Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 1 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 1 |
Debates: | 0 |
ADDIE is a logical series of steps (not really a framework). However, it is still useful (and applicable to designing of training/learning programs) because it provides IDs (especially those fresh to the field or "accidental ones"--sincere apologies to Dr. Karl Kapp here) a logical starting point. We still have accidental IDs and I have personally found it useful when training them to refer to ADDIE as a "process" and then go through each phase of the process. This helps them to understand how to approach a training development.
Mapping each phase of the ADDIE process to one or more ID/Learning Theories make it easy for the newbies to grasp the overall process and also helps them to remember when to apply which theory.
However, where we all tend to slip up with ADDIE is the linear nature of the process. The Waterfall approach often becomes the downfall. This is where ADDIE needs to be supported with the "quick and dirty" and Successive Approximation Method.
I feel instead of blaming ADDIE, we need to recognize that no theory, model, framework or process can work in isolation. It has to be a blend of many. We just have to take the best of each depending on the context, content, need and goals of the said training program.
|