Analysis: The Big Picture

According to Dick and Carey, "An instructional analysis is a set of procedures that, when applied to an instructional goal, results in the identification of the relevant steps for performing a goal and the subordinate skills required for a student to achieve the goal" (p. xx). The desired intent is to systematically break down the KSA (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) determined in your goal statement into smaller and smaller units, and then identify the relevant KSA for your setting.

So the instructional analysis is developed from your goal statement, which highlights why your goal statement for Project milestone 3 must be well written and worthwhile.

Task analysis is essential to good instructional design but is usually these least well understood and is often poorly executed. Jonassen, Tessmer, and Hannum (1999) book “Task Analysis Methods for Instructional Design” provides a comprehensive look at ISD analysis approaches. The many approaches that they describe fall into five domains related to the different aspects of the job or task being learned (from Jonassen, et al., p.6).

• Job analysis focuses on the behaviors engaged in by the performer.
• Content analysis examines the concepts and relationships of the subject matter.
• Learning analysis approaches focus on the cognitive activities required to efficiently learn.
• Activity analysis examines human activity and understanding in context. 
• Cognitive task analysis focuses on the performances and their associated knowledge states.

Each of these approaches entails a different set of assumptions about how learners acquire skills and knowledge and how they learn (p. 7). For example, “learning scientists” based on constructivism and socio-cultural theory would tend to utilize forms of activity analysis. Pragmatically, your practice of ISD will need to adjust to the setting and circumstances, sometimes you will need to apply radical constructivist approaches and the next day, behaviorist methods. So your goal could be to become fluent in various epistemologies and their related approaches.

There are a number of analysis approaches that you could use, each has advantages and disadvantages. Jonassen and Hannum (1986) lists and details 30 analysis and analysis-related approaches including: Behavioral Analysis, Bloom's Taxonomy, Brainstorming, Cognitive Mapping, Component Display Theory (Merrill, 1983), Conceptual Hierarchy Analysis (Tiemann & Markel, 1983; Reigeluth, Merrill & Bunderson, 1978), Criteria for Task Selection, Critical Incident Technique Determining, Delphi Technique, Elaboration Theory (Reigeluth & Rogers 1980; Reigeluth & Stein 1983), Extended Task Analysis Procedure (Reigeluth, Merrill, Branson, Begtand, & Tart, 1980), Fault Tree Analysis (Fussell, Powers & Bennett, 1974), Functional Job Analysis (Fine & Wiley, 1971), Job Task Analysis (Mager & Beach, 1967), Information Processing Analysis (Merrill, 1978; 1980; Resnick, 1976; Resnick & Ford, 1982), Instructional Analysis (Hoffman & Medsker, 1983), Learner Control of Instruction (Merrill, 1975), Learning Contingency Analysis (Gropper, 1974, Learning Hierarchy Analysis (Gagne, 1965, 1974, 1975, 1977, 1985; Gagne & Briggs, 1979), Learning Taxonomy (Leith, 1970), Master Design Chart (Davies, 1976), Mathetics Gilbert (t961), Matrix Analysis (Evans, Gtaser & Homme, 1962; Thomas, Davies, Openshaw, & Bird, 1963), Methods Analysis (McCormick, 1979), Path Analysis (Merrill, 1978, 1980), Pattern Noting (Buzan, 1974; Fields, 1982), PROBE Model (Gilbert, 1982a, 1982b), Syntactic Analysis (Stone, Dunphy, Smith, & Ogilivie, 1966), Task Description (Miller, 1962), and Vocational Task Analysis (Hershbach, 1976). These 30 are not all of the available analysis approaches, the point I make here is that there are many approaches for you to consider.

My favorite analysis approach is top performer analysis that helps to identify nuanced performances, for example how is a top sales person different from an average sales person? For example, Clariana (1988) used top-performer analysis to design and develop training for Peace Corps Nepal.

In this course, you will learn about and apply two powerful and generic analysis approaches, hierarchical analysis that is appropriate for performances that are viewed as hierarchical in nature (i.e., Gagne’s taxonomy) and cluster analysis that is appropriate for determining and then organizing domain content especially from subject matter experts.

Hierarchical analysis captures the performance using a visual flow-chart method that has specific conventions. Following the convention is important in order to make the chart ‘readable’ by others. The conventions are covered in the textbook and our discussions, but in general, (a) arrows point bottom-up to indicate that a lower level KSA is needed to accomplish a higher level KSA and (b) arrows point left-to-right to indicate a sequence of steps or a procedure. Arrows almost never point down or to the left.

---

Clariana, R.B. (1988). Peace Corps Nepal 1988 preservice technical training manual for math and science teacher trainers N/166a. Available form ERIC ED300276,  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED300276.pdf

Jonassen, D.H., & Hannum, W.H. (1986). Analysis of task analysis procedures. Journal of Instructional Development, 9 (2), 2-12.

Jonassen, D.H., Tessmer, M.,& Hannum, W.H. (1999). Task Analysis Methods for Instructional Design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

 

Objectives

At the end of this lesson you will be able to:

Refer to the Course Schedule for this week's readings.