How to Analyze an Instructional Design Case

Estimated reading time: 20 minutes.

Why cases?

Instructional design is a profession of judgment. Models tell you what steps to take; they do not tell you what to do when the client wants a course but needs a job aid, when the subject-matter expert will not return your calls, or when the budget disappears halfway through development. Case analysis develops the judgment that models cannot supply. It is the method used in The ID CaseBook (Ertmer, Quinn, and Glazewski) and in professional preparation across law, medicine, and business.

A case is a realistic, incomplete, and messy account of a design situation. It has more information than you need and less than you want. Your task is not to find the right answer, because there usually is not one, but to construct a defensible analysis: one that identifies the real problem, weighs the constraints and stakeholders, and recommends action that a professional could justify.

The six-step framework

Use these steps for both case analyses in this course. Write a heading for each in your submission.

1. Summarize the situation

In one paragraph, state who is involved, what is being asked, and what has happened so far. Resist the urge to interpret yet. A reader who has not seen the case should understand the setup from your summary.

2. Identify the stakeholders and their interests

List every person or group with a stake in the outcome, and for each, what they want and what they fear. Include the learners, who are often absent from the conversation in the case. Note where interests conflict.

3. Frame the design problem

This is the heart of the analysis. The presenting request ("build us a course") is rarely the problem. Ask:

• Is there a performance gap, and is it caused by lack of knowledge or skill, or by something else (tools, incentives, process, environment)?
• What constraints are fixed (deadline, budget, policy) and which are negotiable?
• What is unknown that matters, and how could it be found out?

State the problem in one or two sentences. A good problem statement names the gap, the learners, and the constraint that makes it hard.

4. Generate and weigh alternatives

Propose at least three courses of action. One should be the obvious one the client asked for; one should be a non-instructional or partly instructional alternative; one should be something a less experienced designer would not think of. For each, list the main benefits, costs, and risks, and identify which stakeholders would favor or resist it.

5. Recommend and justify

Choose one alternative (or a sequence). Justify it with reference to the problem statement, the stakeholders, the constraints, and at least one principle or model from the course. Say what you would do in the first two weeks.

6. Anticipate consequences and plan evaluation

What could go wrong with your recommendation? What early indicators would tell you it is working or not? What would you do if it fails?

Common mistakes

• Solving the presenting request. The client asked for a course, so you design a course. Check first whether instruction is the right lever.
• Ignoring the learners. Cases are told from the designer's or client's perspective. Ask what the learners already know, what they need, and how they would experience each alternative.
• Treating constraints as fixed. Budgets, timelines, and formats are often more negotiable than the case implies, but you have to say how you would negotiate.
• Recommending without trade-offs. If your recommendation has no downside, you have not looked hard enough.
• Retelling the case. Summarize briefly; spend your words on analysis.

What a strong analysis looks like

A strong analysis is specific to the case, cites evidence from it (quote or paraphrase what people said and what the data showed), applies course concepts by name, and reads like a memo a designer would actually write for a client. It is usually 1,500 to 2,000 words. It takes a position and defends it while acknowledging what a reasonable colleague might do differently.

Practice

Before you read Case 1, take any situation from your own work where someone asked for training. Run it through steps 2 and 3 in ten minutes. Was the presenting request the real problem? Bring your example to the Case 1 discussion.

Reference

Ertmer, P. A., Quinn, J. A., & Glazewski, K. D. (Eds.). (2019). The ID CaseBook: Case studies in instructional design (5th ed.). Routledge.