IPISD Model-----Xiaojun Chen

1960s, the military started to address training problems using a systems approach. 1970s, Robert K. Branson with Center for Educational Technology at Florida State University worked with U.S. Army Training Board to develop a model, which evolved into the Interservice Procedures for Instructional Systems Development (IPISD). This early model of instructional design was widely used by the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines to improve interservice training and large-scale instructional development.

“IPISD model and procedures were developed through an interactive process in an attempt to make them acceptable and useful in all services.” Branson, 1978Branson, 1978

The model has five phases --Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Control.Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Control. Each of the phases is a separate and distinct function which could be carried out successively by one person, or each of the steps could be assigned to separate individuals.

Diagram adopted from Branson (1978)

IPISD provide a planning framework IPISD has a suggested sequence of work IPISD provide the basis for a central management system IPISD is the broad application of the systems approach to training.

1. Effectiveness. Through the design and development procedures, a careful selection of what is to be trained, the measurement and evaluation of training, and the revision of the training program until it meets its objectives should greatly increase training effectiveness. 2. Efficiency. The features of IPISD (planning framework and sequence of work) can make the effective instruction be offered in a much more time-efficient way. 3. Costs. It is not reasonable to believe that the use of procedures will always result in lower costs. It is unrealistic to expect lower costs per student on all existing completely effective courses. However, the procedure does provide a systematic way of viewing costs of training and considering whether additional resources are justified in view of the output.

IPISD has the core elements of instructional design. The five headings of IPISD are similar to ADDIC, but the author and users do not refer to it by the ADDIC acronym, but only under the label of IPISD.

I.1 Analyze the job nature – to perform analyst tasks for clients I.2 Select tasks – be able to use specific analyst software, etc. I.3 Construct job performances measures –eg. pilot-case study I.4Analyze existing courses – some existing analyst training course I.5 Select instructional setting – online/face-to-face II.1 Develop objectives – eg. Given the piece of software and client’s documentation and information, learners would be able to walk through analysis procedure with a pre-formatted written-report. II.2 Develop tests accordingly II.3 Describe entry behavior— skills to use computer and business software II.4 Determine sequence & Structure– A detailed module plan with lesson plan

III.1 Specific learning events/Activity III.2 Specify instructional management plan & delivery system– choose appropriate media and learning environment III.3 Review/select existing materials III.4 Develop instruction—modify the lesson plans and module units III5. Validate instruction—small scale pilot classes, collecting feedback and comments IV.1 Implement instructional management plan IV.2 Conduct instruction—put into action V.1 Conduct internal evaluation—survey to learners and instructors V.2 Conduct external evaluation—survey to clients and other relavant departments in the company V.3 Revise system

“(IPISD is a step to) remove training from the status of a cottage industry to a real technology.”---Branson, 1978 Not only in military training, some counties used IPISD in their citizen training. IPISD has distinctive feature to be used in work-place job training in some big corporation.

The IPISD model is a successful model and being widely used in military, business, government and educational institutions. Empirical research Scholarly article to meet standards of research publications Challenge: Learning become more complex. IPISD does not meet the need for project-based or problem- solving learning process. It does not meet all the needs for enhancing human performance in a complex and ever-changing world.

McCombs, B. L. (1986, Summer). The Instructional Systems Development (ISD) Model: A Review of Those Factors Critical to its successful Implementation. Education Communication and Technology Journal, 34(2), Branson, R. K. (1978). The interservice procedures for instructional systems development. Educational Technology, March, ndiana.edu/~molpage/In%2520Search%2520of%2520Elusiv e%2520ADDIE.pdf+ipisd&hl=zh- CN&ct=clnk&cd=30&gl=us ndiana.edu/~molpage/In%2520Search%2520of%2520Elusiv e%2520ADDIE.pdf+ipisd&hl=zh- CN&ct=clnk&cd=30&gl=us

Presented by Xiaojun Chen 9/27/2007