Three+Phase+Design+(3PD)

=Three Phase Design (3PD) Model (Sims and Jones)=
 * Presenter Names: Michelle Matz and Siobhán O hmart  **

=** Introduction to Model **=

In 2002, [|Rod Sims] and Deborah Jones published, Continuous Improvement Through Shared Understanding: Reconceptualising Instructional Design for Online Learning which outlined the **Three-Phase Design (3PD) Model**. (Link to the original article as a PDF). 3PD, comprised of three phases (//develop functionality, evaluate/elaborate/enhance and maintain//), is not meant to replace the accepted instructional design models, like ADDIE that utilize five phases (//assess,// //design, develop, implement, evaluate)//, but rather to provide a development process for online teaching and learning.

It is seen as an instructional design model that "integrates the three essential competency sets for unit or course development (design, subject matter, production) in a cohesive rather than desparate manner. Rather than process driving development, it is the context of the educational components which determine the members of the development teams in a targeted and effective manner." (//Constructivist Instructional Design (C-ID): Foundations, Models, and Examples//, 2009, p381).

Figure 1 Resources Key

A - Academic D - Designer ED - Educational Designer** || (//Figure 1// from Sims & Jones 2002, p4):

"Integral to this process is the notion of iterative development or successive approximations, with initial prototypes being built to //test the water// before completion of the entire course. In the first iteration learning environments are generally created to provide functional delivery with the necessary componentry for effective online teaching and learning. This can include the outputs of a preliminary needs analysis of the learning environment and resources that are //scaled to fit// the proposed teaching and learning context. However with the second and subsequent iterations, development can be enhanced with each generational change. In addition, the model is based on a team approach, bringing together the three main elements of course development in a more lateral manner. No longer is process driving the development, but the project itself (i.e. the course) is dictating the make up of the teams (a cross section of skills from educational design and production) in a much more targeted and effective manner. These teams ideally stay formed for the duration of the project, potentially over a number of semesters, with communication and collaboration between academic staff and developers a key focus." (Sims & Jones 2002, p4)

The authors strong belief is that online course creation should be viewed as "a long-term collaborative process" not a "short-term development process". (Sims & Jones 2002, p9)

=** Explanation of Model **=

After researching the 3PD model we believe that it draws upon both the constructivist and communities of practice learning theories. The constructivism learning theory represents the dynamic relationship between the instructor and students allowing a team collaboration approach to learning and for the continual reassessment and revision of course content within the 3PD model. Additionally, the 3PD model also draws upon the communities of practice model to “generate and evolve into focused communities of practice with shared understanding and a philosophy of continuous improvement”. (Sims 2003, p 18) The 3PD model is explained as a three-step process encapsulating functionality, evaluate/elaborate/enhance and maintain rather than the more traditional sequence of design, develop, implement, evaluate and the three phases are further explained below. Jonassen (1991) notes that many educators and cognitive psychologists have applied constructivism to the development of learning environments. Some design principles noted in constructivism: · The instructor is a coach and analyzer of the strategies used to solve these problems · Instructional goals and objectives should be negotiated and not imposed · Provide tools and environments that help learners interpret the multiple perspectives of the world Jonassen (1994) summarizes what he refers to as "the implications of constructivism for instructional design". The following principles illustrate how knowledge construction can be facilitated: · Focus on knowledge construction, not reproduction · Foster reflective practice · Support collaborative construction of knowledge through social negotiation Wilson and Cole (1991) provide a description of cognitive teaching models which "embody" constructivist concepts. · Embed learning in a rich authentic problem-solving environment · Provide for learner control · Use errors as a mechanism to provide feedback on learners' understanding. · Encourage ownership and voice in the learning process Scaffolding allows students to perform tasks that would normally be slightly beyond their ability without that assistance and guidance from the teacher. Appropriate teacher support can allow students to function at the cutting edge of their individual development. Scaffolding is therefore an important characteristic of constructivist learning and teaching. Assessment is authentic and interwoven with teaching. ( [|http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~emurphy/stemnet/cle3.html] ) The 3PD Model utilizes many of the elements of the constructivist method in that the importance of review and redesign supports the role of designer/instructor as a coach analyzing the challenges of the design and course. Taking into account the learner’s experience and applying lessons learned by the student’s use of the course to refine and change the design to better suit the learner’s needs and success in understanding. This approach fully supports the idea of knowledge construction and in any sound construction project the progress is reviewed along the way and corrections are made to ensure the correct and successful completion of the project.

Etienne Wenger summarizes Communities of Practice (CoP) as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and //**learn how to do it better as they interact regularly**//.” (Italics ours) This learning that takes place is not necessarily intentional. Three components are required in order to be a CoP: (1) the domain, (2) the community, and (3) the practice. ( [] )

This also directly connects with the 3PD Model as the continued interaction and review does indeed help both the learners, instructor and the designer learn how to do it better.

At this stage of the design and development the course material and delivery strategy and components are created. During phase 2 the instructional designer revisits the plan with the teacher based on the experience of the players. It is at this stage where course elements can be evaluated and adjusted. Delivery components might be changed, added or withdrawn as their effectiveness is evaluated. This stage offers a different kind of collaboration that is not as immediately available in the classic classroom environment using standard methods.
 * Phase I: Prepare Functional Components**
 * Phase II: Evaluate, Elaborate and Enhance **

The course is maintained not in a static way but by using the evaluative feedback from the delivered course to modify any of the elements of the design and alter strategy as needed.
 * Phase III: Maintain**



(//Figure 2// from Sims & Jones 2002, p6)

"The value of this model can therefore be realised through the innovative ways in which it conceives the development process as //develop baseline – implement/evaluate/develop – maintain/evaluate// rather than the more traditional process of //design – develop – implement – evaluate//. The model provides an holistic framework consisting of long-term development teams, course templates, design and delivery standards and specified delivery platforms. The development of course materials is therefore not a short-term production process but a long-term collaborative process by all." (Sims & Jones 2002, p9)

= Summary of Model =

In many ways this model has a great appeal for the online environment, the fluidity of online learning connects well with the element of continuing development.

One of the most striking differences of the model is that the evaluation process is ongoing during both the second and third phases of the process as opposed to more standard Dick and Carey where evaluation and redesign and development is performed at the end of the process. Working with distance learning this option allows for a different kind of collaboration between the learners, the instructor and the designer, one that is more interactive and in a sense 'live'.

= References =

Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2002). Continuous Improvement Through Shared Understanding: Reconceptualising Instructional Design for Online Learning. //Proceedings of the 2002 ascilite conference: winds of change in the sea of learning: charting the course of digital education//. Internet: Available from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ conferences/auckland02/ proceedings/papers/162.pdf Accessed February 13, 2010

Constructivist instructional design (C-ID): foundations, models, and examples by Jerry W. Willis (2009)


 * Other Interesting Sites and Articles**

Kays, E, & Sims, R. (2006). Reinventing and reinvigorating instructional design:A theory for emergent learning. //Proceedings of the 23rd annual ascilite conference: Who’s learning? Whose technology?// Internet: Available from: [] Accessed February 13, 2010

[|Discovering Instructional Design 14: the Three-Phase Design Model]

Evaluation of the 3PD model Implementation of an Online Role-playing Game in Music History