Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

ADDIE model

The ADDIE model is an instructional design framework that outlines a systematic, iterative process for creating effective training and educational programs through five interconnected phases: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation.^[1] This model serves as a foundational guide in the field of instructional systems design, emphasizing the need to assess learner needs, plan content, produce materials, deliver instruction, and continuously refine outcomes based on feedback.^[2] Developed in 1975 by the Center for Educational Technology at Florida State University specifically for the U.S. Army, the ADDIE model emerged as part of broader efforts to standardize military training during the post-World War II era, building on earlier influences like the U.S. Air Force's five-step approach from 1970.^[3]^[1] Originally presented as a linear sequence of 19 steps grouped into the five phases—detailed in the seminal work by Branson et al.—it was designed to ensure comprehensive and efficient instructional development for large-scale training initiatives.^[3] Over time, the model evolved from a rigid, waterfall-style process in the 1970s to a more dynamic and cyclical framework by the mid-1980s, incorporating ongoing evaluation at each stage to allow for revisions and adaptations, as refined by the U.S. Armed Forces.^[3] The acronym "ADDIE" itself was not formalized until 1995, but the underlying methodology quickly gained prominence beyond military contexts, influencing corporate training, higher education, and e-learning design.^[3]^[2] In practice, the Analysis phase involves identifying learner needs, performance gaps, and environmental constraints through data collection; Design focuses on defining learning objectives, content outlines, and assessment strategies; Development entails creating and testing instructional materials; Implementation covers the rollout and facilitation of the program; and Evaluation measures effectiveness via formative (ongoing) and summative (final) assessments to inform iterations.^[1] This phased approach promotes efficiency, learner-centered outcomes, and adaptability, making ADDIE a cornerstone for modern instructional designers despite criticisms of its potential rigidity in agile environments.^[2]

Introduction

Definition

The ADDIE model is a foundational framework in instructional design, with its acronym standing for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation.^[4] This structured approach guides the creation of effective instructional materials and training programs by outlining sequential yet interconnected steps to ensure alignment with learner needs and objectives.^[5] As a process model, ADDIE emphasizes a systematic methodology for instructional designers, focusing on practical steps to build and refine educational content rather than adhering to a singular theoretical perspective on learning.^[6] It is inherently iterative, incorporating feedback mechanisms that allow revisions across its five phases to enhance overall effectiveness and adaptability.^[7] This flexibility distinguishes it as a versatile tool for diverse instructional contexts, promoting efficiency in program development.^[8] The model's etymology traces back to military training origins, where it emerged as a standardized process to support rigorous and scalable instruction in demanding environments.^[9]

Purpose and Benefits

The ADDIE model serves as a systematic framework for instructional designers to create learner-centered training programs by methodically addressing learner needs, organizational goals, and performance gaps from the outset.^[10] Its primary objective is to ensure that instructional interventions are purposeful and targeted, fostering environments where learning outcomes directly support enhanced human performance and skill acquisition.^[11] By emphasizing a structured progression through its five core phases—Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—the model promotes a holistic approach that integrates evaluation as an ongoing element to validate effectiveness at every stage.^[12] One key benefit of the ADDIE model is its ability to improve alignment between learning objectives and actual outcomes, as the initial analysis phase identifies specific learner requirements, while subsequent phases build materials that are relevant and directly tied to measurable results.^[13] This alignment reduces the risk of developing irrelevant content, ensuring that instructional materials remain adaptable to diverse audiences and evolving contexts, such as shifting workplace demands or technological advancements.^[10] Furthermore, the model's iterative nature allows for continuous refinement based on formative and summative feedback, leading to progressively more effective training solutions that enhance learner engagement and retention.^[11] The ADDIE model also contributes to cost efficiency in instructional design by enabling early detection of potential issues, thereby minimizing expensive revisions during later development stages.^[12] For instance, thorough upfront analysis confirms the necessity of training interventions, avoiding resource allocation to unnecessary programs and streamlining the overall process to deliver high-impact results with optimized budgets.^[13] Overall, these advantages make ADDIE a foundational tool for producing professional, scalable learning experiences that are both economical and outcome-oriented.^[10]

Historical Development

Origins

The ADDIE model emerged in the 1970s as a foundational framework for instructional systems design, specifically developed in 1975 by the Center for Educational Technology at Florida State University under funding from the United States Army.^[9] This effort was part of the broader Interservice Procedures for Instructional Systems Development (IPISD), aimed at creating standardized training programs for military personnel.^[14] The model's inception addressed the need for a systematic approach to producing effective instructional materials amid the complexities of post-Vietnam War military education requirements.^[15] The roots of ADDIE trace back to earlier systematic instructional design practices originating during World War II, when U.S. military efforts required rapid, efficient training methods for large numbers of recruits, and were directly influenced by the U.S. Air Force's five-step approach from 1970.^[16]^[3] Psychologists and educators, including figures like B.F. Skinner, contributed to the development of programmed instruction and behavioral objectives that influenced post-war training manuals and laid the groundwork for formalized systems like ADDIE.^[17] These WWII-era approaches emphasized breaking down complex skills into manageable components, a principle central to ADDIE's structure. Key early contributor at Florida State University was Robert K. Branson, who led the IPISD project and helped shape the model's theoretical underpinnings through FSU's traditions of systems-based instruction.^[14] Originally presented as a linear sequence of 19 steps grouped into the five phases and detailed in the seminal work by Branson et al., the initial purpose of ADDIE was to provide a linear, phased process for standardizing the creation of Army instructional materials, ensuring consistency and measurability in training outcomes.^[1]^[18] This five-phase structure—analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation—served as a blueprint for efficient resource allocation in military education.^[9]

Evolution

During the 1980s and 1990s, the ADDIE model transitioned from its initial linear, waterfall-style framework—previously known as Systems Approach to Training (SAT) or Instructional Systems Design (ISD)—to more iterative interpretations, with the acronym "ADDIE" formalized in 1995, especially as it gained traction in civilian education and corporate training sectors beyond its military origins. This evolution reflected the growing recognition of the need for flexibility in addressing complex instructional needs and incorporating ongoing feedback, with the U.S. Army itself revising the model by 1984 to emphasize that "all parts are interrelated" in a dynamic process.^[3]^[19] Scholars like Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer further reinforced this view in 1997, describing the phases as "iterative and cyclic" to better suit diverse educational and professional contexts.^[3] The 2000s marked a pivotal influence of technology on the model's refinement, with adaptations tailored for e-learning environments and digital tools that enabled rapid prototyping and multimedia integration. Emerging technologies such as online platforms and interactive media prompted instructional designers to embed iterative evaluation throughout the process, enhancing adaptability for virtual training programs.^[1] This technological shift addressed the demands of distributed learning, incorporating elements like gamification and AI to create more engaging and scalable instructional solutions.^[1] A significant milestone in documenting this progression was Robert M. Branch's 2009 book, Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach, which highlighted the model's inherent flexibility for non-traditional settings, including multimedia development and online learning, positioning ADDIE as a versatile foundation amid proliferating complex design paradigms.^[20] In response to accelerating development needs in fast-paced industries, the ADDIE model has evolved toward agile-compatible versions, blending its core phases with iterative sprints, adaptive planning, and continuous stakeholder input to support rapid iterations without sacrificing structure.^[1] This hybrid integration, as explored in subsequent works like the 2011 U.S. Army TRADOC Regulation on non-linear ADDIE, allows for formative adjustments that align with agile principles in corporate and educational applications.^[3]

Core Phases

Analysis Phase

The Analysis phase serves as the foundational step in the ADDIE instructional design model, where instructional designers systematically investigate the problem to determine whether instruction is required and, if so, what form it should take. This phase involves clarifying the instructional problem, establishing goals and objectives, and assessing the learning context to ensure that subsequent efforts are aligned with actual needs. By identifying performance gaps—such as discrepancies between current learner capabilities and desired outcomes—instructional designers lay the groundwork for targeted interventions that address root causes rather than symptoms.^[21]^[22] Key activities in the Analysis phase include conducting needs assessments to pinpoint organizational or individual performance issues, defining learner characteristics such as prior knowledge, demographics, attitudes, and skills, and evaluating contextual factors like available resources and delivery constraints. Designers perform multiple sub-analyses: a needs analysis to describe the problem and set learning goals; a learner analysis to profile entry-level behaviors and motivations; a context analysis to examine instructional settings, timelines, and support systems; and a task analysis to break down required performances into hierarchical components and decision points. These activities often involve collaboration with subject matter experts to validate findings and ensure relevance.^[21]^[4]^[22] Common tools and methods for gathering data during this phase encompass surveys and questionnaires to quantify learner needs, interviews and focus groups for qualitative insights into attitudes and experiences, observations to assess real-world performance, and reviews of existing data such as performance records or pre-tests. Task analysis techniques, including hierarchical breakdowns or cognitive mapping, help delineate the knowledge and skills required for goal achievement. These methods enable designers to answer critical questions about who the learners are, what they need to know, where and when instruction will occur, and why gaps exist.^[21]^[22] The primary outputs of the Analysis phase are a comprehensive learner analysis report documenting characteristics and gaps, clearly defined instructional goals and objectives, and an outline of resource constraints such as budget, time, and technology. This documentation provides a blueprint that informs the transition to the Design phase, where goals are translated into structured learning objectives and strategies. As the prerequisite to all later phases, the Analysis phase is crucial for ensuring efficiency and effectiveness, preventing misdirected efforts that could arise from unexamined assumptions about learner needs or environmental factors.^[4]^[21]^[22]

Design Phase

The Design phase of the ADDIE model builds upon the needs, goals, and learner characteristics identified in the Analysis phase to create a comprehensive blueprint for instruction. This stage emphasizes systematic planning to ensure the instructional program is effective, efficient, and aligned with intended outcomes. Instructional designers focus on defining how learning will occur, specifying strategies that promote engagement and retention while anticipating potential challenges in delivery.^[4]^[23] Key activities in the Design phase include developing precise learning objectives that are observable and measurable, frequently guided by Bloom's Taxonomy to address varying cognitive domains such as knowledge recall, application, and analysis. Designers then select appropriate delivery methods—ranging from traditional classroom settings to online platforms or hybrid formats—based on factors like audience preferences, resource availability, and content complexity. Outlining the content sequence follows, involving a subject matter analysis to decompose topics into logical, scaffolded units that build progressively on prior knowledge and skills. This ensures a coherent flow that supports learner progression without overwhelming them.^[23]^[4] The phase also incorporates prototyping initial ideas through tools like storyboards, which visualize the instructional flow and allow for early feasibility checks before full development. Outputs primarily consist of detailed design documents, including lesson plans that specify activities and timelines, as well as preliminary assessment strategies to measure achievement against objectives. These artifacts provide a clear roadmap for subsequent phases, minimizing revisions later.^[4] Important considerations during Design include aligning strategies with adult learning principles (andragogy), which stress relevance to real-world experiences, learner autonomy, and problem-centered approaches to motivate mature audiences. Accessibility must be integrated from the outset, applying universal design for learning (UDL) principles to support diverse needs, such as providing multiple representation formats and flexible engagement options for learners with disabilities. This proactive focus enhances inclusivity and broadens the program's reach.^[24]

Development Phase

The development phase of the ADDIE model focuses on the production and assembly of instructional materials, transforming the detailed plans and prototypes established in the prior design phase into functional resources. This stage emphasizes the creation of tangible content that aligns with learner objectives, ensuring that the materials are ready for testing and refinement. Instructional designers collaborate with subject matter experts to author and integrate components, addressing how abstract designs become concrete deliverables.^[25] Key activities in this phase include authoring textual and instructional content, such as scripts, lesson modules, and guides, often developed in collaboration with experts to ensure accuracy and relevance. Developers also produce multimedia elements, including videos, animations, and interactive simulations, to enhance engagement and support diverse learning styles. Additionally, assessments are created, encompassing pre-tests, practice exercises, quizzes, and post-tests that measure achievement of learning outcomes, with formats ranging from multiple-choice items to performance-based tasks. These efforts build on the design blueprints to produce cohesive materials.^[25]^[4] The primary outputs of the development phase are complete instructional materials, such as organized lesson plans, digital modules, handouts, and media files, along with initial pilot versions configured for small-scale testing on platforms like learning management systems. These deliverables provide structured practice opportunities and feedback mechanisms to reinforce learning. For instance, a pilot version might include an interactive module hosted online for preliminary user trials.^[25]^[4] Common tools used include authoring software like Articulate Storyline for building interactive e-learning courses and Adobe Captivate for developing responsive simulations and videos, which facilitate the integration of multimedia and assessments without extensive coding. Other supporting tools encompass graphic design applications like Adobe Photoshop for visuals and audio editors like Audacity for recordings, enabling efficient production of high-quality assets.^[25] Quality checks during development involve initial formative reviews, where teams evaluate materials for factual accuracy, instructional alignment with objectives, learner engagement, and technical functionality, often through peer feedback or expert validation to identify revisions before full implementation. These reviews ensure that content is clear, accessible, and effective in promoting active learning.^[25]^[4]

Implementation Phase

The implementation phase of the ADDIE model involves the actual delivery of the instructional program to learners, marking the transition from preparation to active execution. This stage ensures that the instructional materials, strategies, and objectives outlined in earlier phases are effectively deployed in a real-world context, with a focus on logistical coordination and ongoing support to facilitate optimal learning outcomes. Key activities include training facilitators to deliver content proficiently, distributing necessary materials to participants, scheduling sessions to align with learner availability, and providing continuous support to address individual needs during the process.^[26]^[4] Facilitator training typically covers curriculum delivery techniques, learning objectives, assessment methods, and troubleshooting common issues to ensure consistent and engaging instruction. Materials, such as handouts, digital resources, or simulation tools developed in the prior phase, are distributed in advance or during sessions to equip learners for participation. Scheduling encompasses determining session formats—whether in-person, virtual, or hybrid—and timing them to minimize disruptions, often incorporating enrollment tracking to monitor participant numbers and attendance. Learner support mechanisms, like help desks or real-time feedback channels, are established to guide participants through challenges and promote active engagement.^[27]^[10] The primary outputs of this phase are the conducted training sessions themselves, along with documentation such as participant enrollment data, attendance records, and initial performance metrics that indicate delivery success. These elements provide tangible evidence of the program's rollout and serve as foundational data for subsequent review. By bridging the gap between instructional development and practical application, the implementation phase applies theoretical designs in dynamic environments, adapting to real-time learner interactions to enhance knowledge transfer and skill acquisition.^[4]^[26] Challenges in this phase often revolve around managing group dynamics, where facilitators must navigate diverse learner backgrounds, motivation levels, and interactions to maintain focus and inclusivity. In virtual settings, technical issues such as connectivity problems or platform glitches can disrupt sessions, requiring prompt resolution through backup plans like alternative access methods or offline resources. Addressing these hurdles demands proactive preparation and flexibility to sustain momentum and ensure equitable access for all participants.^[10]^[27]

Evaluation Phase

The evaluation phase of the ADDIE model involves systematically assessing the instructional program's effectiveness to ensure it meets its intended objectives and supports continuous improvement. This phase encompasses both formative evaluations, which occur iteratively during the earlier phases to provide ongoing feedback for refinements, and summative evaluations, conducted after full implementation to measure overall success. Formative evaluations focus on identifying issues in real-time, such as through prototype testing, while summative evaluations determine the program's impact on learners and outcomes.^[28] A widely adopted framework within this phase is Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation, which structures assessments across reaction (learner satisfaction), learning (knowledge acquisition), behavior (application of skills), and results (organizational impact). At the reaction level, feedback gauges participant engagement; learning level uses pre- and post-tests to verify comprehension; behavior level observes on-the-job changes; and results level analyzes broader metrics like productivity gains. This model, originally developed in 1959, integrates seamlessly with ADDIE by aligning evaluations to specific instructional goals.^[29]^[30] Common methods in the evaluation phase include surveys for gathering qualitative feedback, standardized tests for measuring knowledge retention, and performance metrics such as error rates or completion times to assess practical application. These tools enable data-driven insights, with surveys often deployed post-session for immediate reactions and metrics tracked longitudinally for behavioral changes. The phase emphasizes an ongoing, iterative integration, where evaluation data from prior phases like design and implementation informs revisions, fostering a feedback loop that enhances future iterations of the program.^[28]^[31] Key outputs of the evaluation phase are comprehensive reports summarizing findings across evaluation levels and targeted recommendations for revisions, such as content adjustments or delivery modifications. These reports document evidence of effectiveness, highlight gaps, and propose actionable steps to optimize the instructional design, ensuring alignment with initial analysis objectives.

Variations and Adaptations

Iterative Approaches

The iterative approach to the ADDIE model modifies the traditional sequential process by incorporating feedback loops that enable instructional designers to revisit earlier phases based on ongoing evaluation results, rather than adhering strictly to a one-way progression. This adaptation emphasizes flexibility, where evaluation not only occurs at the end but informs revisions throughout, often visualized as a cyclical loop connecting the five core phases—analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. Such iterations allow for continuous refinement, ensuring that instructional materials align more closely with evolving learner needs and project constraints.^[32] The ADDIE model, originally linear in the 1970s, evolved into a more iterative framework by the mid-1980s. In the 2000s, as instructional design intersected with rapid technology changes in e-learning, practitioners adapted ADDIE further by drawing on agile principles to enhance flexibility.^[3] A prominent example of iterative ADDIE is the Agile-ADDIE hybrid, which integrates agile principles like sprints and prototyping into ADDIE's phases to facilitate rapid development cycles, especially in software training contexts. For instance, in developing an interactive multimedia course for life skills education, designers used this hybrid to iteratively return to analysis and design phases after prototyping features, incorporating stakeholder feedback from interviews and questionnaires to refine content progressively. Similarly, in creating a cultural awareness e-learning program with game-based tasks, teams employed short development sprints within ADDIE, allowing evaluation-driven loops back to design for enhancements using tools like SCORM editors, resulting in scalable content for over 3,000 learners.^[33]^[34] The benefits of iterative ADDIE include greater adaptability to changing requirements, such as shifting learner demographics or technological updates, which is particularly valuable in modern e-learning where projects often face unpredictable timelines. This approach reduces risks by identifying issues early through repeated evaluations, promotes stakeholder collaboration, and enhances overall instructional quality without abandoning ADDIE's structured foundation. It has become commonplace in e-learning development, enabling efficient resource allocation and higher learner engagement in fast-paced settings.^[32]^[33]

Integrations with Other Models

The Successive Approximation Model (SAM) serves as an agile, iterative alternative to ADDIE, emphasizing quicker prototyping and collaborative feedback loops to address ADDIE's potential linearity, particularly in time-constrained e-learning projects. The Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model provides a detailed expansion of concepts akin to ADDIE's analysis phase, breaking it into components such as identifying instructional goals, conducting learner analysis, and contextual analysis to support goal-oriented instructional strategies. For example, ADDIE is often paired with Gagné's Nine Events of Instruction to structure lesson design within its design and implementation phases, incorporating events like gaining attention, presenting content, and providing feedback to create more engaging and sequenced learning experiences. This integration applies Gagné's events during ADDIE's development stage to build interactive modules that address cognitive conditions for learning, such as stimulating prior knowledge recall before new material introduction.^[35] These approaches offer key advantages, including addressing ADDIE's perceived linearity through backward design principles from Understanding by Design (UbD), which starts with defining essential understandings and assessments before planning activities. By applying UbD's outcome-focused stages within ADDIE's analysis and design phases, designers can create more flexible, learner-centered curricula that prioritize enduring skills over rigid sequencing.^[36] A practical case of such fusion appears in blended learning environments, where ADDIE is combined with Kemp's iterative model to support non-linear adaptations across its nine interdependent elements, such as learner characteristics and evaluation methods. This approach enables continuous revisions in hybrid courses, for instance, by iterating on online and face-to-face components based on ongoing assessments, resulting in more adaptable training for diverse adult learners.^[37]

Applications

In Education

In educational settings, the ADDIE model is widely applied to structure curriculum development in K-12 schools and online course design in universities, ensuring instructional materials align with learner needs and educational standards. In K-12 contexts, educators use ADDIE to create digital teaching modules for subjects such as physics, social sciences, and language arts, tailoring content to students' competencies and environmental factors through systematic analysis and iterative refinement. For instance, Android-based apps and e-learning platforms have been developed for elementary reading and STEM modules, promoting personalized learning experiences. In higher education, ADDIE guides the design of asynchronous online courses, incorporating interactive elements like quizzes and case scenarios to support flexible, student-centered instruction.^[38]^[39] A key example of ADDIE's application involves the analysis phase to identify student needs in flipped classroom environments. In K-12 and undergraduate settings, pre-tests and literature reviews during analysis reveal gaps in foundational skills, such as algebraic thinking, allowing designers to develop video-based pre-class activities and in-class discussions that address these weaknesses. Similarly, in graduate-level clinical training for neurology residents, analysis via questionnaires assesses baseline knowledge, leading to customized flipped sessions that enhance clinical competence. These approaches, rooted in ADDIE's core phases of analysis and development, foster active learning by shifting passive content delivery to home preparation and collaborative problem-solving in class.^[40]^[41] The evaluation phase of ADDIE plays a crucial role in ensuring accreditation compliance in universities, where programs must meet rigorous standards for quality and outcomes. For accredited online postgraduate modules, such as those on virtual care, evaluation incorporates pre- and post-assessments, satisfaction surveys, and long-term outcome tracking aligned with certification bodies like Mainpro+ and Maintenance of Certification, verifying instructional effectiveness and stakeholder alignment. This phase enables revisions that maintain compliance while improving course coherence.^[39] Adaptations of ADDIE in higher education often involve shorter cycles to support modular learning, where courses are broken into concise, self-contained units with defined timelines and feedback loops. Designers assess learner constraints and integrate e-learning platforms for quick prototyping of modules, such as virtual discussions for practical skills, allowing rapid adjustments based on student input. This modular approach enhances flexibility in online environments, accommodating diverse schedules without compromising depth.^[42] Overall, ADDIE's implementation in education improves student engagement and retention by delivering tailored instruction that emphasizes interaction and relevance. Studies in distance learning show that ADDIE-enhanced courses, using multimedia and feedback, boost motivation and reduce dropout rates, with asynchronous formats preferred for their accessibility. In information literacy programs, integrating high-impact practices via ADDIE has led to higher participation in collaborative tasks and better interdisciplinary connections, resulting in sustained learning gains.^[43]^[44] As of 2025, a growing trend in educational applications of ADDIE involves integrating artificial intelligence (AI) tools to automate and enhance phases like analysis (e.g., using AI for learner data analytics) and development (e.g., generating personalized content with generative AI). This adaptation supports scalable, adaptive learning experiences in online and hybrid environments, improving efficiency for educators designing courses for diverse student populations.^[45]^[46]

In Corporate Training

In corporate training, the ADDIE model provides a structured framework for developing programs that align with organizational goals, enhancing employee performance while optimizing resource allocation for efficiency and measurable results.^[47] This systematic approach ensures training initiatives address specific business needs, such as improving productivity and compliance, through its five phases, ultimately supporting scalable and cost-effective learning solutions.^[48] ADDIE is widely applied in employee onboarding to systematically introduce new hires to company processes, culture, and roles, starting with analysis of individual and organizational needs to create tailored foundational courses.^[47] In compliance training, it facilitates the creation of high-stakes programs that meet regulatory requirements, emphasizing thorough design and evaluation to produce audit-ready materials and track adherence.^[47] For skill-building workshops, ADDIE supports the development of targeted sessions, such as those focused on sales techniques or public speaking, by iteratively refining content based on learner feedback to build core competencies.^[7] A key example of ADDIE's design phase in corporate training involves customizing sales training programs, where instructional designers define objectives like product knowledge and negotiation skills, then develop storyboards and select interactive formats such as eLearning modules to align with team-specific challenges.^[13] During the implementation phase, this can extend to global virtual sessions, delivering the program through learning management systems (LMS) with facilitator support and real-time resources to accommodate distributed teams across time zones.^[13] The evaluation phase of ADDIE emphasizes return on investment (ROI) by linking training outcomes to business key performance indicators (KPIs), such as increased sales revenue or reduced compliance violations, through metrics like performance data and behavioral changes.^[48] This focus allows organizations to quantify training impact, justifying investments by demonstrating improvements in productivity and skill application.^[48] A prominent trend in corporate training is the integration of ADDIE with LMS platforms, which enables scalable delivery by centralizing content organization, tracking progress, and facilitating automated assessments for programs like onboarding and compliance.^[49] This combination supports efficient rollout to large workforces, with evaluation informing ongoing refinements for broader accessibility.^[49] In 2024-2025, corporate applications of ADDIE increasingly incorporate AI to streamline instructional design, such as using AI-driven analytics in the analysis phase for performance gap identification and generative AI in development for creating customized training modules. This integration enhances personalization and ROI in employee training programs, particularly for remote and global teams.^[50]^[51]

Criticisms and Limitations

Key Criticisms

One of the primary criticisms of the ADDIE model is its linear, sequential structure, often likened to a "waterfall" approach, which imposes rigidity on the instructional design process and makes it difficult to accommodate changes once initial phases are complete. This linearity assumes stable requirements and environments, leading to significant delays and the need for costly redesigns if learner needs, technologies, or content evolve during development. For instance, in e-learning projects, the model's front-loaded emphasis on analysis and design can result in courses taking several years to complete, as teams experience prolonged waiting periods between phases and limited opportunities for mid-process adjustments.^[52]^[53] Critics argue that this structure is particularly ill-suited for fast-paced, technology-driven contexts, such as digital education, where rapid iteration and adaptability are essential to respond to emerging tools and dynamic learner interactions. The model's prescriptive nature privileges instructional designer control and content-centric planning over learner-centered creativity and collaboration, potentially stifling innovation and underemphasizing ongoing evaluation during implementation. Studies from the 2000s and beyond highlight how such rigidity contributes to inefficiencies in e-learning initiatives, with projects often exceeding timelines due to the inability to integrate feedback until the final evaluation stage.^[52]^[54]^[53] Additionally, the ADDIE model has been criticized for overlooking diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) considerations, potentially missing cultural cues and needs of underrepresented and marginalized learner groups. This limitation can result in instructional designs that fail to address systemic biases or promote inclusive pedagogy, prompting the development of adaptations like the INCLUSIVE ADDIE model, which adds substages for cultural responsiveness as of 2024.^[55]^[24] In comparison to agile models like SAM, ADDIE's perceived obsolescence stems from its overemphasis on exhaustive upfront processes at the expense of flexible, iterative development, which better suits contemporary needs for quicker, more responsive training solutions. This has led prominent instructional designers to advocate moving beyond ADDIE to avoid bottlenecks and promote more efficient, adaptive methodologies.^[54]^[53]

Modern Responses

In response to critiques regarding its perceived rigidity, contemporary instructional design literature promotes iterative and hybrid applications of the ADDIE model to enhance flexibility, allowing practitioners to revisit phases as needed based on ongoing feedback. This approach integrates elements from agile methodologies, such as rapid prototyping, to support agile development without abandoning ADDIE's core structure. For instance, evaluation is emphasized not only at the end but throughout each phase—analysis, design, development, implementation—to enable real-time adjustments and promote learner-centered agility.^[56] Defenders of ADDIE highlight its proven track record in structured environments, where the systematic process has delivered consistent results in training programs since its origins in the 1970s, serving as a reliable foundation for diverse instructional needs. The model's structured approach also contributes to cost savings by providing a framework for estimating time and resources upfront, reducing inefficiencies through methodical planning and iteration that minimizes rework. This has been particularly evident in organizational training, where ADDIE's phased evaluation helps optimize resource allocation and improve return on investment.^[56]^[10] In the 2020s, recent developments have seen ADDIE integrated with artificial intelligence tools to accelerate analysis and development phases, such as using AI for data-driven needs assessment in analysis and automated content generation in development. These integrations enable faster personalization of learning experiences, with AI handling tasks like predictive gap analysis and real-time feedback during implementation, thereby enhancing efficiency while maintaining ADDIE's systematic integrity. For example, as of August 2025, the ADGIE model adapts ADDIE by incorporating generative AI across phases to streamline instructional design workflows. AI-powered analytics in the evaluation phase provide deeper insights into learner engagement, allowing for quicker refinements.^[51]^[57]^[50] Expert views position ADDIE as a foundational scaffold rather than a rigid prescription, offering a versatile blueprint that can be adapted to incorporate modern tools and methods without losing its emphasis on thorough planning and assessment. Instructional design scholars, including Michael Allen, argue that ADDIE's core steps—analysis through evaluation—are inherent to any effective process, making it enduringly relevant as a base for hybrid models. This perspective underscores ADDIE's role in providing conceptual clarity amid evolving technologies, ensuring it remains a practical guide for designers.^[56]

References

[1]
The ADDIE Model Explained: Evolution, Steps, and Applications for ...
ADDIE (short for analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation) is a learning development model used by course developers and training designers.Phases of the ADDIE Model · How does the ADDIE model...
[2]
The ADDIE Model for Instructional Design Explained
Aug 15, 2022 · In the ADDIE model, analysis is the input for the system; design, development, and evaluation are the process; and implementation is the output.
[3]
History of the ADDIE Model
The ADDIE model first appeared in 1975, created by Florida State University for the U.S. Army, and was based on a previous U.S. Air Force model. It was ...
[4]
ADDIE Model - Information Technology - UW Bothell
The ADDIE model stands for Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate. It is an instructional design model to help think through course design.
[5]
[PDF] The ADDIE Model of Instructional Design Fact Sheet - COPS Office
The ADDIE model is a process traditionally used by instructional designers and training developers. The five phases—Analysis, Design, Development, ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[6]
ADDIE: A Framework for Exploring ID – Everyday Instructional Design
The ADDIE model is a process model that is frequently used to organize the stages of instructional design and development projects.
[7]
ADDIE Model Explained: All You Need to Know [+ FREE Template]
Iteration opportunities: ADDIE is an iterative model, which means it allows for feedback and changes at each stage of development to ensure the final ...What is the ADDIE model? · The 5 phases of the ADDIE... · ADDIE model examples
[8]
Instructional Design Framework - Stanford Teaching Commons
ADDIE is a foundational instructional design methodology that provides a structure for reliably creating effective learning experiences for you and your ...
[9]
Our Experience - Learning Systems Institute - Florida State University
Funded by the United States Army, the LSI faculty developed the “ADDIE” (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) model, which is still the standard ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
[10]
The ADDIE Model for Instructional Design [+Pros/Cons & FAQs]
The ADDIE model is fundamental to instructional design, as it was one of the first systematic design processes to cover these steps in a comprehensive and ...
[11]
What is the ADDIE Model of Instructional Design? 2025 Guide
Jan 3, 2025 · The ADDIE model, developed by Florida State University in the 1970s, is the most well-known framework for designing instruction to improve human performance.Analysis · Design · Development
[12]
What Is ADDIE and Why Use It? - Association for Talent Development
Jul 21, 2023 · Another benefit of the ADDIE model is that it is flexible and adapts to different learning environments and situations. The model can be applied ...
[13]
ADDIE Model: 5 Stages of Instructional Design (2025) - Whatfix
Jan 16, 2025 · ADDIE model represents an iterative, dynamic, and flexible guideline for instructional designers to build effective eLearning courses.The 5 Phases of the ADDIE... · Benefits of the ADDIE Model
[14]
Dr. Robert K. Branson (1932-2021) - Give to Florida State University
IPISD and FSU are widely acknowledged as the origin of the ADDIE Model. ADDIE – used extensively in academia, government, and industry - is described as the ...Missing: contributors | Show results with:contributors
[15]
History of the ADDIE Model
The system selected for use by the U.S. Army was Instructional Systems Development (ISD), developed in 1975 by Florida State University. ISD is a comprehensive ...
[16]
[PDF] A History of Instructional Design and Technology: Part II
The origins of instructional design procedures have been traced to World War II (Dick, 1987). During the war, a large number of psychologists and educators who ...
[17]
Origins and Evolution of Instructional Systems Design - Academia.edu
This chapter surveys the history of the concept of instructional design as it is known in the educational technology field. Obviously, there are as many ...
[18]
Instructional Design Models
The development phase of the ADDIE Model is where instructional designers develop the content and learning interactions outlined in the design phase. During ...Missing: developers | Show results with:developers
[19]
Analysis – ADDIE Explained
The Analysis phase of the ADDIE model serves as the investigative prelude that informs, first of all, whether a program of instruction is needed.
[20]
Analysis: Planning Your Instruction - Knowledge Base
Jul 18, 2024 · Analysis is the first step in planning effective instruction, and the first phase of the instructional design model ADDIE.
[21]
Design – ADDIE Explained
Sequence of instruction: Determine an appropriate sequence of instruction based on the Learning Outcomes. Subject matter analysis: Determine the type of ...Writing Learning Outcomes · Instructional Strategies · Communication To Facilitate...Missing: Phase | Show results with:Phase
[22]
INCLUSIVE ADDIE: Initial Considerations for DEI Pedagogy
Mar 10, 2022 · The instructional design process should avoid negative stereotypes and unconscious bias, encourage respect, representation, access, and ...Missing: Phase | Show results with:Phase
[23]
Development – ADDIE Explained
Examples of multimedia authoring systems include H5P, Camtasia, Snagit, Articulate Storyline, Adobe Captivate, Lectora Online, Genial.ly, and Elucidate.Selection Of Tools And... · Supplementary: Production Of... · Systems
[24]
Implementation – ADDIE Explained
The Implementation stage in the ADDIE Model is where decisions are made about the context, conditions, and timeframe of an instructional program.
[25]
ADDIE Design Model: Implementation | NC State Extension
it's when the course is delivered to learners ...
[26]
Instructional Design Evaluation - EdTech Books
Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation proposes four levels of evaluation: reaction, learning, behavior, and results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
[27]
The Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation Model [+ Benefits & FAQs]
What Is the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model? · The Four Levels of the Kirkpatrick Model · Level 1: Reaction · Level 2: Learning · Level 3: Behavior · Level 4: Results.
[28]
[PDF] Training Evaluation Field Guide - OPM
Jan 1, 2011 · ... Kirkpatrick. Four Levels evaluation model. The Kirkpatrick model measures training effectiveness by analyzing training feedback in terms of: • ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[29]
Evaluation – ADDIE Explained
Compare number of HIPAA violation reports before and after training. Research should indicate a reduction of HIPAA violations. There should be an 80% reduction ...Forms Of Evaluation · Formative Evaluation · Summative Evaluation
[30]
4.3 The ADDIE model – Teaching in a Digital Age
ADDIE's roots go back to the Second World War and derive from system design, which was developed to manage the hugely complex Normandy landings. Many open ...
[31]
The History Of ADDIE - Discover Learning Designs
ADDIE was developed in the 1970s at Florida State University for a military project, initially linear, and became cyclical by the mid-1980s.
[32]
[PDF] Instructional Design enabled Agile Method using ADDIE Model and ...
Instructional Design enabled Agile Method using ADDIE Model and Feature ... (2015) 'FDRD : Feature Driven Reuse Development Process Model', (May 2014).
[33]
Reconciling ADDIE and Agile instructional design models—case study
This article analyses a hybrid approach to the process of creating the e-learning course introduction to cultural awareness in specific situational context.<|control11|><|separator|>
[34]
[PDF] A comparative study of SAM and ADDIE models in simulating STEM ...
The study compared exhaustively the Successive Approximation Model (SAM) and Analyze, Design,. Develop, Implement and Evaluate (ADDIE) model on the teaching and ...
[35]
Dick and Carey Model of Instructional Design - Whatfix
Dec 30, 2024 · The ADDIE model is another popular instructional design approach, comprised of five stages: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and ...
[36]
Robert Gagné and the Systematic Design of Instruction
The study of instructional design is eclectic and full of history. From its roots in cognitive psychology and the training of troops in World War II to the ...Gagné's Conditions Of... · Taxonomy Of Learning... · Dick And Carey Model
[37]
[PDF] Understanding by Design, ADDIE and Action Research In Relation ...
Feb 4, 2011 · In the ADDIE model, ADDIE is the generic term for a five-phase instruction model that consists of Analysis, Design,. Development, Implementation ...
[38]
[PDF] Integration of Instructional Models and Learning Styles for Open and ...
Mar 16, 2022 · The ADDIE model of instructional design is invented to deliver a systematic approach for preparing instructional materials (Shelton & Saltsman, ...
[39]
Revolutionizing Education: Unleashing the Power of the ADDIE ...
Jun 26, 2024 · This research explores various aspects of the ADDIE model and its potential to transform education in the 21st century for effective teaching and learning.
[40]
An Approach to the Design and Development of an Accredited ...
Aug 8, 2024 · The ADDIE model is a systematic instructional design framework widely used in the creation and development of educational and training programs.
[41]
[PDF] The Effects of Flipped Classroom Strategy Based on “Addie Model ...
Flipped Classroom helped develop algebraic thinking skills. The study recommended using the stages of ADDIE model in applying the flipped classroom strategy, ...
[42]
Application of flipped classroom teaching method based on ADDIE ...
Apr 3, 2024 · Application of flipped classroom teaching method based on ADDIE concept in clinical teaching for neurology residents ... The ADDIE model consists ...
[43]
(PDF) Adapting the Addie Instructional Design Model in Online ...
Aug 7, 2025 · Instructional designers widely use ADDIE to create modules, models, software, and courses for instruction and learning. It is also used as a design model.
[44]
A Comparative Study of the ADDIE Instructional Design Model in ...
This study refers to the investigation of good teaching practices and approaches in relation to the ADDIE model in distance online environments.
[45]
[PDF] Using the ADDIE Model to Integrate High-Impact Practices - ERIC
In this article, the authors share how a team of librarians used the ADDIE instructional design model to incorporate best practices in teaching and learning ...
[46]
ADDIE Model: Guide to Effective Instructional Design - Docebo
Typically, the development includes three subphases: drafting, production, and evaluation. Essentially, during this phase, you'll create and test the learning ...Missing: accreditation | Show results with:accreditation
[47]
ADDIE Model: 5 Key Stages for Effective Employee Training - Disprz
Rating 4.5 (79) Jul 3, 2025 · It breaks down the process of creating impactful learning into five clear phases: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation.<|separator|>
[48]
Using Addie to Manage your LMS Implementation Project - LearnUpon
If you are about to take on an LMS implementation project, try using ADDIE to make the process simpler. Learn how in this post.
[49]
Is the ADDIE model appropriate for teaching in a digital age?
Sep 9, 2014 · It has been criticised by constructivists for not paying enough attention to learner-instructor interaction, and for privileging more ...
[50]
https://www.disco.co/blog/ai-for-instructional-design-using-the-addie-model
[51]
Book Review: Leaving ADDIE for SAM, by Michael Allen with ...
Sep 19, 2012 · In Part I of Leaving ADDIE for SAM, Allen outlines fournecessary criteria for the ideal process model, each of which are met by SAM. 1. The ...
[52]
In Defense of ADDIE - Association for Talent Development
Mar 16, 2022 · For decades, instructional designers have effectively used the ADDIE model for instructional design and training. ... Michael Allen said ...Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
[53]
eLearning With ADDIE: The Role Of AI
Jun 10, 2025 · AI revolutionizes eLearning with ADDIE by enabling personalization, interactivity, and continuous improvement across all phases.Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s