Theoretical Frameworks of Performance-Based Models

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to highlight theories that support the functions of performance‐based design models and to discuss the implications of integrating divergent models into the system‐oriented human performance technology (HPT) and performance improvement (PI) disciplines. HPT, PI, and instructional systems design (ISD) share a systems framework, along with the influence of common theories such as performance theory, learning theory, adult learning, cognitive psychology, and behavioral psychology (Foshay, Villachica, & Stepich, 2014). This article focuses on the role of theory as a tool in the practitioner's toolbox and as a connection point when working with teams and organizations that have different theoretical orientations. Performance‐based ISD models are discussed, including Robinson and Robinson's (1989) Training for Impact, Brethower and Smalley's (1998) Performance‐Based Instruction, and Bradford and Boler's (2015) Horizon Model. Allen and Sites's (2012) successive approximation model (SAM) retains elements of ADDIE as a process, but the model is iterative rather than systematic in design.

Instructional design learners make sense of theory: a collaborative autoethnography

“…Furthermore, theory is a vital part of decision making within ID practice (Johnson, 1998;Winn, 1997), enabling practitioners to envision new possibilities, problem solve and design, and debate different perspectives (Wilson, 1997). Supported by theory, practitioners craft design interventions aligned within a unified framework, communicate instructional design activity, and adapt existing models to new situations (Tamez, 2016).…”