Speaker 1: Hey designers, welcome to part two of my series on Introduction to Instructional Design. Today we're going to talk about two instructional design systems, Addy and SAM. So last time I gave you a quick introduction to instructional design and what it is. Again, it is a systematic structuring and development to facilitate learning. This is what distinguishes the field of instructional design separate from pedagogy or teaching in general. We're all about being really systematic to facilitate learning. There's a particular goal in mind to where we want our learners to go and we're going to be really intentional about how we get them there. So that brings us to systems and models. I'm using that word interchangeably here, but the main model you're going to see is Addy. That's the one there on the left. Addy stands for Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate. You'll see the first letter of each word there makes up the word Addy. This is the main introductory system and or model you're going to see whenever you are new to instructional design. This is a very procedural model. You'll see it's really nice and neat. There are five steps. You follow them in order and you'll get to where you need to be. I'll talk more about that in a minute. In contrast, there's another model that's newer to instructional design and it's a particular kind of model where you do rapid prototyping. It's called SAM, the Successive Approximation Model. I know that is a really catchy name. This one's only three steps at first. You analyze, develop, design. It might look familiar from Addy on the left there, but then you repeat. This one, you do have some simple steps there, but you're going to repeat them over and over. Let's look at both of these in a little bit more detail. Here's how Addy looks. It's often called a waterfall system or model where you work through the steps. Each one leads to the next. It seems really neat and tidy. Of course, real life normally isn't so neat and tidy. You dive into a project, you start one step, you move on to the next one, and then you're like, oh, maybe I need to go back, do more analysis. Or you get all the way down to develop and you're like, oh, there's a flaw in this design. It's not going to work and you have to start over again. So on and so forth. This looks really nice and neat and tidy on paper. It's a great way to get started in instructional design because it kind of puts you in the right mindset. But keep in mind, as you work through these steps, it's not going to be so nice and neat and tidy in real life. And maybe your mind just doesn't work that way. As you get more into instructional design, you'll figure out what works really well for you or what doesn't work really well for you. Maybe your mind is more into jumping right into things and then seeing if it works or not. So SAM, this rapid prototyping model, might be for you. So in both models, you start with analysis, right? This is where you think about who your learner is, where you want them to be, how you can get them there. Design is all about putting that kind of onto paper, really planning out what you want to build for them. Developing is where you actually develop the thing. So SAM is all about, you just kind of dive in and then you rinse and repeat, okay? So this is like, you kind of do a quick analysis, you do a quick design and then you build it right away. This is something that might work really well for a team, especially if you're kind of gridlocked on deciding what to do next. So you'll come up with a model, test it out, and then you'll decide what works well and what didn't work well. So they often recommend in this model of design that you come up with a prototype, then you throw that out and you come up with a totally different prototype. And the idea is that you are doing some really deep creative work where you're seeing what works well and what doesn't work well. And you repeat this system as much as you need to to get a final product that works really well. Again, you're just prototyping here. So your first prototype, your second prototype, they're going to be really rough. In contrast, Addie, the thought is that you work through this and by the end you're going to have a really nice polished product, kind of all in one go. Again, not always true to real life. SAM kind of assumes you're going to start with something quick and dirty and then you are just going to keep on revising and revisiting it until you get something that works really well for you. So again, really nice contrast in these two models, kind of starts to get you thinking about how to be systematic about your design. So again, Addie, big emphasis on analysis and design. The idea is the more work you do up front, think about who your learner is, come up with a really good design, you're going to save yourself time later down the road. It is time intensive though to think about these things up front and you can also end up wasting some time potentially if things that you assumed were true or things you designed up front don't work well at all. So it is really important in this model to do it right the first time or maybe approach this as more of a prototyping experience and you can go with SAM. So SAM is all about diving in and then just adjusting as needed. It really is really focused on prototyping and revising, it's trying something, seeing if it works and then trying it over again. So these are both guides for how to approach instructional design, neither of these is the one right perfect system and or model. There's lots of other systems and models out there, but these are a good way to kind of start thinking in an instructional design kind of way, start thinking systematically and as you develop your own practice as an instructional designer, you're going to figure out what works really well for you. All right, knowledge check time. I love to build an interactivity into my videos, even if it is just a video. So quick, I got two questions for you. Which model puts more emphasis on pre-development work? Is it Addy or is it SAM? If you answered Addy, you are correct. Addy is all about kind of front loading the work, doing a really thorough analysis, doing a really in-depth design and then diving in into developing. So thought is the more work you do up front, the more time you're going to save yourself later on. That's a great idea, but in real life, sometimes it doesn't work so nice and neatly. All right, use this one if you just want to dive in and start prototyping. The answer is SAM. You are correct. SAM is all about prototyping. You do a quick analysis, you do a quick design and you dive in and start building and at each level you kind of like spiral it up. So you do more analysis and design, you do another prototype at each level and eventually you get to where you need to be. So I mean, how do you choose between these two models? I actually don't have any content for this slide. It really depends on what works for you and what works for the environment that you are in. It might be that you're in a really traditional workplace that has a really deep legacy of instructional design and it's really about doing things by the book, doing things in order. Maybe if you're working with the military or some sort of legacy corporation where they have a lot of workflows in place, maybe Addy is going to work well for you. And maybe that makes a lot of sense because they have a deep knowledge base to draw upon. They know what works well and what doesn't work well and you just work through the steps. In contrast, if you're in a newer, faster kind of startup environment, SAM might work really well for you. Or if you're working with a client and they are unclear about what they're really looking for or you're not sure really what they're looking for, SAM might work really well because you can prototype something for them, throw it out, see if it works, see if it doesn't, try something else. It's all about being kind of creative and working on the fly and not really being married to any particular design or even developed prototype because you're going to try something else. And this also depends on how your own mind works as well. Are you someone that likes to be really deliberate? Or are you someone that likes to just dive in, make something, and see how well it works? It really depends on you. And both of them are still a systematic approach to facilitating learning. Both are still good, solid instructional design. It's just a matter of how you work and how it might work where you are working. All right. That's it for this video. Next up in part three of this Intro to ID series, we are going to talk about how people learn. So be sure to tune in for that.