A Comparison of Traditional to Modern Instructional Design
Espoused Beliefs (Mental Model)
Traditional Instructional Design Nature of learning Modern Instructional Design
Typical Learning Structure View of the state of Knowledge
Necessary to get a job gain social status sometimes very unpleasant Individual, solitary learner Teacher as expert Lecture/Test Based Stable, slow-changing Passive/Dependent Learning Oriented toward Teacher as Authority Formal Structures (e.g., seats in a row) Closed enrollments Competitive Grading Faculty devise curriculum Teachers choose objectives Orientation Standardization Instruction Skills acquisition Certification Theory X
Vehicle for self-expression self-improvement social betterment Collaborative Teacher as resource, learning facilitator Variety of learning activities, many experiential Dynamic, fast-changing Active/Independent Learning Oriented toward Respect for Teacher as Subject Matter expert and resource Informal Structures (e.g., seats in a circle) Open enrollments Grading on Collaborative Outcomes and/or peer evaluation and/or self evaluation Mutual Diagnosis finding right blend of curriculum requirements and learner's own objectives Change Development Communication Creation of new knowledge Life long learning Theory Y
Typical Classroom climate
Diagnosis of needs
Purpose of intervention
View of human nature
Copyright 1998-2000 The University of the Future, LLC. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 3
A Comparison of Traditional to Modern Instructional Design
Underlying Assumptions
Traditional Instructional Design Learners Attitude Possible Answers Motivation to learn, change, or improve Role of experience Learner self-concept Learning orientation Learning objective Modern Instructional Design
Dependent One right way External, dictated by others Often undervalued Irrelevant to curriculum requirements Needs direction Subject-centered Logic oriented Do the minimum required to get the grade, degree, job, promotion
Independent/Self-responsible Many ways Internal, response to personal, career, or performance needs A rich resource Basis for what to learn next Integrated with curriculum requirements Capable of self-organizing, self-direction, taking the initiative Life, career, performance-centered Process oriented Self-betterment, keep performance commitments
Copyright 1998-2000 The University of the Future, LLC. All rights reserved.
Page 2 of 3
A Comparison of Traditional to Modern Instructional Design
Consequent Learning Design
Traditional Instructional Design Modern Instructional Design
How need is established
Mandate from above
Instructional design
Learning process
Traditional lecture-based face-to-face classroom or pencil & paper based correspondence courses or computer-based training Instruction Memorization Modeling Demonstration Coaching Etc.
Learner's desire motivated by self-identified performance improvement or learning outcome expectations Active Learning Collaborative Learning Reflective Learning Pragmatic Learning (real world application) Critical Thinking Reflective Thinking Personal Mastery Shared Visioning Discussion and dialogue to surface assumptions and deepen learning. Experiences that mirror reality, such as team learning, case studies, simulations, field trips, ropes courses, etc. Real-world experience, new information, adaptation, practice, and integration.
Based in part on the following: Cross, K. Patricia. Adults as Learners: Increasing Participation and Facilitating Learning (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981). Knowles, Malcolm S. The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy Versus Pedagogy (New York: Association Press, 1970). Pepitone, James S. Future Training: A Roadmap for Restructuring the Training Function (Dallas: AddVantage Learning Press, 1995).
Copyright 1998-2000 The University of the Future, LLC. All rights reserved.
Page 3 of 3
