sheet is copied. The result: an overhead transparency. In this way, the trainer has sequenced instruction from what the learner already knows about transparencies and photocopying to what the learner does not know about producing transparencies.
Unknown-to-Known Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced from unknown to known, learners are deliberately disoriented at the outset of instruction. In short, instructional designers consciously set out to “put the learners in over their heads.” It is sometimes called discovery learning. This approach dramatizes how little they really know about a subject or the performance of a task or work duty with which they already feel smugly familiar.
The aim of this approach is to motivate learners for a subsequent learning task. It gives them an uncomfortable experience that leads them to question their own knowledge, thereby demonstrating to them that they need to learn more. Perhaps the most obvious example is military boot camp, in which new recruits undergo an initial upending experience that clearly dramatizes how little they really know about their own physical and mental limitations.
Step-by-Step Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced step by step, learners are introduced to a task or work duty through either of two methods. The first method is based on the steps of the task or work duty itself. Instructional designers begin by analyzing how the task or duty is performed. They then sequence instruction around each step in the task or each task included in a work duty.
The second method is based on the knowledge that learners must already possess or they must have mastered the skills to be capable of learning the procedure. Instructional designers analyze how people learn the skill or process information. This analysis is conducted using techniques such as information processing analysis, information mapping, or learning hierarchy analysis.
Performance objectives are then sequencing around each step (“chunk of knowledge” or “specific skill”) that learners must possess to master a task or work duty. On occasion, training is not necessary for step-by-step learning to occur. Learners may be coached through a task by means of a job aid, such as a checklist or step-by-step description of a procedure. Alternatively, they may be coached through a task with a decision tool such as a flowchart, diagram, or electronic tool.
Part-to-Part-to-Part Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced part to part to part, learners are treated to a relatively shallow introduction to a topic, move on to another topic that is also treated superficially, move on to a third topic that is treated superficially, eventually return to the original topic for more in-depth exposure, and so on. The aim is to ensure that learners are introduced to topics and then hear more about them gradually as they are elaborated on in subsequent rounds of the spiral.
General-to-Specific Sequencing
When performance objectives are sequenced from general to specific, all learners are introduced to the same foundation of knowledge of the same skills. Later, however, each learner specializes. This method of sequencing is sometimes called the pyramidal or core structure method. All learners are exposed to certain topics (the core) but may specialize (by exposing themselves to topics around the core).
Other Approaches to Sequencing
Other sequencing methods may, at times, be appropriate. The nine described in this section are not intended to be exhaustive. They are, instead, intended to be representative of possible ways to sequence instruction.
Analyze Content
Analyzing instructional content can be conducted in many ways. Perhaps best-known is so-called content analysis, which is not one method but many. Words may be analyzed for frequency. But a better approach is thematic analysis in which common concepts or themes are examined for frequency. A staple in qualitative methods, thematic analysis can be helpful in picking up common themes in words and is a counterpoint to statistical methods with numbers. Many software programs, such as NVIVO or N*UDIST, are widely used as tools to help analyze words.
Analysis of this kind can be helpful when examining developed or subject-to-revision instructional products to determine “goodness of fit” to meet performance objectives. It can also be helpful in examining text stemming from interview data gathered during needs assessment, focus group data, secondary data presented in words, or similar information.