Running head: ADDIE MAPPING 1

Mapping ADDIE and Hannafin-Peck

Karen Currie

California State University, Monterey Bay

Points Description Comments

19/20 Shows a clear mapping between the Yes. I like your table. Be sure to cite sources
chosen model and the ADDIE when you are describing components of a
framework. model.
14/15 Includes differences between the Good designers evaluate and revise as they go,
two models. even if they’re only thinking about the ADDIE
framework.
14/15 Avoids giving ADDIE Mostly!
characteristics that it does not
possess—even though various
authors have a tendency to do so
(see Molenda’s article).
8/10 Follows APA style (no abstract APA Style is looking pretty good.
required) and basic grammar and More citations would help.
usage See comments & red text for small things. See
notes on Level 1 headings.
55/60 Good job, Karen. The H-P model is interesting. I like that it’s easy to use & also the
emphasis on evaluation & revision along the way.

May 21, 2018

IST 626: Advanced Instructional Design

Dr. Jeanne Farrington

MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

Mapping Addie and Hannafin Peck Commented [BF1]: For some reason the page number in
your header has disappeared. Page numbers should be
included on all pages.
When analyzing instructional design models, the ADDIE model is seen as the

foundational process in which all other models follow making unique adaptations along the way.

When searching for the creator of the ADDIE model, Moldena pointed out that “This model is

referenced in virturally all subsequent historical reviews of ID.” (Moldena, 2015). Using the

comprehensive ADDIE model to compare other design structures highlights its versatile usage

and ease of application in most if not all training programs.

Michael Hannafin and Kyle Peck published The Design Development and Evaluation of

Instruction Software in 1988. This design model consists of just three phases with a special

emphasis on evaluation and revision after each phase. (Pappas, 2016) This model was created to

be used in online training or eLearning. The creation of this model supports meeting educational

objectives of the training being provided, as well as presenting developers with a transparent

message of the needs of the learners to most effectively employ a systematic approach to

training.

ADDIE Commented [BF2]: This is a Level 1 heading and needs to

be centered and bold.
ADDIE is known as the standard model in the instructional design world. The ADDIE

layout includes five clear-cut steps that are outlined for easy implementation when developing

training courses. As the designer works through the first four stages there is an opportunity to

evaluate along the way, then ends with a final step of evaluation as well.

The first phase of ADDIE is the analysis stage. This stage focuses on identifying the

needs to address in training. Designers look at current workplace practices to see the learning

environment as well as to identify the skills and knowledge the learners currently posses. Any

gap in knowledge is identified and objectives are written to close that gap.
MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

The design phase is next, focusing on how to best meet the objectives. The content of the Commented [JF3]: Good design can result from this.
Excellent point.
course is decided, along with the most effective strategy to present the information. Key

deliverables that will be shared with the clients at the conclusion of this stage are storyboards and

media that will be included in the training.

The third stage is the development phase. In this phase the materials for the training are Commented [BF4]: A comma is needed after this short,
introductory clause.
produced and a schedule is created to ensure learning goals are met. If a prototype is included in

the package this would be piloted during the development stage.

The next phase, implementation is where systems and products are put to use. Training is

provided, materials are used, and job aids are implemented by employees. Assessments and

feedback forms are completed and shared with the client.

Finally, evaluation of the training is executed. The effectiveness of the training is

determined, strengths as well as areas of improvement are noted and shared for any revisions that Commented [BF5]: Place this between commas.

are needed prior to implementing any future rounds of training.

Hannafin-Peck Commented [BF6]: Another Level 1 heading.

The Hannafin-Peck model is composed of three phases, needs assess, design, and

develop/implement. Evaluation and revision is conducted after each phase while the Commented [BF7]: This is an incorrect verb form with the
compound subject ‘Evaluation and revision’.
instructional designer is working to develop the course. (Pappas, 2016) In the Hannafin-Peck

model the designer has the opportunity to revise and fine-tune each component in real time has Commented [BF8]: This is another example of an
introductory clause that needs a comma.
the potential to produce a more consistent end product. This model is user friendly to those that

do not have a background in instructional design or computer adaptive instruction. (Grabinger,

1988). According Pappas goes as far as to claim that “one of the most significant advantages of Commented [BF9]: ‘According to Papas “one of the…”.

using the Hannafin-Peck model in eLearning is that virtually anyone can use it to create effective

eLearning experiences.” (2016) This model provides a dedicated focus to on design and develops
MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

the training with a focus on producing quality materials for the participants. It is commonly used

due to it’s learner-centered approach to instruction to maximize engagement as well as the ease

of it’s evaluation process. Commented [BF10]: its

In the first phase, assessment, a comprehensive needs analysis is conducted of the online

learners. This analysis will not only identify the gaps in performance but will compare them with Commented [BF11]: If you use ‘not only’, you need to
follow with ‘but also’.
the needs of the organization. Upon completion of the needs analysis, objectives are developed

to fill the gap through computer adaptive instruction. evaluation and revision of phase one takes

place before moving on to phase two.

In the design phase, step two, the subject matter expert is consulted in order to begin

planning the eLearning experience. Materials and resources are selected and a storyboard is

created. The storyboard includes the multimedia components, practice activities, and the

assessments that will be used in the course. While this phase can be the most time consuming of

the three, a high level of organization can mitigate any time used unnecessarily. (Pappas, 2016)

Evaluation and revision of phase two take place before moving on to phase three.

The final stage includes both development and implementation. In this last stage content Commented [BF12]: This is an introductory clause.

is reviewed to ensure things are ready, testing is conducted, and proofreading and editing take

place as a final check for a product launch. Facilitators are available as well as any needed

support staff that can support learners as needed. Evaluation and revision take place before this

phase is considered completed.

MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

Mapping Addie and Hannafin-Peck Commented [BF13]: Level 1 heading.

The ADDIE model works through five distinct phases where the Design Development

and Evaluation of Instruction only contain three phases. Evaluation and Revision is not

considered a phase in the Hannafin-Peck model, instead, it is implemented after each phase of

the model. In the ADDIE model it is considered its own step and is assigned phase five. The

Hannafin-Peck model takes the third and fourth step, Develop and Implement in ADDIE and

joins them together in phase three in the Hannafin-Peck model. The table below goes into greater

detail outlining the differences between each phase.

ADDIE Hannafin-Peck Considerations

1 Analysis: needs Needs Assess: needs Models are similar, learning objectives are
assessment, identify analysis, identify created here in Hannafin- Peck but not in
performance gap, performance gaps, ADDIE
goal setting identify organization
goals, construct
learning objectives
2 Design: create Design: consult In both materials and resources are
learning objectives, subject matter determined, practice activities are created,
identify learning expert, materials and and media is selected. Storyboards are
activities, identify resources are provided for client review. Hannafin-Peck
media, Storyboards selected, Storyboard includes the creation of assessment in this
created includes phase.
practice materials,
media, assessment.
3 Development: Develop/Implement: ADDIE develops materials, this step is
develop material review, proofread already completed in Hannafin-Peck
4 Implementation: and edit course Training is provided by both models here.
provide training materials, training is Hannafin-Peck requires additional IT staff
piloted or provided, to be on hand due to the technology
have support on component. Hannafin-Peck includes
hand evaluation in this step.
5 Evaluation: None ADDIE completes the evaluation step in
formative phase five. Commented [BF14]: Tables and figures need to be labeled
evaluation, and also cited if they are borrowed from another publication.
See http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/tables-and-figures/
summative
evaluation, revision
MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

Conclusion

While ADDIE is often viewed as an “umbrella term” (Molenda, 2015) for design, with

steps that are commonly worked through by anyone trying to problem-solve a workplace

struggle (Farrington, 2011), the Hannafin and Peck model was created specifically to address the

needs of e-Learning. The Hannafin-Peck model is considered highly motivating and is a learner-

centered approach to design. (Pappas, 2016) The ADDIE model is focused more on the

instructional “approach” and less on providing highly engaging and motivating experiences

(Reisner-Dempsey, 2018) While the ADDIE model has certainly evolved over time from a once

very linear approach, it still does not offer the opportunity to evaluate and revise within each

phase. Commented [JF15]: Hmm. Good designers revise as they

go. That said, this is a good characteristic of the H-P model.
It’s great that they make it explicit. ADDIE is a framework,
though, into which you can put H-P & most other ID models.
MAPPING ADDIE AND HANNAFIN-PECK

References

Farrington, J. (2012) Seriously, there is no time for design. Performance Improvement,51 (8),

26-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21295

Moldena, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model. Performance Improvement, 42(5),

34-36

Pappas, Christopher. (2016) Applying The Hannafin-Peck Model in eLearning. Retrieved May

22, 2018, from https://www.efrontlearning.com/blog/2016/03/applying-the-hannafin

peck-model-in-elearning.html

Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J.V. (2012), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and

Technology. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.