Estimated reading time: 30 minutes.
make_videos.py or record and embed your own.)Every design decision assumes something about the learners: what they already know, what they can attend to, what motivates them, what tools they have, and how much time they will give you. If those assumptions are wrong, the instruction fails no matter how well built. Learner analysis replaces assumptions with evidence. Context analysis does the same for the settings in which learning and performance happen.
In the Dick and Carey model, this is component 3, "Analyze learners and contexts." In ADDIE it belongs to Analysis. In Kemp it is "learner characteristics." Every model has it because skipping it is the most common cause of instruction that is accurate, well produced, and useless.
Dick and Carey organize learner characteristics into categories. Adapted and consolidated:
| Category | Questions | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Entry skills | What prerequisite knowledge and skills do learners have? Which are missing? | Determines where instruction starts; missing prerequisites derail everything after |
| Prior knowledge of the topic | What do they already know, including misconceptions? | Prior knowledge is the strongest predictor of new learning; misconceptions must be addressed, not overwritten |
| Attitudes toward content and delivery | Do they see the content as relevant? How do they feel about the delivery mode (online, classroom, self-paced)? | Shapes motivation and the need for relevance-building |
| Motivation | Why are they here? What are the consequences of learning or not learning? | Keller's ARCS (attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction) gives design levers |
| Educational and ability levels | Reading level, language, numeracy, digital skills | Sets the register of materials and the need for supports |
| Learning preferences | How do they prefer to learn, and how do they actually learn best? | Preferences inform engagement; do not confuse preferences with "learning styles," which lack empirical support as a basis for matching instruction |
| Attitudes toward the organization | Trust, morale, history with training | Explains resistance and predicts uptake |
| Group characteristics | Size, heterogeneity, existing relationships | Determines whether one design fits all, and whether collaboration is feasible |
Add for adult learners: competing demands on time, relevant experience that can be leveraged, and the degree of autonomy they expect (Knowles's andragogy).
Use more than one method; each has blind spots.
Triangulate. If interviews say learners are confident and error logs say they fail, believe the logs and ask why the confidence exists.
Dick and Carey distinguish two contexts.
Performance context: where learners will use what they learn. Analyze the physical setting (space, noise, equipment), the social setting (alone or with others, supervision), the managerial support (is the new performance expected and rewarded?), and the relevance of the skill to the job. If the performance context does not support the new behavior, training will not produce it.
Learning context: where instruction will happen. Analyze the facilities and equipment (labs, devices, bandwidth, LMS), the compatibility of the site with your instructional needs, the constraints on time and scheduling, and the fit between the learning context and the performance context. The closer the two, the better the transfer; that is why simulation, practice environments, and on-the-job components matter.
Analysis is only useful if it changes the design. For every finding, write an implication. Examples:
| Finding | Design implication |
|---|---|
| A quarter of nurses have used the vendor system elsewhere | Offer a test-out or an accelerated path; do not force experienced users through basics |
| Night shift will not attend daytime classes | Provide asynchronous options and on-unit support during night hours |
| Help desk calls concentrated in five workflows | Prioritize those workflows for practice; build job aids for them |
| Veteran nurses report technology anxiety | Build confidence early with a guaranteed-success first task; pair with peer support |
| Learners have two devices per three people on the unit | Design practice that can be done in short sessions at shared devices; avoid requiring personal devices |
Choose at least two methods and gather real data about the learners for your course design project, even if the sample is small (three interviews and a review of existing records is enough). If you cannot reach the learners at all, reconsider the project; a design built on imagined learners will not survive the later assignments.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2015). The systematic design of instruction (8th ed.). Pearson. Chapter 5.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. Springer.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.