ADDIE and SAM: A Comparative Analysis

Credit: @effectivelearningininstructionaldesign.com

The instructional design process is a complex and ever changing approach to ensuring learner success. Instructional designers and educators have used many different models for developing content that the learner can best engage with and learn from. There are many competing models that have been used over the years to help learners best benefit from their learning experience. While there are many different models that are used by instructional designers, ADDIE and SAM seem to be at the front of discussion when deciding what model can be effective. This blog post will compare and contrast the two models in order to help instructors and designers see a better picture between the two competing models.

What are ADDIE and SAM? 

While this blog post is not meant to discuss what ADDIE and SAM are, a little background behind basics of each model is necessary to understand how they compare as instructional design processes. ADDIE and SAM are both interesting instructional design models.

ADDIE

Credit: @digitalchalk

ADDIE, according to Brown and Green (2015), is one of the most popular models because it takes into account the most basic aspects of instructional design: analyze, produce, and evaluate. ADDIE takes the basic steps of instructional design and divides them into five stages: Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate.

ADDIE was created as a design model allows instructors and designers to use background research and needs analysis data to create content for learners. ADDIE allows the designer/instructor to to evaluate the effectiveness of the content after it has been developed. Check out this short video on the basics of ADDIE and each of it's important steps.

SAM

Credit: Michael Allen

SAM (Successive Approximation Model) is another popular instructional design model where design is approached in a very cyclic process where analysis and design are intertwined through small steps. The content can be analyzed at different points in the design process for optimal an optimal learner experience. SAM allows the developer to have multiple check points throughout the design process to allow for an effective design. SAM contains the basic steps of instruction design but incorporates them in a cyclic process. SAM, according to Brown and Green (2015), was created to place more emphasis on each step of the process. Check out this video on SAM.

How do these models compare? 

Both ADDIE and SAM are useful and important models of instructional design. While both include the basic aspects of instructional design, they both have some key differences in their approach to the design of content. While there are many differences in these two models, this blog will focus on three key differences between the two models: Linear vs. Cyclic, Iterative vs. Non-iterative, and Whole Design vs. Prototypes.

The Design Process: Linear vs. Cyclic

One area where ADDIE and SAM differ is in the basics of the design process. ADDIE has been referred to as a "waterfall approach" where each step falls into the next step until it reaches the final product. SAM, however, is a very cyclic process where the designer cycles through the creative process. What does this mean for the two processes? For ADDIE, it means that the designer gets to a finished product to test after going though each of the stages. For SAM, it means that the designer cycles through the steps several times before getting to the product. Does this mean that one is better than another? I would think the answer is no. Each model is designed to fit the needs of a specific designer. If the designer needs a more linear approach with a product that needs less evaluation during its development, then ADDIE may be the way to go. If the designer needs to assure that the product is effective and tested before being used by a large learner population, then SAM may be the way to go.

The Development Process: Iterative vs. Non-Iterative

Another area where ADDIE and SAM differ is in their development process. SAM is often referred to as an iterative approach where each step is carefully reviewed and reworked in order to ensure a better end product (content). Each of the steps has a component where the content can be evaluated and reviewed (often by a group of people) to ensure quality and usefulness of the final product. This ensures the content being developed is what is needed and the developer is not waiting until the end to see the outcome. ADDIE is much less iterative, by design. ADDIE will help the developer churn out the content and the need for review or changes is often at the end of the process. ADDIE does not incorporate self or group checks throughout the process. For the ADDIE model, it occurs mostly at the end. Which is better? The answer is not so simple. It depends on the project. In some instances, the need for an iterative process is necessary and speed is not that important. This is the time where SAM may be the most effective for a designer. In other times, speed and repetitive checking is not as important. This would be a great instance for the developer to use the ADDIE model. While ADDIE is not a fast process in and of itself, it is generally faster than SAM as long as project goals are not changed throughout the process. Again, the need of the developer and the learners will determine which model is best suited for the project at hand.

Flexibility: Whole Design vs. Prototypes  

Another aspect where ADDIE and SAM differ is in their "roll out". What does that mean? Well, in essence, it means that each model deals with a product being produced in different ways. With ADDIE, a whole design in generated for use and then evaluated. The entire product is released for implementation and evaluated. With SAM, prototypes are developed along the way. These prototypes can be tested and reviewed before it is implemented. In essence, the developer can have test runs of the product, stakeholder input throughout the process, and more detailed feedback throughout the process. In this case, SAM has better quality control on the final product than does ADDIE. Another aspect is that although ADDIE creates a whole product in the end, which can be faster, but it can also backfire. If project goals change during the process, it could mean starting from scratch. SAM would allow for changes to be made in a more effective way than ADDIE. Again, does this mean that one is better than the other? Not necessarily. If time is of the essence and prototyping and multiple points of evaluation would hinder the process, then ADDIE could be a perfect tool in that situation. However, if quality control is essential and time is not as big of an issue, then SAM could be a good fit.

Conclusion

So, which model is better? I think it is important to remember that it is not pitting one instructional design model against another. Both models have strong foundations within the instructional design field and are important tools needed for different projects that will be undertaken. Just like the design of content is important, the choice of the tool for the design is also essential. The instructional designer must make sure to use a tool that best meets their needs at the time. While SAM was designed to be used in place of ADDIE with less rigid steps, I think there is good value in both models and their use is highly dependent on the situation at hand.

Are there other differences you have found between the models? Do you think both are valuable models? I wold love to hear what you think. :D



Resources:

Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2015). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and practice. Routledge.