Reeves multimedia design model: Difference between revisions

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Definition ==
== Definition ==


The '''Reeves Multimedia Design Model'' is a typical [[instructional systems design]] (ISD) model for education and training.  It includes four major functions: 1) analysis, 2) design, 3) production, and 4) evaluation, i.e. a typical variant of [[ADDIE]].  Each function is divided into a set of specific activities.
The '''Reeves Multimedia Design Model'' is a typical [[instructional systems design]] (ISD) model for education and training.  It includes four major functions: 1) analysis, 2) design, 3) production, and 4) evaluation, i.e. a typical variant of [[ADDIE]].  Each phase implies a set specific activities performed by a set of team members and that will lead to certain products.
 
See also: [[multimedia]], [[multimedia animation]], [[interactive multimedia]], etc.


== The Model ==
== The Model ==


Disclaimer: This model seems to have been published by Thomas Reeves some now dead Georgia Tech Web Site. Since [[User:DSchneider|DSchneider]] found the model ((c) Reeves, 1994) on an other Georgia Tech site, we assume that Thomas Reeves is the author of it. However, we do not claim that this is what T. Reeves believes to be the best design method. We are not even sure that Reeves is Thomas Reeves :)
Disclaimer: This model seems to have been published by Thomas Reeves on some now dead Georgia Tech Web Site. Since [[User:DSchneider|DSchneider]] found the model ((c) Reeves, 1994) on an [http://www.ceismc.gatech.edu/MM_Tools/MMDM.html other Georgia Tech site], we assume that Thomas Reeves is the author of it. However, we do not claim that this is what T. Reeves believes to be the best design method. We are not even sure that Reeves is Thomas Reeves :)


<table border="1"> <tr>  <td><b>Process</b></td>
<table border="1"> <tr>  <td><b>Process</b></td>
<td> <span style="font-weight: bold;">Team</span></td>
<td> <span style="font-weight: bold;">Team members</span></td>
<td> <b>Product</b></td>
<td> <b>Products</b></td>
  </tr>
  </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Analysis phase</th>  
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Analysis phase</th></tr>
</tr>
  <tr>
  <tr><td> Conducting NeedsAssessment</td>
<td>
<td> Project Manager</td>
*  Conducting Needs Assessment
<td> Needs Assessment Report</td>
* Preparing Audience Assessment
  </tr>
* Specifying Content and Objectives
  <tr><td> Preparing AudienceAssessment</td>
*  Selecting Authoring Systems
<td> Subject MatterExpert(s)</td>
*  Selecting Delivery Systems
<td> Learner Profile</td>
* Planning Project
  </tr>
* Planning Evaluation Strategies
  <tr><td> Specifying Content andObjectives</td>
</td>
<td> InstructionalDesigner(s)</td>
<td>
<td> Content Outline</td>
*  Project Manager
  </tr>
*  Subject Matter Expert(s)
  <tr><td> Selecting AuthoringSystems</td>
* Instructional Designer(s)
<td> Project Evaluator(s)</td>
* Project Evaluator(s)
<td> Learning Hierarchy</td>
* Programmer(s)
  </tr>
</td>
<tr><td> Selecting DeliverySystems</td>
<td>
<td> Programmer(s)</td>
*  Needs Assessment Report
<td> InstructionalObjectives</td>
*  Learner Profile
  </tr>
* Content Outline
  <tr><td> Planning Project</td>
* Learning Hierarchy
<td></td>
*  Instructional Objectives
<td> Authoring System Specs.</td>
*  Authoring System Specs.
  </tr>
* Delivery System Specs.
<tr><td> Planning EvaluationStrategies</td>
* PERT Chart
<td></td>
* Project Timetable
<td> Delivery System Specs.</td>
* Evaluation Plan
</tr>
  </td>
  <tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td> PERT Chart</td>
  </tr>
<tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td> Project Timetable</td>
  </tr>
  <tr><td></td>
<td></td>
<td> Evaluation Plan</td>
  </tr>
  </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Design phase</th> </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Design phase</th> </tr>
  <tr><td> Creating TreatmentSpecifications</td>
  <tr>
<td> Project Manager</td>
<td>
<td> Treatment Description</td>
*  Creating Treatment Specifications
  </tr>
*  Specifying Instructional Interactions
  <tr><td> SpecifyingInstructional Interactions</td>
*  Screen Design
<td> Subject MatterExpert(s)</td>
* Flow charting
<td> InstructionalArchetypes</td>
* Prototyping
  </tr>
*  Writing Scripts Specifications
  <tr><td> Screen Design</td>
*  Formatting Screens
<td> InstructionalDesigner(s)</td>
* Conducting Formative Reviews
<td> Flowcharts</td>
  </td>
  </tr>
<td>
  <tr><td> Flowcharting</td>
*  Project Manager
<td> Project Evaluator(s)</td>
*  Subject Matter Expert(s)
<td> Scripts</td>
* Instructional Designer(s)
</tr>
* Project Evaluator(s)
  <tr><td> Prototyping</td>
* Programmer(s)
<td> Programmer(s)</td>
* Graphic Artist(s)
<td> Format Sheets</td>
* Video Producer(s)
  </tr>
</td>
<tr><td> Writing ScriptsSpecifications</td>
<td>
<td> Graphic Artist(s)</td>
* Treatment Description
<td> IMM Prototypes </td>
* Instructional Archetypes
  </tr>
*  Flowcharts
<tr><td> Formatting Screens</td>
*  Scripts
<td> Video Producer(s)</td>
* Format Sheets
<td> ImprovementSpecifications</td>
* Interactive Multimedia (IMM) Prototypes
  </tr>
*  Improvement Specifications
  <tr><td> Conducting FormativeReviews</td>
</td>
<td> </td>
<td></td>
  </tr>
  <tr><td></td>
<td> </td>
<td></td>
  </tr>
  </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Production phase</th>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Production phase</th></tr>
</tr>
  <tr>
  <tr><td> Authoring Interactions</td>
<td>
<td> Project Manager</td>
*  Authoring Interactions
<td> Interactive Code</td>
*  Creating Graphics
  </tr>
*  Preparing Adjunct Materials
  <tr><td> Creating Graphics</td>
* Conducting Preproduction
<td> Subject MatterExpert(s)</td>
* Conducting Production
<td> Graphics</td>
*  Conducting Postproduction
  </tr>
*  Mastering Optical Media
  <tr><td> Preparing AdjunctMaterials</td>
* Integrating Optical Media and Authoring Code
<td> InstructionalDesigner(s)</td>
  </td>
<td> Adjunct Materials</td>
<td>
  </tr>
*  Project Manager
  <tr><td> ConductingPreproduction</td>
*  Subject Matter Expert(s)
<td> Project Evaluator(s)</td>
* Instructional Designer(s)
<td> Program Documentation</td>
* Project Evaluator(s)
</tr>
* Programmer(s)
  <tr><td> Conducting Production</td>
* Graphic Artist(s)
<td> Programmer(s)</td>
* Video Producer(s)  
<td> Shot Lists</td>
* Video Editor(s)
</tr>
*  Talent
  <tr><td> ConductingPostproduction</td>
</td>
<td> Graphic Artist(s)</td>
<td>
<td> Video/Film</td>
*  Interactive Code
</tr>
*  Graphics
  <tr><td> Mastering Optical Media</td>
* Adjunct Materials
<td> Video Producer(s) </td>
* Program Documentation
<td> Audio</td>
*  Shot Lists
  </tr>
*  Video/Film
<tr><td> Integrating OpticalMedia &amp; Code</td>
* Audio
<td> Video Editor(s)</td>
* Edited Video Masters
<td> Edited Video Masters</td>
*  Videodisc/CD-ROM
  </tr>
* IMM Program
  <tr><td></td>
</td>
<td> Talent</td>
<td> Videodisc/CD-ROM</td>
  </tr>
  <tr><td> </td>
<td></td>
<td> IMM Program</td>
  </tr>
  </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Evaluation phase</th> </tr>
  <tr><th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Evaluation phase</th> </tr>
  <tr><td> Documenting Project</td>
  <tr>
<td> Project Manager</td>
<td>
<td> Project Documentation</td>
*  Documenting Project
  </tr>
* Testing IMM
  <tr><td> Testing IMM</td>
* Validating IMM
<td> Subject MatterExpert(s)</td>
*  Conducting Impact Evaluation
<td> Functionally Valid IMM</td>
</td>
  </tr>
<td>
  <tr><td> Validating IMM</td>
* Project Manager
<td> InstructionalDesigner(s)</td>
* Subject Matter Expert(s)
<td> Instructionally ValidIMM</td>
* Instructional Designer(s)
  </tr>
* Project Evaluator(s)
  <tr><td> Conducting ImpactEvaluation</td>
*  Programmer(s)
<td> Project Evaluator(s)</td>
</td>
<td> Formative EvaluationReport</td>
<td>
  </tr>
*  Project Documentation
  <tr><td></td>
* Functionally Valid IMM
<td> Programmer(s)</td>
* Instructionally Valid IMM
<td> Effectiveness Eval.Report</td>
*  Formative Evaluation Report
  </tr>
*  Effectiveness Eval.Report
  <tr><td></td>
* Impact Evaluation Report
<td></td>
  </td>
<td> Impact EvaluationReport</td>
  </tr>
  </tr>
</table>
</table>


== Critique and discussion ==
== Critique and discussion ==


As presented, this model is a linear "waterfall" model. However, you should, before implementing it, think about important "milestones" that should lead to inspection of what has to been done, what needs to changed, etc. and include revision loops (at least at the end of each phase).
As presented, this model could be interpreted as a linear "waterfall" model. However, you should, before implementing it, think about important "milestones" that should lead to inspection of what has been done, what needs to be changed, etc. and include revision loops (at least at the end of each phase). [[User:DSchneider|DSchneider]] therefore thinks that this is rather a "checklist", i.e. a components model.


In [[User:DSchneider|DSchneider]]'s opinion, such design methods are very well suited for lower designs that are concerned by lower [[learning level]]s.
In [[User:DSchneider|DSchneider]]'s opinion, such design methods are very well suited for lower designs that are concerned by lower [[learning level]]s.
Line 168: Line 145:
{{quotation | The objective based design tradition presumes that knowledge exists in its perfect form in the world outside the user and that each user possesses a more or less perfect understanding of that perfect form Pedagogic practises based on this view often incorporate behavioural learning theory whereby learning was viewed as primarily dependent upon the arrangement of stimuli and the reinforcement provided for various responses. Most computer based training has been designed from such a behaviourist perspective. Reeves (1992) observes that generally these instructional technologies have had disappointing results. "Although there is some evidence that these programs are effective for learning concepts and procedural knowledge, their efficacy in the development of the higher order learning required in most education and many training contexts has been limited".}} (Litchfield, 1994).
{{quotation | The objective based design tradition presumes that knowledge exists in its perfect form in the world outside the user and that each user possesses a more or less perfect understanding of that perfect form Pedagogic practises based on this view often incorporate behavioural learning theory whereby learning was viewed as primarily dependent upon the arrangement of stimuli and the reinforcement provided for various responses. Most computer based training has been designed from such a behaviourist perspective. Reeves (1992) observes that generally these instructional technologies have had disappointing results. "Although there is some evidence that these programs are effective for learning concepts and procedural knowledge, their efficacy in the development of the higher order learning required in most education and many training contexts has been limited".}} (Litchfield, 1994).


On a side note, Reeves is today rather known for eclectic views, e.g. see the [[pedagogic strategy]] article.
On a side note, Thomas Reeves is today rather known for eclectic views, e.g. search this Wiki for "Reeves".


== Links ==
== Links ==
Line 181: Line 158:
== References ==
== References ==


Litchfield, A. (1994). Interface communication management: A user centred multimedia design model. In C. McBeath and R. Atkinson (Eds), Proceedings of the Second International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 298-303. Perth, Western Australia, 23-28 January. Promaco Conventions. http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1994/km/litchfield.html
* Litchfield, A. (1994). Interface communication management: A user centred multimedia design model. In C. McBeath and R. Atkinson (Eds), Proceedings of the Second International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 298-303. Perth, Western Australia, 23-28 January. Promaco Conventions. http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1994/km/litchfield.html


Reeves, T. C. (1992). Research foundations for interactive multimedia. In Promaco Conventions (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 177-190. Perth, Western Australia, 27-31 January. Promaco Conventions. [http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1992/reeves.html]
* Reeves, T. C. (1992). Research foundations for interactive multimedia. In Promaco Conventions (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 177-190. Perth, Western Australia, 27-31 January. Promaco Conventions. [http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1992/reeves.html]


[[Category: Instructional design method]]
[[Category: Design methodologies]]
[[Category:Instructional design methods]]

Latest revision as of 14:30, 29 September 2006

Definition

The 'Reeves Multimedia Design Model is a typical instructional systems design (ISD) model for education and training. It includes four major functions: 1) analysis, 2) design, 3) production, and 4) evaluation, i.e. a typical variant of ADDIE. Each phase implies a set specific activities performed by a set of team members and that will lead to certain products.

See also: multimedia, multimedia animation, interactive multimedia, etc.

The Model

Disclaimer: This model seems to have been published by Thomas Reeves on some now dead Georgia Tech Web Site. Since DSchneider found the model ((c) Reeves, 1994) on an other Georgia Tech site, we assume that Thomas Reeves is the author of it. However, we do not claim that this is what T. Reeves believes to be the best design method. We are not even sure that Reeves is Thomas Reeves :)

Process Team members Products
Analysis phase
  • Conducting Needs Assessment
  • Preparing Audience Assessment
  • Specifying Content and Objectives
  • Selecting Authoring Systems
  • Selecting Delivery Systems
  • Planning Project
  • Planning Evaluation Strategies
  • Project Manager
  • Subject Matter Expert(s)
  • Instructional Designer(s)
  • Project Evaluator(s)
  • Programmer(s)
  • Needs Assessment Report
  • Learner Profile
  • Content Outline
  • Learning Hierarchy
  • Instructional Objectives
  • Authoring System Specs.
  • Delivery System Specs.
  • PERT Chart
  • Project Timetable
  • Evaluation Plan
Design phase
  • Creating Treatment Specifications
  • Specifying Instructional Interactions
  • Screen Design
  • Flow charting
  • Prototyping
  • Writing Scripts Specifications
  • Formatting Screens
  • Conducting Formative Reviews
  • Project Manager
  • Subject Matter Expert(s)
  • Instructional Designer(s)
  • Project Evaluator(s)
  • Programmer(s)
  • Graphic Artist(s)
  • Video Producer(s)
  • Treatment Description
  • Instructional Archetypes
  • Flowcharts
  • Scripts
  • Format Sheets
  • Interactive Multimedia (IMM) Prototypes
  • Improvement Specifications
Production phase
  • Authoring Interactions
  • Creating Graphics
  • Preparing Adjunct Materials
  • Conducting Preproduction
  • Conducting Production
  • Conducting Postproduction
  • Mastering Optical Media
  • Integrating Optical Media and Authoring Code
  • Project Manager
  • Subject Matter Expert(s)
  • Instructional Designer(s)
  • Project Evaluator(s)
  • Programmer(s)
  • Graphic Artist(s)
  • Video Producer(s)
  • Video Editor(s)
  • Talent
  • Interactive Code
  • Graphics
  • Adjunct Materials
  • Program Documentation
  • Shot Lists
  • Video/Film
  • Audio
  • Edited Video Masters
  • Videodisc/CD-ROM
  • IMM Program
Evaluation phase
  • Documenting Project
  • Testing IMM
  • Validating IMM
  • Conducting Impact Evaluation
  • Project Manager
  • Subject Matter Expert(s)
  • Instructional Designer(s)
  • Project Evaluator(s)
  • Programmer(s)
  • Project Documentation
  • Functionally Valid IMM
  • Instructionally Valid IMM
  • Formative Evaluation Report
  • Effectiveness Eval.Report
  • Impact Evaluation Report

Critique and discussion

As presented, this model could be interpreted as a linear "waterfall" model. However, you should, before implementing it, think about important "milestones" that should lead to inspection of what has been done, what needs to be changed, etc. and include revision loops (at least at the end of each phase). DSchneider therefore thinks that this is rather a "checklist", i.e. a components model.

In DSchneider's opinion, such design methods are very well suited for lower designs that are concerned by lower learning levels.

“The objective based design tradition presumes that knowledge exists in its perfect form in the world outside the user and that each user possesses a more or less perfect understanding of that perfect form Pedagogic practises based on this view often incorporate behavioural learning theory whereby learning was viewed as primarily dependent upon the arrangement of stimuli and the reinforcement provided for various responses. Most computer based training has been designed from such a behaviourist perspective. Reeves (1992) observes that generally these instructional technologies have had disappointing results. "Although there is some evidence that these programs are effective for learning concepts and procedural knowledge, their efficacy in the development of the higher order learning required in most education and many training contexts has been limited".” (Litchfield, 1994).

On a side note, Thomas Reeves is today rather known for eclectic views, e.g. search this Wiki for "Reeves".

Links

The model presented here can be found (at least) on these web sites:

References

  • Litchfield, A. (1994). Interface communication management: A user centred multimedia design model. In C. McBeath and R. Atkinson (Eds), Proceedings of the Second International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 298-303. Perth, Western Australia, 23-28 January. Promaco Conventions. http://www.aset.org.au/confs/iims/1994/km/litchfield.html
  • Reeves, T. C. (1992). Research foundations for interactive multimedia. In Promaco Conventions (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Interactive Multimedia Symposium, 177-190. Perth, Western Australia, 27-31 January. Promaco Conventions. [1]
Retrieved from "https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/mediawiki/index.php?title=Reeves_multimedia_design_model&oldid=8133"