Model Desain Pembelajaran

Main ideas, concepts, and lessons

• Learning design (instructional design) = systematic, decision-based planning
  • A field that answers: how should learning be designed so learners achieve expected competencies?
  • Treat learning as a system with aligned parts: learners, goals, content, strategies, media/resources, learning activities, assessment, and evaluation/revision.

Purpose of instructional design

• Ensure students can reach competencies in one session or a series of learning activities.
• Resolve key questions about:
  • what to learn (goals/objectives),
  • best teaching method,
  • how to measure whether competencies were achieved.

Learning design as a system (inputs → process → outputs)

Input types

• Raw input: learners with their characteristics.
• Instrumental input: tools/instruments (e.g., teacher, curriculum, learning media).
• Environmental input: classroom/school/cultural/setting factors that influence learning.

Core components that must be designed and aligned

1. Learners (characteristics, needs)
2. Learning goals/objectives
3. Content (structure, sequencing)
4. Instructional strategy (approaches, methods, learning models/techniques)
5. Media and resources (tech devices, visuals, materials, books, e-resources, websites, etc.)
6. Learning activities (student experiences + interactions: student–content, student–student, student–teacher)
7. Assessment (how achievement is measured: tests, tasks, observation tools/rubrics/checklists, performance measures)
8. Evaluation and revision (formative + summative; improve what doesn’t work)

Theoretical foundations underlying design decisions

• Behaviorism: learning as observable behavior change.
• Cognitivism: mental processes and information processing (attention, memory, assimilation/accommodation/equilibration, understanding levels such as Bloom’s taxonomy).
• Constructivism: knowledge is built through experiences; learners discover concepts via teacher-designed activities; learning is individual and contextual.
• Systems approach: all learning components must be coherent and interrelated.
• Agile/iterative view: design is continuous—refine and revise rather than “one-time” perfection.

Important caution about comparing models

• Models differ in scope, so comparisons may not be “apple-to-apple.”
  • Some target macro design (whole training/program),
  • others micro design (one meeting/lesson),
  • or focus on media/product/curriculum.

How to read/understand any instructional design model (8 perspectives)

1. Problem focus: what real learning problem the model addresses.
2. Unit of analysis: individual, class, training/workshop, or curriculum/system level.
3. Learning assumptions: view of learners and learning process.
4. Design process/stages: what steps happen and what is shared/common across models.
5. Assessment placement + purpose: beginning/progression/end; role in decision-making.
6. Feedback usage: who gives feedback, when, and how it drives revisions.
7. Linearity vs nonlinearity: straight sequence vs cyclical/iterative/nonlinear.
8. Best-fit educational context: subject characteristics, environment, situation.

---

Methodologies / step-by-step structures presented (detailed)

1) EDI (Analyze–Design–Develop–Implement–Evaluate)

• Developed as: a process framework (not strictly linear; can loop back).

Stages

• Analyze

  • Needs analysis
  • Stakeholder expectations (e.g., ministry/curriculum requirements)
  • Learner analysis (age, background, abilities, learning styles, motivations, special needs)
  • Performance analysis / performance gaps
  • Task analysis / content analysis (what competencies/materials are needed and material organization)
  • Context analysis (school/workplace/community/online environment; resources; culture/policies; constraints & opportunities)

• Design

  • Learning outcomes (general)
  • Convert to instructional objectives (specific, measurable)
  • Assessment strategy (tests or non-tests; what exactly is measured)
  • Instructional strategy (learning approach, methods, techniques)
  • Content sequence (order of material)
  • Learning activities (what students do step-by-step)
  • Media (storyboard/sketch plan; purpose; intended user/setting; draft design)
  • Learning environment (physical/interaction setup)

• Develop

  • Produce media/modules/LMS/tools and finalize instruments (e.g., storyboard → video; write/print modules; prepare LMS; finalize test questions/instruments)

• Implementation

  • Trial in real context (classroom or intended setting)
  • Observe how implementation works

• Evaluation

  • Evaluate quality/effectiveness (media quality, learning interaction quality, student–content interaction)
  • Identify weaknesses and revise

Strengths mentioned

• Systematic and communicable; supports documentation; works across contexts (training/workshops/counseling).

Potential weakness mentioned

• If treated too rigidly/linear, it can be less agile when needs change quickly; initial analysis can be “too heavy.”

---

2) CAM model (C-A-M)

• Nature: nonlinear; elements are interrelated and may cycle.

Nine elements

1. Determine instructional goals and instructional issues
2. Identify learner characteristics and needs
3. Analyze content and tasks (task analysis)
4. Determine instructional objectives (specific)
5. Arrange content order
6. Design strategic instruction (learning steps/syntax)
7. Design instructional messages and delivery (teacher→student message flow)
8. Develop evaluation instruments (tests and other forms)
9. Choose instructional resources (people, books/journals/websites, technology/devices, facilities/tools/materials)

Core logic emphasized

• Flexible, integrated, student-centered; learning objectives/content/strategy/resources/delivery/evaluation align through interconnected elements.

---

3) Dick & Carry model

• Developed by: Walter Dick and Lou/Carrie (James O. Carey mentioned).
• View: learning as a system with interconnected components.

Main stages (process)

1. Identify instructional goals / general learning objectives
2. Conduct instructional analysis
3. Conduct learner and context analysis
4. Write performance objectives (measurable behaviors/indicators)
5. Develop assessment instruments
6. Develop instructional strategy
   • adopt existing strategies or methods, then apply/follow them
7. Develop/select instructional materials
8. Conduct formative evaluation (after segments/material are taught)
   • cycles of expert review and trials
9. Revise instruction based on formative data
10. Conduct summative evaluation

Terminal objective analysis concept

• Identify terminal competence (final expected ability)
• Break into subordinate skills (staged steps toward terminal goal)
• Identify entry skills (prerequisite abilities)
• Analyze instructional sequence

Formative evaluation sequence (5 steps)

1. Expert review
2. One-to-one trial (try with individual student)
3. Small group trial
4. Field evaluation (real class, larger realistic context)
5. Revision (improve based on gathered data)

Strengths mentioned

• Systematic stages; strong alignment among goals and performance; supports complex competency analysis.

Limitations mentioned

• Time-consuming, documentation-heavy, complex for simple learning; can feel procedural if applied mechanically.

---

4) Gagne model (Nine Events of Instruction)

• Developed by: Robert M. Gagné.
• Purpose: design instruction within one learning meeting/session using nine events linked to learner conditions.

Key idea

• Learning depends on:
  • Internal conditions (abilities, motivation, behavior, cognitive/creative characteristics, prior experiences)
  • External conditions (objectives, material, strategies, media, learning environment)

Nine events (instruction sequence)

1. Gain attention (attract attention; convey objectives; spark curiosity/dialogue)
2. Inform learner of objectives
3. Stimulate recall of prior knowledge
4. Present stimulus / material
5. Provide learning guidance (examples, demonstrations, step support)
6. Elicit performance (have learners demonstrate work/answers)
7. Provide feedback
8. Assess performance
9. Enhance retention and transfer (help students remember and apply to new situations)

---

5) Merrill model (David Merrill’s principles / “meaningful learning”)

• Core principle: learning is better when it is problem-centered and moves through meaningful steps toward performance.

Instructional logic described

1. Start with a real-world problem (contextual, authentic)
2. Activate prior knowledge (prompts/questions; learners share what they already know)
3. Demonstrate new knowledge/skills (teacher demonstration or video example)
4. Apply the learning (students solve the problem using new skills)
5. Integrate results into real life contexts (transfer)

Additional design themes mentioned

• Authentic tasks (real tasks, not imaginary)
• Develop competence to solve problems
• Workplace learning can be used

---

6) ASSURE model (Assure)

• Developed by: Heinich, Molenda, Russell.

Acronym structure

• A: Analyze learners (characteristics, needs, learning styles)
• S: State objectives
• S: Select methods, media, and materials
• U: Utilize media and materials
• R: Require learner participation (activate actively; design tasks/interaction)
• E: Evaluate and revise (identify weaknesses; revise/improve quality)

Advantages mentioned

• Strong focus on learning activities, method-media connection, and especially learner participation.

Digital-learning adaptation mentioned

• Use LMS design, multimedia presentations, simulations (incl. VR/AR), interactive presentations, blended/flip-classroom approaches.

---

7) 4D model (Define–Design–Develop–Disseminate)

• Developed by: Thiagarajan, Semmel, and others mentioned.

Stages

• Define

  • Analyze basic needs, learners, tasks/concepts, goals
  • (media-oriented needs analysis)

• Design

  • Plan assessment, instructional strategy, and learning media/format specifications

• Develop

  • Produce materials; expert appraisal; revise based on developmental testing
  • Developmental testing (small scope), then field testing (larger scale)

• Disseminate

  • Distribute/implement so others can adopt; final packaging and readiness for use

---

8) 5E model (Engage–Explore–Explain–Elaborate–Evaluate)

• Developed by: BSCS (Biological Science Curriculum Study).

Learning cycle steps

• Engage: arouse curiosity/interest; activate prior knowledge
• Explore: learners investigate/test/collect data; teacher as facilitator
• Explain: learners and teacher build explanations/discussions from findings
• Elaborate: expand understanding in new contexts; apply to different problems/situations/projects
• Evaluate: assess understanding, skills, and ability to apply to new situations

Note emphasized

• Treated as an instructional learning cycle (often for lesson meetings), not necessarily a full macro instructional design framework.

---

9) UBD / Backward Design (Understanding by Design)

• Principle: start from desired results, then determine evidence, then plan learning experiences.

Three stages

1. Identify desired results
   • what students should know, understand, and be able to do
2. Determine acceptable evidence
   • proof of learning (tests, projects, discussions, portfolios, etc.)
3. Plan learning experiences and instruction
   • activities, resources, strategies, real experiences that lead to desired outcomes

Focus emphasized

• Understanding, not “coverage” (not merely finishing material).

Critique of

• material-completion mindset,
• activity-only mindset without clear learning outcomes.

---

10) Rapid Prototyping model

• Developed by: Tripp and Biccel Mayer (as stated).
• Inspiration: software engineering prototyping process.

Process loop

• Develop an initial version/prototype
• Try it, test it, and collect feedback
• Revise
• Repeat (prototype → test → feedback → revise)

Prototype roles

• Explore user needs realistically
• Communicate ideas among stakeholders
• Early evaluation tool to find weaknesses quickly

---

11) Successive Approximation model (SAM / “successive approximation”)

• Developed by: Michael W. Allen and Richard Sites (as stated).

Emphases

• Iterative design (continuous refinement)
• Collaboration from early stages
• Prototyping + continuous feedback

Cycle described

• Preparation (understand needs; form team)
• Iterative design: generate alternatives → compare → choose → refine
• Iterative development: build products through prototyping/evaluation cycles
• Build → organize/develop → evaluate → revise (repeated)

Signature concept mentioned

• “Save starts” / intensive collaboration from the start (involving students, teachers, and stakeholders early).

---

Criteria for choosing a suitable model (as listed)

When selecting among the 11 models, considerations include:

• Goals/competencies to be achieved
• Learners (who they are; characteristics/needs)
• Content complexity (and complexity of competencies)
• Context where learning happens
• Technology available
• Time and resources
• Evidence: how success will be proven

---

Conclusion / key takeaway

• Instructional design models are frameworks for thinking, not a single universal “best” method.
• Different models fit different scopes (macro training vs micro lesson), focus areas (media, events, interaction, curriculum).
• Instructional designers must:
  • analyze learners and needs,
  • decide/select an approach/model,
  • design and develop learning experiences,
  • collect evidence, evaluate, and revise.

---

Speakers / sources featured

Speakers

• Likely lecturer/teacher: not explicitly named in the subtitles.

Sources/models and credited developers mentioned

• EDI model: Florida State University (1970s)
• CAM model: developed by Gerald Cam (noted as CAM in subtitles)
• Dick & Carry model: Walter Dick and Lou/Carrie (James O. Carey mentioned)
• Gagne model: Robert M. Gagné
• Merrill model: David Merrill
• ASSURE model: Heinich, Molenda, Russell
• 4D model: Thiagarajan and Semal (and “one of your seniors,” as stated)
• 5E model: BSCS (Biological Science Curriculum Study)
• UBD / Backward Design: referenced as Wijin and TIG (intended to reference Wiggins & McTighe)
• Rapid Prototyping: Tripp and Bisel Mayer (as stated)
• Successive Approximation model: Michael W. Allen and Richard Ses (as stated)
• Bloom taxonomy: Bloom (referenced generally)