An instructional design team is assigned the task of creating an instructional CD ROM based on historical sites along the Oregon Trail. During the design phase, the team created a template to be used for all screens within the CD. This template included buttons for navigational purposes.

The project progressed to the development phase. The development team created the storyboards, which were approved by all team members. The scripting of the content began, and the team moved along at a swift rate.

After completing the scripting of the multimedia CD, the design team decided to change the template buttons to create more navigational ease for the user. The template was also modified for aesthetic reasons.

As the deadline for the project approaches, the development team is unsure if they can make the modifications in the scripting before the project is due for implementation.

Questions:

1. How could this kind of dilemma be avoided when using the ADDIE model for instructional design within a multimedia authoring project?
2. What are some solutions to remedy this problem? How could the project have been handled differently?

Case Study #2:

The same instructional design team that was working on the Oregon Trail project just a few months ago has been assigned to another project. The assignment is to create an instructional website using the same information from the CD. More content is added to the original project, which means that the navigational structure must be changed. Also, the template has once again been modified to ease in user navigation. The website must also be written so that the visually impaired will be able to access and use the site.

Unfortunately, the development team lacks confidence in the abilities of the design team. The development team decides to ignore the instructions of the design team and create the CD ROM in a way that is more amenable to the multimedia authoring program being used. The rationale is that the design team and subject matter experts do not fully understand the limitations of the program. Further, the design team is not aware of the time it takes to modify changes in the template; therefore, the development team decides to “do what they can” in the given time left for the project. They decide to continue with the project without any further consultation with the design team.

The prototype is completed, and the design team notices that the changes and suggestions they made in the flowcharts were essentially ignored in the prototype. Much of the new content was virtually left out of the CD. The due date for the project has passed, and there is no time left to modify the prototype before it goes out to be evaluated.

Questions:

1. How could the design and development teams improve communication?
2. How could the team perform formative evaluation while developing the prototype to assure that all aspects of the project are being completed satisfactorily?