Instructional Design Models: ADDIE, ASSURE, and CRI
This paper examines foundational instructional design models — ADDIE, ASSURE, and Criterion Referenced Instruction (CRI) — analyzing how each structures the learning process and encourages learner involvement. It compares the stages of each model, noting their relative strengths and limitations regarding student feedback and formative assessment. The paper then applies these models to a practical scenario: teaching phlebotomy techniques requiring both anatomical knowledge and hands-on blood-drawing skills. It argues that CRI is the most appropriate model for this context due to its competency-based, performance-oriented approach, and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of that selection.
- Overview of Instructional Design Models: Introduction to major instructional design frameworks
- The ADDIE Model: Stages and feedback limitations of ADDIE
- The ASSURE Model: ASSURE steps compared to ADDIE's learner feedback
- Choosing a Model for Phlebotomy Instruction: CRI selected for competency-based phlebotomy training
- Criterion Referenced Instruction: Advantages and Disadvantages: CRI elements, tracking, and continuous improvement
- Conclusion: CRI limitations and suitability for medical education
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Directly compares multiple instructional design models using consistent evaluative criteria — learner feedback timing, specificity of steps, and real-world applicability — making the analysis easy to follow.
- Grounds abstract model descriptions in a concrete applied scenario (phlebotomy training), demonstrating how theoretical frameworks translate into practical curriculum decisions.
- Acknowledges the limitations of the chosen model (CRI's origins in self-instruction) while still arguing for its suitability, showing intellectual balance.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses a compare-then-apply structure: it first describes and critiques multiple models side by side, then selects and justifies one for a specific instructional context. This technique — establishing a field of options before narrowing to a reasoned recommendation — is a strong pattern for applied education writing and mirrors the kind of evidence-based decision-making expected in instructional design practice.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a broad survey of two major instructional design frameworks (ADDIE and ASSURE), each given its own explanatory paragraph followed by a brief critical commentary. It then pivots to an applied question — designing instruction for phlebotomy students — and introduces CRI as the best-fit model. The final section elaborates on CRI's core elements, practical advantages for medical training, and one notable limitation, closing with a justification rooted in the learning outcomes required of phlebotomy graduates.
Overview of Instructional Design Models
Instructional design models provide structured frameworks for developing effective educational experiences. Each model organizes the learning process differently, with varying degrees of emphasis on learner involvement, feedback, and assessment. Two of the most widely used models are ADDIE and ASSURE, both of which incorporate formative and summative assessment strategies, though they differ in specificity and the timing of learner feedback.
The ADDIE Model
The foundational instructional design model is called the ADDIE model, an acronym for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. During the analysis (planning) phase, the designer identifies the "learning problem, the goals and objectives, the audience's needs, existing knowledge, and any other relevant characteristics. Analysis also considers the learning environment, any constraints, the delivery options, and the timeline for the project" (ADDIE Model, 2012, Learning Theories). During the design phase, learning objectives are further specified as the instructional plan takes shape. The development phase involves the actual creation of the content. The implementation phase is the execution of the instructional plan, during which input is solicited from both learners and instructors about its efficacy. Finally, and equally critically, the evaluation phase assesses the instructional process as a whole and gathers feedback from users.
Built into the ADDIE model are both formative and summative techniques of assessment. Learners provide feedback during the implementation phase — either by taking quizzes or by being asked for their opinions — representing the formative component. A general summative evaluation follows in the final phase. However, one of the more common criticisms of the ADDIE model is that meaningful feedback comes too late in the process.
References
ADDIE Model. (2012). Learning theories. Retrieved from http://www.learning-theories.com/addie-model.html
Clark, D. (2010). Why instructional system design? Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat1.html
Criterion-referenced instruction. (2012). Instructional Design. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/criterion-referenced.html
Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., & Russell, J. D. (2012). Instructional technology and media for learning (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.