TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7 Army Educational Processes (2013)

Department of the Army TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7
Headquarters, United States Army

Training and Doctrine Command
Fort Eustis, Virginia 23604-5700
9 January 2013
Army Learning
ARMY EDUCATIONAL PROCESSES
FOR THE COMMANDER:
OFFICIAL: MARK MACCARLEY

Major General, U.S. Army
Deputy Chief of Staff
CHARLES E. HARRIS, III

Colonel, GS
Deputy Chief of Staff, G-6
History. This publication is a new U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC)
pamphlet (TP).
Summary. This new publication provides information to institutions that primarily provide
education. It presents general principles of education using analysis, design, development,
implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE). ADDIE is a generic process to conduct instructional
system design. In addition, the pamphlet provides a template of educational processes grounded
in adult learning principles used across Army educational institutions.
Applicability. This pamphlet applies to TRADOC activities and The Army School System
(TASS) institutions that primarily provide education: the U.S. Army War College; all Leader
Development and Education schools including intermediate level education (ILE) and captains
career course (CCC); the Sergeants Major Course within the Sergeants Major Academy; graduate
level courses; and courses required for civilian certification. Education provides intellectual
constructs and principles. It helps develop individuals and leaders who can think, apply
knowledge, and solve problems under uncertain or ambiguous conditions. Education is
associated with "how to think." Education gives leaders and individuals the tools to think at all
levels (organizationally and strategically) and to enhance leadership abilities along with
knowledge and experience. This achievement occurs over a leader’s career with increasingly
complex education, especially in the areas of leader development and the military arts. It also
applies to non-TRADOC agencies and organizations possessing memoranda of understanding,
TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7
memoranda of agreement, and contracts for developing educational learning products for
TRADOC and TASS agencies and organizations. This pamphlet does not pertain to assessments
and/or evaluations conducted on behalf of the Army Quality Assurance Program.
Proponent and exception authority. Army regulation (AR) 350-1 assigns the Commanding
General (CG), TRADOC, the responsibility to develop and publish training development policy
and procedures and serve as the Army’s proponent for the Army Training and Education
Development process. The proponent of this pamphlet is the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center
— Leader Development and Education (CAC-LDE). The proponent is the authority to approve
exceptions or waivers to this pamphlet consistent with controlling law and regulations, unless
otherwise designated. Exceptions are granted on an individual basis. The commander or senior
leader of the requesting activity must endorse all waiver requests before forwarding them
through higher headquarters to the policy proponent. Requests must include requestor contact
information; type of request (initial, extension, modification, appeal, or cancellation); specific
line items requested for waiver; unit, institution, or center/school affected; proposed alternative;
justification; impact; expected benefits; anticipated effective dates; and duration requested. The
proponent continually seeks innovation and process improvement. Significant process
improvements and global exceptions will be considered for addendum to policy prior to the next
revision.
Suggested Improvements. Submit changes for improving this publication on Department of the
Army (DA) Form 2028 (Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms) through
channels to CAC-LDE, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Also, submit suggested improvements using
DA Form 1045 (Army Ideas for Excellence Program Proposal). Individuals and organizations
are authorized to send comments electronically.
Distribution. This TP is available only on the TRADOC Web site

http://www.tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/.
Summary of Change
TP 350-70-7
Army Educational Processes
This new publication, dated 9 January 2013-
o Addresses the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation processes

focusing on the systems approach to curriculum development and the interdependence of the five
phases (chap 2).
o Demonstrates how the five phases can be used in developing a disciplined process to ensure
classroom instruction accomplishes the institution's educational purpose (chap 3).
o Serves as a reference for curriculum developers who are preparing instructional material to use
in Army Educational Institutions (apps A-E).
2
Contents
Page
Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5
1-1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................ 5
1-2. References ....................................................................................................................... 5
1-3. Explanation of abbreviations and terms ............................................................................ 5
1-4. Scope ............................................................................................................................... 5
1-5. Overview ......................................................................................................................... 5
1-6. Philosophy of educational institutions .............................................................................. 5
1-7. Degree programs .............................................................................................................. 5
1-8. Accreditation agencies ..................................................................................................... 6
Chapter 2 The Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE)
Process ...................................................................................................................................... 7
2-1. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 7
2-2. ADDIE phases ................................................................................................................. 7
2-3. ADDIE examples for educational institutions ................................................................... 7
2-4. The five phases of the ADDIE .......................................................................................... 9
Chapter 3 Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 26
3-1. Introduction.................................................................................................................... 26
3-2. Types of evaluation ........................................................................................................ 26
3-3. Formative evaluation ...................................................................................................... 27
3-4. Program evaluation ........................................................................................................ 28
Chapter 4 Faculty Development ................................................................................................ 29
4-1. Introduction.................................................................................................................... 29
4-2. Variation in faculty composition .................................................................................... 30
4-3. Common faculty development threads ............................................................................ 30
4-4. Faculty and staff development divisions ......................................................................... 30
4-5. Faculty development governance ................................................................................... 30
Appendix A References............................................................................................................. 32
Appendix B Relationships Among Learning Domains, Levels of Learning, and Learning
Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 33
Appendix C Assessment Instruments......................................................................................... 34
Appendix D Examples of Lesson Plans ..................................................................................... 38
Appendix E Rubric Examples .................................................................................................. 91
Glossary .................................................................................................................................. 102
Table List
Table 2-1 Assessment matrix.................................................................................................... 23
Table E-1. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Environmental ........................................ 96
Table E-2. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Logistics ................................................. 98
Table E-3. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Teaching ................................................. 99
Table E-4. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Phase 3 and Graduation ........................ 101
3
Figure List
Page
Figure 2-1. Accountable Instructional System (AIS) ...................................................................8
Figure 2-2. Hierarchy of educational outcomes, objectives, and standards ..................................9
Figure 2-3. Sample assessment plan ......................................................................................... 24
Figure 4-1. USACGSC Faculty Development Program (FDP) Job Aid ..................................... 31
Figure B-1. Taxonomy of educational objectives. ..................................................................... 33
Figure E-1. Command and General Staff College (USACGSC) form 1009c (Assessing
Classroom Participation), May 2011 ......................................................................................... 91
Figure E-2. USACGSC form 1009s (Assessing Speaking and Presentations), June 2011 ........... 92
Figure E-3. USACGSC form 1009w (Assessing Writing), May 2011 ........................................ 94
4
Chapter 1
Introduction
1-1. Purpose
This pamphlet provides information to institutions that primarily provide education. It presents
general principles of education using analysis, design, development, implementation, and
evaluation (ADDIE). ADDIE is a generic process to conduct instructional system design. In
addition, the pamphlet provides a template of educational processes grounded in adult learning
principles used across Army educational institutions.
1-2. References
Required and related publications and prescribed and referenced forms are listed in appendix A.
1-3. Explanation of abbreviations and terms

Abbreviations and special terms used in this pamphlet are explained in the glossary.
1-4. Scope
This pamphlet covers all areas of education such as teaching, curriculum development,
assessment, and evaluation.
1-5. Overview
This chapter discusses the purpose and scope of this pamphlet. It outlines the philosophy of
educational institutions, degree programs, and accreditation.
1-6. Philosophy of educational institutions

Army educational institutions have different philosophies. A philosophy is the distillation of a
collective set of values and principles that motivate students and faculty to achieve institutional
purpose and desired effects.
1-7. Degree programs

Some Army educational institutions offer degree programs to their students. Congress gives the
United States Army Command and General Staff College (USACGSC) and the United States
Army War College (USAWC) the authority to grant master's degrees to students who complete
approved programs. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 reaffirmed
this authority:
a. Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army, the Commandant of the
USAWC may, upon recommendation of the faculty of the college, confer appropriate degrees
upon graduates of the college who meet the degree requirements consistent with the
recommendations of the U.S. Department of Education and principles of the regional accrediting
body.
b. Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army, the Commandant of the
USACGSC may, upon recommendation of the faculty of the college, confer appropriate degrees
upon graduates of the college who meet the degree requirements consistent with the
recommendations of the U.S. Department of Education and principles of the regional accrediting
body.
5
1-8. Accreditation agencies

Regional accrediting agencies accredit Army institutions that offer advanced degrees. In
addition, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) accredits joint professional military
education (JPME) programs offered at intermediate and senior level colleges. The U.S. Army
Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) accredits using Army Enterprise Accreditation
Standards. Finally, some schools choose specialized accreditation agencies to accredit their
programs. A description of each accreditation agency follows.
a. Regional. Regional accreditation agencies include the Middle States Association of

Colleges and Schools, the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, the Higher
Learning Commission of the North Central Association, the Southern Association of Colleges
and Schools, and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. Each institution completes
self-study prior to the on-site regional accreditation review. The regional agencies' accreditation
is valid for 10 years.
b. Joint.
(1) The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff accredits intermediate and senior level
colleges for their JPME programs. The five-phase approach to developing joint qualified
officers results in JPME learning areas and objectives taught at each level; however, the
intermediate level is the first level to receive an on-site accreditation review by a Process for
Accreditation of Joint Education team representing the Chairman. In the Army, there is one
intermediate-level college, USACGSC, and one senior-level college, the USAWC; these are the
two Army schools that warrant a joint accreditation review. Both institutions' JPME programs
are 10 months long. As with regional accrediting agencies, a joint accreditation review requires
that the institution completes an institutional self-study prior to the on-site Process for
Accreditation of Joint Education visit.
(2) JPME institutions must implement the joint learning areas and objectives within their
respective curricula to satisfy the goal of joint education, which is to produce a joint qualified
officer. In addition, the intermediate- and senior-level colleges must adhere to seven common
educational standards to achieve a fully met accreditation status. Joint accreditation status is
valid for 6 years.
c. TRADOC. As with the training institutions, the TRADOC Quality Assurance Office
(QAO) accredits educational institutions using the Army Enterprise Accreditation Standards. In
addition, QAOs from individual schools accredit The Army School System (TASS) brigades for
professional military education. The institution completes a self-assessment of the standards
prior to the on-site accreditation visit. Currently, TRADOC accreditation is valid for 3 years.
d. Accreditation of TASS by the QAO. The process includes a self-study done by the
brigade and a visit by the proponent QAO to sites where courses are delivered (inactive duty for
training and active duty for training) to review faculty qualifications, curriculum, student
records, learning environments, and administrative procedures.
e. Specialized accreditation. Some schools are accredited by specialized accreditation

agencies recognized by the Department of Education. Examples of these specialized
6
accreditation agencies are the Council on Occupational Education and specialized medical
accreditations.
Chapter 2
The Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE) Process
2-1. Introduction
The ADDIE process is a framework used to organize and manage educational programs.
ADDIE organizes all course and curriculum development activities using a disciplined process
that ensures classroom instruction accomplishes the institution's educational purpose. The
ADDIE process includes five phases which support program management with inputs to the
process by the institutional leadership, and outputs to support systematic review and updates.
2-2. ADDIE phases

The following is an overview of each ADDIE phase.
a. Analysis. The analysis phase is the link between identifying the educational requirements
and developing the instruction. In this phase, the curriculum developer determines what must be
taught and how the content can be taught effectively with the available resources.
b. Design. The design phase uses the results of the analysis phase to help identify the lesson
components. Topic lists are translated into major topics which become terminal learning
objectives (TLOs) and minor topics which become enabling learning objectives (ELOs).
c. Development. In this phase, the ELO standards, and lesson content outline are converted
into an actual lesson plan and advance sheet to support learning outcomes.
d. Implementation. This phase emphasizes the planning components required to teach the
course. It has two distinct components. Component 1 ensures instructors/facilitators understand
the course vision, content, and delivery methodology, and are ready to teach. Component 2 is
the actual conduct of the course.
e. Evaluation. Although depicted last in the ADDIE process, this is actually a continuous
process that consists of data collection and analysis to determine the effectiveness and value of a
course or program.
2-3. ADDIE examples for educational institutions

The ADDIE process is central to the Accountable Instructional System (AIS). The two models
presented below are the AIS (figure 2-1) and the hierarchy of educational outcomes, objectives,
and standards (figure 2-2). Understanding both models is critical to curriculum developers.
Other educational institutions may use other models with the same outcome.
a. The AIS model shown in figure 2-1 demonstrates the continuing nature of a systems
approach to curriculum development and the interdependence of the processes and of the five
ADDIE phases: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. The evaluation
arrows in the center show that the activities of one phase may generate data or information that
results in a revision of the products of another phase (or phases). For example, during the design
7
phase, the curriculum developer may determine that some educational topics identified during
the analysis phase are not realistic. They must then return to the analysis phase for appropriate
revisions. This act of continual validation provides the checks and balances that lead to a quality
curriculum.
Figure 2-1. Accountable Instructional System (AIS)
b. The hierarchy of educational outcomes, objectives, and standards model in figure 2-2
depicts the links between educational outcomes, objectives, and standards.
(1) The AIS directly supports the mission of ensuring that graduates achieve the
educational outcomes that enable students' success. These educational outcomes are to produce
successful graduates who will lead teams to solve complex problems throughout the unified land
operations. This description of "what a graduate looks like" loosely defines the content focus for
courses spanning the areas of leadership, problem solving, and decisive action.
(2) From these broad educational outcomes, TLOs are defined for blocks of instruction to
fulfill the educational requirements in each area supporting the educational outcomes.
(3) The TLOs, in turn, define subordinate ELOs that specify the individual lesson
requirements that support the learning. Finally, the standards of the ELOs define how you
8
measure achievement of the objective. Please note relationships between the elements of the
hierarchy.
Figure 2-2. Hierarchy of educational outcomes, objectives, and standards
2-4. The five phases of the ADDIE

Discussion of the five ADDIE phases used in AIS follows.
a. Analysis. This phase determines whether the institution needs a course. Analysis
identifies what to teach and how much to teach. Whether a course is new or pre-existing, a
thorough analysis ensures its relevance and necessity.
(1) Analysis components.
(a) Goal analysis. Identifies how the course supports the institutional mission, vision, and
learning outcomes; develops a course goal.
(b) Topic analysis. Specifies topics that support identified goals and learning outcomes.
(c) Target audience analysis. Describes students' current knowledge and experiences.
(d) Gap analysis. Compares the desired education outcome of the above topic analysis
with the student's pre-instruction knowledge determined in the target audience analysis.
(e) Resource analysis. Identifies resources and constraints.
(f) Evaluation plan. Determines potential evaluation processes to measure course

success.
9
(g) Milestone plan. Establishes target dates.
(h) Continuity book. The author begins to build a continuity book covering all phases of
the ADDIE process. Place all analysis phase products in a continuity book.
(2) Conducting an analysis.
(a) Goal analysis. Link the course goal to institutional mission, goal and/or learning
outcomes. The goal analysis identifies the topics included in the new or revised course or lesson.
The following is a technique for conducting a goal analysis:
 Develop a clear, concise goal or lesson scope statement. If one already exists, review
it to determine whether it is still appropriate. Does this statement clearly describe
what the student should be able to do because of the instruction? Is it a clear
description of the end state?
 Determine whether the course goal supports the institution's goals and learning
outcomes. If not, the leadership must determine whether to develop or revise the
course. For lesson development, determine whether the lesson supports the course. If
not, determine whether to develop or revise the lesson.
 Determine how the goal relates to, or links with, the goals of other courses or lessons.
Coordinate with other curriculum developers to ensure the course or lesson
complements, not duplicates, other courses or lessons.
(b) Topic analysis. Once determined that the course goal or lesson scope supports the
institutional mission, goals, or learning outcomes, identify exactly what the adult student must
accomplish to meet that goal. The following is an approach to conducting a topic analysis:
 Collect information from all possible sources: subject matter experts (SMEs),
publications, libraries, Internet, command directives, previous course evaluations, etc.
Complete the basic research before continuing to other steps.
 Develop a topic list. Brainstorm and list all possible topics. Base this on the approved
course or lesson goal. It is a good idea to involve SMEs in developing the topic list.
 Identify related topics, and then group the related topics.
 Identify which related topics are major topics and which are minor topics. The major
topics will become the TLOs, and the minor topics will become the basis for the
standards for achieving the TLO and for developing the ELOs to support the TLOs.
See appendix B for more information on learning objectives.
 Build a learning hierarchy of topics. Next, develop a topic hierarchy list. The
hierarchy list places the topics in a progressive and sequential order.
(c) Target audience analysis. Target audience analysis identifies the skills and abilities
the adult student brings to the course. The following is an approach to conducting a target
audience analysis:
 Identify student experiences that may influence their ability to achieve the course
objectives.
10
 Determine the type of target audience data needed. For example, if the course requires
using distributed learning, what skills will the target audience possess and bring to the
course?
 Determine where to find target audience data — personnel data forms, class
demographics, questionnaires, etc.
 Develop a target audience profile. What are the expected experience, knowledge,
skills, and abilities of the student? What level of learning, course content, delivery
methods, and instructional strategies would be appropriate?
 A lack of target audience baseline knowledge and experience may require
modification to the topic list or a prerequisite requirement.
(d) Gap analysis. In this step, the curriculum developer compares the product of topic
analysis to the product of target audience analysis to determine not only what to teach, but also
how much to teach in a given lesson. Without this analysis, the author risks producing a lesson
that is beyond student capability and neither advances learning nor sustains interest. To conduct
a gap analysis, perform the following steps:
 Analyze the target audience profile with respect to the topic list. This analysis
provides what must be taught.
 Refine the data from the step above. The result of this analysis provides the
information to write learning objectives addressed in the design phase.
 Analyze the list with respect to the lesson goal. Do all the topics actually support the
lesson goal? Are the topics critical for accomplishing the lesson goal?
(e) Resource analysis. Identify and list the resource requirements in the areas of
equipment, facilities, funds, personnel, and time. Early planning of resources will help manage
the time involved in securing them. The following questions may help determine whether
sufficient and appropriate resources are available.
 Equipment: What specific equipment will you need (for example, computers)? How
will you use the equipment in the course? What quantities do you require?
 Facilities: How much work space will you require? What facilities are available? Are
there special environmental requirements?
 Funds: What are the initial personnel, equipment, and facilities costs?
 Personnel: What categories of personnel do you need to develop the lesson (for
example, computer operators)? How many instructors/facilitators do you need? What
are the student requirements?
 Time: What are the milestones? How much time do you need to develop the
instruction? What is the estimated course length? When must you order material to
meet course milestones?
(f) Identify resource constraints. Every course has constraints such as maximum course
length, manpower, budget, and student load. Ignoring these constraints may lead to a course or
11
lesson that is either too large for the time allotted or requires too large a share of resources. If
faced with a resource constraint, select an alternative strategy or delivery approach.
 Equipment: Computers to support simulation? Appropriate networks?
 Facilities: Room to post maps and overlays? Student work area? Reference material
storage in the classroom? Library?
 Funds: Impact on cutting printing dollars? Copyright dollars cut?
 Personnel: Faculty replacement for those who retired or transferred? New faculty
have instructional experience?
 Time: Other "non-curriculum developer" duties? Student requirements?
(g) Develop evaluation plan. After completing all analyses, begin developing the
evaluation plan. The evaluation plan analysis identifies potential evaluation processes. The
following is an approach to developing an evaluation plan:
 Identify potential evaluation methods to measure course success.
 Identify potential data collection tools.
 Identify the potential data collection dates.
 Write a program evaluation plan, which is a document describing the course or lesson
and possible evaluation measures.
(h) Milestone plan. During initial course or lesson planning, develop a milestone plan to
serve as a road map for managing the development process. To meet deadlines, backward plan
from the date the product is required. The following is an approach to developing a milestone
plan:
 Determine the date the course materials are due. These include lesson plans, course
and lesson materials, copyrights, and other materials.
 Determine the evaluation requirements dates: date ofprogram evaluation plan, dates of
formative evaluation of lesson plans and assessment tools, and date of evaluation tool
development. Determine the timeline for implementation of evaluation tools, for
analysis of data collected, and for the official program evaluation report.
 Identify dates for faculty content workshops ("train-up").
 Update the milestone plan. Because the milestone plan is a tool for managing the
course building process, update it at the end of each ADDIE phase or when any
significant change occurs.
b. Design. Use the products created during the analysis phase to identify the course and
lesson components. During this phase, translate topic lists into realistic TLOs and supporting
ELOs. Sort TLOs and ELOs into a progressive and sequential learning order. Design an
assessment plan to determine whether students meet the course or lesson standards to the
prescribed learning level. Design the evaluation plan to ensure the course or lesson meets its
stated objectives.
12
(1) Design components.
(a) Write learning objectives. Write statements clarifying the desired end state and what
students will master because of the course or lesson.
(b) Design assessment plan and sample assessment tools. Plan how to measure whether
or not students met the stated objectives, and design sample assessment tools to measure student
achievement.
(c) Conduct preliminary research for possible course or lesson materials. Identify
information available to assist in meeting the objectives — resources, methodology, current and
emerging doctrine, publications, guidance, etc.
(d) Design course or lesson plan. Determine the order in which to present the learning
events. Design a plan for conduct of the class.
(e) Design the evaluation plan and sample evaluation tools.
(f) Update resource analysis.
(g) Update milestone plan.
(h) Incorporate adult learning principles. Curriculum developers ensure the course or
lesson is designed for the adult student. Applying the principles of adult learning reinforces
students' assuming responsibility for their learning.
(2) Producing the design components.
(a) Learning objectives. The first component in the design phase is to write learning
objectives based on the topic list produced during the analysis phase. A learning objective is a
precise statement of the student's expected learning (action), the learning environment
(condition), and the measure of student achievement (standard) of the prescribed level of
learning and domain. The curriculum developer writes the learning objective from the
perspective of the student. The learning objective:
 Is the contract among the students, faculty, and learning organization.
 Serves as the foundation for educational design.
 Provides the basis for method of instruction.
 Determines instructional content and establishes the learning conditions.
 Identifies the standards for measurement or assessment of student learning.
 Establishes student responsibility and accountability.
(b) Learning objective parts. All learning objectives must include an action, condition,
standard, level of learning, and domain.
13
 Action. An action statement specifies what a student should do as a result of the

education. Use only one verb in any action statement. The verb selected for the action
statement must be congruent with the level of complexity of the action described.
 Condition. A condition statement describes the learning environment. It states what
will be provided (a scenario, small group, etc.), what will be withheld (without
references, closed-book, etc.), and any time constraints. It includes anything that
affects student learning; for example, material, equipment, special environmental
conditions, references, the role the student is assuming, etc.
 Standard. The standard statement provides the criteria used to measure if and how
well students master the objective. It also minimizes subjectivity in measuring student
attainment of the identified skills. The standard should incorporate the minor topics
identified in the topic analysis.
 Learning level. Base the level of learning on the complexity of learning. The desired
level of learning dictates the selection of the verb in the action statement and is
reflected in the criteria used to assess student learning. Many educational institutions
use Bloom's Taxonomy when selecting the cognitive level of learning. In addition, if
the objective indicates assessment of the affective domain, the level of learning within
the affective domain must be the same level as the cognitive domain.
 Domain. The three domains are cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. Educational
institutions generally use the cognitive and affective domains.
(c) Types of learning objectives. There are two types of learning objectives in course or
lesson design:
 TLOs are the major topics identified during topic analysis. The learning level of the
TLO is always equal to or at a higher level than the ELO.
 ELOs are the prerequisites required to achieve the TLO. They are the minor topics
identified in the topic analysis. These are the standards identified in the TLOs, written
in action verb form. (Adding an action verb to the TLO standards provides the action
statement for the ELO.)
(d) Writing learning objectives.

 Review the results of the gap analysis produced in the analysis phase. Eliminate
redundancies or add topics based on new guidance.
 Compare the list to the stated course or lesson goal. Do all the topics actually support
the course or lesson goal? Are the topics critical for accomplishing the course or
lesson goal? Are there topics that are related or nice to know, but that do not support
course or lesson goal? If so, eliminate them.
 Analyze the topic hierarchy previously made. Examine those relationships. Are the
topic priorities still valid? Are the topic relationships still valid? Which topics
represent end states? (These will probably become TLOs.) Which topics must be
covered first? (These will probably become ELOs.) Do any topics not contribute to
the desired end state? (If so, delete.) Are any necessary topics left out? (If so, add.)
14
If a topic supports the goal but stands alone, consider making it a new TLO rather than
an ELO.
 Change each topic into a learning objective action statement. (See figure B-1.) State
the topic in a sentence beginning with an action verb. For example, mission analysis
becomes "conduct a mission analysis"; course of action (COA) development becomes
"develop a COA." Placing the action verb at the beginning of the sentence converts a
topic into a learning objective action statement. The action verb describes behavior
the student must exhibit to achieve the learning. Is the statement clear and concise?
Does the statement accurately describe the desired student behavior? Does the
statement have only one verb?
Caution: If statement has a conjunction, there may be two objectives.

 Write the condition statement for each learning objective. Condition statements set
parameters. They describe the condition under which the objective will be taught or
measured. The condition includes such things as environment (individually, as a
member of a group, in a role, etc.), resources (given a case study, specific reference
material, etc.), and constraints (within 30 minutes, etc.). For example, "Acting as a
leader at the strategic or organizational level in the operational environment; using an
organizational-level leadership perspective, references, case studies, practical
exercises, and class discussions based on decisive action." Must the student perform
the action alone or as part of a group? Are there take-home requirements? Are there
in-class requirements? Will students be able to use references? Will students receive
new materials such as a scenario? How much time is available?
 Write the standard statement. The standard statement lists the criteria used to measure
the accomplishment of the objective. Do not use action verbs in the standard
statement. Instead, introduce the standard by making the action verb a noun or gerund.
For example, "Analysis includes the role officers play in influencing the development
of organizations and leaders." What does the success of the action look like? What
must be included, addressed, or considered to measure the action? What determines
successful completion of the action? Is there an Army standard with which the student
must comply? (Identify specific standards, not just a regulation number.)
 Determine the learning level of the objective. Each action verb reflects a level of
learning, and each part of the objective must reflect the same level of learning in order
for it to be accurate. Do the action, condition, and standard statements support each
other? Must students recall facts (knowledge)? Must students explain in their own
words (comprehension)? Must students apply a process (application)? Must students
compare courses of action (analysis)? Must students generate a new product
(synthesis)? Must the students judge the value of something (evaluation)?
Note: The highest learning level chosen includes all learning levels below it. For
example, analysis includes knowledge, comprehension, and application.
15
 Determine learning domain. When the affective domain is used, it must be equal to
the cognitive domain. For further information on learning levels, refer to materials in
the library associated with your school/center.
(e) Designing an assessment plan. After determining the desired outcome of instruction,
measure student accomplishments. Write an assessment plan. The learning objectives tell what
performance is expected, under what conditions, and to what extent. To attain acceptable
performance, students must meet or exceed the standards specified in the learning objective's
standard statement.
 To design an assessment plan, determine how to assess the accomplishment of each
learning objective. For example, will the students explain a concept, conduct a
briefing, or develop a solution to a problem? The design of the assessment plan
provides the framework to be used in the development phase. Finalize the assessment
plan and assessment instruments during the development phase of ADDIE.
 Analyze each learning objective. What assessment methods are appropriate (for
example, written, role-play, practical exercise, presentation, etc.)? What does the verb
indicate?
 Determine how to measure each learning objective. Note that there may be more than
one way to measure the objective. How will students show they have met the
objective? What is the learning level of the learning objective? Can the learning
objective be measured adequately with a written assessment? A practical exercise
(PE)? A briefing? Will the student need to write a paper? Perform an action? Play a
role? Does the method adequately assess student outcomes in accordance with criteria
in the standard?
 Design a sample assessment item for each measurable learning objective. Assessment
items are not limited to written examinations; they may also include briefings, plans,
papers, skits, role-play exercises, tasks, products, and other instruments. Begin to
design appropriate rubrics to support assessment. Are the students required to write a
paper? If so, the sample assessment instrument will be the draft of "directions to
students." Is there a practical exercise? If so, the sample assessment instrument will
be a draft of the concept of the PE (what the student does, what is expected, etc.). Will
the students produce something? If so, the sample assessment instrument will be a
draft describing the expectations for the product.
 All assessments require rubrics to provide students with feedback and faculty with
tools to assess learning. See appendix E.
(f) Conducting preliminary research. Conduct preliminary research for possible course
materials when developing the learning objectives, assessment plan, and sample assessment
tools.
 Select sources for possible course materials. Consult all possible sources to determine
which are appropriate, including existing course materials. Relevant existing materials
save time, personnel, material, and funding. Faculty and curriculum developers of
previous versions of the course may also provide relevant insight. Other sources
include publications and personnel from Department of Defense, joint and other
16
federal agencies, industry and commercial enterprises, and colleges and universities.
Additional research sources include data from various evaluation reports, student and
faculty course surveys, libraries, World Wide Web/Internet, and government
databases.
 Identify possible course materials and link to course learning objectives. If learning
objectives in the source materials match the course learning objective, consider their
use.
 Evaluate material. Select initial course or lesson materials at this time. If using
copyrighted materials, obtain permission from the publisher before using these.
Determine if the user fee is within the budget or if the material provides adequate
benefit to support the cost. Copyrighted material must have clearance for use if it is
labeled "limited to U.S. students only," "no foreign," or "no contractors," or if the
material is unclassified information from a classified source. Only materials listed on
the course syllabus may be provided to international military students. Clear all
material (including unclassified material) through proper channels before providing
them to international military students or contractors. Does the material match the
learning objectives? (If not, reject it.) Is the content level of the material appropriate
for the planned level of instruction? Is the material accurate and free of error? Is the
material current? Is the material copyrighted? Does the material address motivational
factors? Does the material encourage active learning? Is the material well organized?
Is the material properly sequenced? Will the material be meaningful to students? Will
the material be appealing to students? Is the material at the appropriate level of
difficulty and complexity? Is the reading level appropriate? Can the available
materials be used in part, modified, or combined with other materials to accomplish
the desired goal? Are materials cleared for international military students or
contractors?
(g) Designing the course or lesson plan. The course plan outlines the course development
process, sequences course events, and identifies course design flow. It is the course blueprint.
 Design a course or lesson outline. Put learning objectives in instructional sequence.
 Order content progressively and sequentially.
 Place lower-level learning objectives up front.
 Introduce broad concepts and technical terms early.
 Provide practice and review of concepts and knowledge that are essential parts of later
lessons.
 Introduce a concept in the lesson where it is most frequently used.
Caution: Cognitive overload may occur because of excessive amount of information and
reading assigned in a short time period.
 Place complex or cumulative concepts late in the sequence.
17
 Evaluate (formative evaluation) the course or lesson outline. Are ELOs sequenced
appropriately to effectively support the TLO(s)? Is there adequate time for each
learning objective and sufficient time to accomplish all the ELOs supporting the TLO?
Are cognitive levels appropriately sequenced? Do the topics flow logically?
 Design the evaluation plan and sample evaluation tools. The evaluation plan is a
document that describes the context, purpose, tools, implementation plan, and final
report for the program evaluation.
 The first part of the evaluation plan describes the context of the evaluation, such as the
school, department, dates of the research, and the population, if applicable.
 The second part of the evaluation plan describes the purpose of the research. The
evaluation plan should state the year for the program evaluation of a curriculum,
funding issues, quality of life, curriculum re-design or new curriculum, and any
specific research questions, if appropriate.
 The third part of the evaluation plan describes the data collection tools such as
interviews; surveys (internal and external); focus groups; observations, insights, and
lessons; viability inspections; and any historical documents. In the case of a
curriculum program evaluation, an external curriculum review using the ADDIE
process is imperative. Also, in the case of curriculum program evaluation, there must
be a tool to capture and analyze student assessment. Ensure these tools are contained
in the appendices to the evaluation plan.
 The fourth part of the evaluation plan describes the methodology to include the
implementation of the data collection and the method of analysis of the data collected.
This may include specific schedules or rules for implementation of data collection
tools.
 The fifth part of the evaluation plan describes the implementation plan. The
curriculum developer may write the implementation plan in chart or narrative format,
but the plan should explain the expectation for implementation of the tools.
 The sixth part of the evaluation plan describes how, when, and where to present the
evaluation results.
 Prepare samples of any tools used and ensure the tools will collect the data to measure
the program's success.
 Update resource analysis. Resource needs may change throughout the ADDIE
process. Review the resource estimate and make any necessary changes.
 Update milestone plan. Review and update the milestone plan. This is a critical step
because the milestone plan guides the course building process.
c. Development. Compare the analysis and design phases to ensure consideration of all
aspects of the course or lesson. Continue to gather references and supporting materials and
select or develop media and methods of instruction that support accomplishing the learning
objectives. At the end of development, the course or lesson will be ready for implementation and
instructional materials ready for use. Before developing any materials, review the goals and
learning objectives to ensure the course or lesson meets the learning outcomes. The components
of the development phase include the following:
(1) Select the method of instruction.
18
(2) Select the instructional media.
(3) Select and develop instructional material.
(4) Develop evaluation tools.
(5) Update resource analysis.
(6) Develop lesson plans and advance sheets.
(7) Develop assessment instruments.
(8) Collaborate in course or lesson development. The curriculum developer develops the
course and may develop or assist in the lesson development to support the course goals and
objectives. The leadership, however, has course approval responsibilities. Collaborate with
all curriculum developers if more than one curriculum developer is responsible for course or
lesson development.
(9) Produce the development components.
(a) Select method of instruction. In the development phase, one of the first and most
important actions is selecting the method of instruction for the course or lesson. In effect, this is
the selection of the procedures used to attain the objective. Any instructional program may
require different methods at different times. The importance of a method lies not in itself but in
how well it accomplishes the course or lesson objectives.
 Refer to the learning objectives. The learning objectives are the keys to selecting
methods of instruction. The learning objectives tell what learning methodology must
support the learning level. For example, if the learning objective states that the student
will analyze a COA, the methodology used could be a case study, a practical exercise,
or related activity. A lecture or memorization exercise would support lower level
cognitive learning.
 Consider the subject taught. In determining the methodologies to use, the subject is a
critical factor. Who will direct the learning experience (that is, students, faculty, or
shared)? Is the action an individual or group effort? What is the class' level of
education, aptitude, background, and interests? Will the subject stimulate discussion?
Are there different points of view presented? Would the subject be enhanced by an
exercise? What type? Is there a problem-solving component? Does the subject
matter change frequently?
 Determine faculty qualifications and experience. How much time is available for
"train-up?" What types of teaching experiences have the faculty had? Have the
faculty had recent field experience involving the subject area? Are there experienced
faculty available to help neophytes? Is it possible for new faculty to assist with a class
before assuming full faculty duties?
 Determine the level of student involvement. The learning objective is the course
guide. It tells the level of desired student involvement. It is important to remember
that student involvement maximizes student retention and learning. What is the action
19
verb in the objective (for example, apply, explain, or analyze)? How is student
accomplishment of the learning objectives being measured? What conditions are
specified for the learning objectives? Is preparation time required for the students?
What formative feedback is required? Is the final product a group product or an
individual product?
 Consider student ability, experience, and background. Use the target population
description developed during the analysis phase and the methodology information to
help identify the appropriate methodology to meet student knowledge and experience
and course objectives.
 Determine the student-to-faculty ratio. The resource analysis done during the analysis
phase and the information gained during the previous five steps help determine the
student-to-faculty ratio.
 Determine time available. Match the time available for instruction against the time
required to accomplish a specific learning objective using a particular method. Some
methods may require more time but allow the learning to last. For example, a
discussion typically requires more time than a lecture; however, a discussion can
enable higher level learning to take place during the course.
 Determine the type of facilities and equipment available. Facilities and equipment
influence the success of the method. What type of facility is needed (classroom,
distributed learning, computer room, or off-site)? Does the facility lend itself to
formal or informal learning? Are any possible constraints identified? Is the necessary
equipment available?
(b) Select instructional media. Almost without exception, every method of instruction
needs some type of media support. No single medium is the most appropriate choice for every
instructional situation. Select media that supports learning. The media used in a course must
support the method of instruction selected and uphold the supported learning objective.
 Determine appropriateness of media selected for the method of instruction. Specify
the media device(s) for each method of instruction. The media must support the
selected method of instruction.
 Determine if the media supports the learning objectives. The media selected must
support the action verb in the learning objective. Ask which medium or combination
of media best supports the intended instruction.
 Determine the ease and cost involved in updating and revising. Consider the
frequency of change to doctrine and/or equipment. If the TLO or ELO is subject to
change, the media devices selected should be those that are easiest to change with the
least cost.
 Determine compatibility of available equipment with proposed media.
 Determine amount of student interaction the learning objective requires. Adults prefer
to be involved.
 If the learning activity requires student involvement to accomplish the objectives,
select media that provide the interaction.
20
 Consider student interest and motivation. Choose media that trigger student interest
and provide motivation.
(c) Select and develop instructional material. Each type of media requires material
selection or development. Ensure that the materials are appropriate for the media selected.
There are two parts involved in acquiring the appropriate material: selecting and developing.
Review the selected material and determine its usefulness.
 Review material collected during the analysis and design phases. Eliminate any
material no longer needed.
 Select course materials.
 Make any required material modifications.
 Develop material. Producing instructional material is both expensive and time
consuming. The time spent in developing material reduces the time available to
develop lesson plans, work with students, or perform other tasks.
 Analyze resources before developing material. How much time is needed to develop
and produce the materials? Is the instructional value of the material enough to justify
the amount of time needed in the development? (If material is for long-term use for a
large number of classes, justify the developmental time.) Are there support personnel
who can assist with material development? How much media expertise is needed to
develop the material? Is it available? Is the cost of developing the material within
budget constraints?
 Develop material appropriate for the selected media. Clear all material cited from
another source through copyright channels.
(d) Develop evaluation tools. Finalize all evaluation tools identified in the evaluation
plan. Demonstrate validity and reliability for each evaluation tool and include this information
in the program evaluation report.
 Finalize each evaluation tool. Be sure to write all items so they can produce a metric
(measure) of the program.
 Validity ensures the evaluation tool is an accurate measure of the curriculum. To
evaluate the ratio of "content validity" of an evaluation tool, ask at least three SMEs to
comment on how each item in the tool relates to measurement of a specific part of the
program, documenting a summary of comments for the program evaluation report.
Examples of comments are "Is the 'thing' measured by each item 'essential,' 'useful but
not essential,' or 'not essential' or 'not necessary' to the performance or attainment of
the construct?" An increasing level of agreement among SMEs supports the argument
that each particular item is essential and therefore valid. Content validity ratio =
number of SMEs who indicate "essential to the curriculum" minus the N of SMEs/2,
divided by N of SMEs/2. The highest possible number to represent content validity
ratio is 1.00.
 A measure is considered reliable if a subject's response of the same evaluation tool
given twice is similar (test/retest reliability). Conduct a reliability evaluation by
asking a limited number of subjects to repeat an evaluation tool within a short time,
21
approximately 2 weeks, followed by a comparison of among the scores between the

results of Time 1 and Time 2 for each subject. Correlation may be computed using the
statistical package for the social sciences. An alternate method to estimate reliability
can be conducted using the statistical package for the social sciences to develop a
Cronbach's alpha, demonstrating correlation among all items in an evaluation tool,
demonstrating reliability.
 Include evaluation tool validity and reliability results in the final program evaluation
summary. Retain the data that supports the results for 3 years.
(e) Update resource analysis. Identify resource needs. Make methodology and media
changes if required resources are not available to support the course as designed. If changes are
necessary, return to the design phase.
(f) Develop lesson plans and advance sheets. Lesson plans are critical components of the
course development process. The lesson plan organizes what is presented in the lesson as well as
when and how it is presented. It is the curriculum developer's way of communicating course
intent to the faculty. The lesson plan tells the faculty how to implement the course. Much of the
preliminary work that goes into developing a lesson plan was completed during the design phase.
Write the lesson plan from the faculty's viewpoint.
 Examples of lesson plans from educational institutions. See appendix D for detailed
lesson plan directions.
 Advance sheet development. Write advance sheets from a student's perspective.
Advance sheets have specific components. See appendix D. Institutions may have
additional requirements. The following is an explanation of the components of an
advance sheet.
 Scope paragraph. The scope paragraph should match the scope of the lesson plan.
 Learning objectives. The learning objectives should be the same as those in the lesson
plan.
 Issue material.
o Advance issue. List any courseware available to the students before the start of the
lesson.
o During class. Include handouts, quizzes, PEs, and other material students will receive
in class.
 Homework assignments. List all homework assignments.
 Reading and study requirements.
o Read. The required reading material gives the course or lesson consistency. Prioritize
the reading requirements.
o Review. Review readings should have a specific purpose for having students review
previous material besides linkages among lessons.
o Scan. Have a purpose in mind when assigning canned material. Scanning can orient
students to a topic, serve as a preview of further discussion, establish a knowledge
baseline, pique interest, or alert students to class activities or requirements. Do not use
scanning as a method to cover nice-to-know material.
 Items required. Be specific about what students must bring to class and why. Do not
list items that will not be used or are only nice-to-have.
22
 Assessment plan. Write a lesson-specific assessment plan in either of two ways: (1)
Write a short narrative which stipulates which specific points of the lesson will be
assessed, what performance measure(s) the student has to accomplish to demonstrate
mastery level, and what criteria are assessing for mastery. (2) Refer the students to an
appendix. This option may be more appropriate if the assessment plan is lengthy and
requires additional enclosures or supporting documents.
(g) Develop course assessment criteria. After determining the method of instruction and
media and after selecting and developing the learning support materials, develop the course
assessment criteria. Assessment criteria specifically identify what process or product should be
used to assess students. This must match the learning objectives and the learning level identified
in the objectives. For example, if the learning level is analysis and in the assessment plan has
identified a written test as part of the assessment, the assessment must be written at the analysis
level. Recall or recognition of matching or fill-in-the-blank questions would not be appropriate.
 Review the TLOs and ELOs, learning levels, and assessment plan.
 Construct a matrix from review in the step above.
 In column 1, list the learning objective number.
 In column 2, list the learning level of each objective. This could influence the amount
of time spent in the classroom and weighting of grades.
 In column 3, record the instruction time (in hours) and the preparation time
(homework, readings, etc., also in hours) that is needed to accomplish each objective.
 In column 4, list the type of assessment identified in the assessment plan for that
objective and identify its weight or percentage total.
 In column 5, record the number of assessment items and the learning level of the
assessment. The assessment item's learning level must match the learning in the
objective.
 In column 6, identify the weighting of possible points toward the final grade.
 The following assessment matrix (table 2-1) provides an example.
Table 2-1
Assessment matrix
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6
TLOs & ELOs Learning Time Type of Assessment Items Weighting of points toward
Numbers Level (in hours) Assessment Number and final grade
Learning Levels
1. TLO A Synthesis 20 Hours 500 word written 1 Product Synthesis 50 points
paper
2. ELO A.01 Analysis 12 Hours In-Class Daily Class 10 points
Discussion Participation Analysis
3. ELO A.02 Application 4 Hours Independent PE 1 Product Application a. 10 points (Product)

b. 10 points (Process)
4. ELO A.03 Application 4 Hours Group PE 1 Product 20 points
 Write the assessment plan criteria as it will appear on the advance sheet. Write in a
narrative format the information identified in the two previous steps above.
23
 Figure 2-3 is an example of an assessment plan.
1. Your faculty member will assess the course learning objectives using the following:
a. A 500-word, double-spaced, typed paper. This paper will be a critical discussion of

_________.
Your written discussion must include the following (insert the standards from TLO A at
this point). This paper is worth 50 points (or 50%) of your total grade for C000.
b. Twenty points (or 20%) of your grade will be determined by your staff group's final
product on _________ (insert specifics from ELO A.03 at this point.)
c. You will also be assessed on your individual class product _________ (insert the
standard from ELO A.02). Both the process that you select and your final product will be
worth a possible 20 points (10 points each).
Figure 2-3. Sample assessment plan

 Faculty awards grades. (Each institution has a particular grading policy.)
(h) Develop assessment instruments. At this point in ADDIE, develop assessment

instruments that match the learning objectives and learning levels. Develop assessment
instruments to determine how well the student accomplishes the objective, not how well the
student performs compared to other students. Options include written assessment methods and
any observations of the learning objective (for example, develop orders, participate in group
assignments, conduct research, etc.). The key factor is to assess the student against the learning
objectives — how well he or she accomplishes the objective given specific conditions, defined
standards, and an identified level of learning.
 Review the learning objectives.
 Review the assessment plan developed during the design phase. The assessment plan
is the guide for developing assessment instruments.
 Review the sample assessment items developed during the design phase. Are they still
appropriate?
 Determine the number of questions, scenarios, exercises, and products needed to
adequately assess each learning objective. The amount of class time spent on a
learning objective gives an indication of its importance.
 Develop assessment instruments based on input from the first three steps above.
Continue to focus assessment items on the action, condition, standard, level of
learning, and domain of the learning objectives.
 Develop rubrics and guidance. Whatever the assessment is (written paper, group PE,
discussion, etc.), develop a rubric to calibrate assessment and provide feedback. See
appendix D for examples of rubrics.
24
(10) Update milestone plan. Review and update the milestone plan developed during the
analysis phase.
d. Implementation. This phase has two distinct components. Component 1 ensures faculty
are prepared, materials are available, and everything is ready for the course. Component 2 is the
actual conduct of the course or lesson.
(1) Make final coordination.
(a) Coordinate equipment. Have the necessary equipment requirements been identified?
Is the equipment available in adequate numbers and in operating condition?
(b) Check facilities. Are the appropriate facilities available and reserved? Are there any
modifications needed to existing facilities? If so, have they been completed?
(c) Check personnel (for curriculum developers). Are enough faculty available to
facilitate the course? Is the course on the calendar? Is there adequate time scheduled for faculty
"train-up?" Are materials and supplies available in adequate quantities to support instruction?(2)
Conduct faculty "train-up." The curriculum developer should conduct these sessions. The
sessions should replicate the actual instruction as much as possible. At a minimum, curriculum
developers should review each lesson with the faculty by covering the critical points of the
course, how the faculty will conduct the course, and how they will assess students. If possible,
require future faculty to act as students and complete all student requirements.
(3) Teach the course. Focus implementation on teaching and learning.
(a) Conduct instruction. The instruction should follow the course or lesson plan. It
should be conducted by qualified faculty, in a professional manner and environment, and using
the appropriate method.
(b) Assess student accomplishments of learning objectives. As appropriate, use

assessment instruments, faculty feedback, daily faculty records, and data for program evaluation.
(c) Review student assessment results and faculty feedback information. Review and
analyze the information to improve or revise the course. This data becomes part of the program
evaluation.
(d) Implement evaluation tools (surveys, focus groups, interviews, etc.) per the evaluation
plan.
(e) Conduct formative evaluations with faculty. It is extremely helpful to provide

feedback on each lesson after it is taught. Ensure experienced and new faculty participate. Be
sure to capture data to use in the program evaluation.
e. Evaluation. Evaluation in ADDIE is a continuous process that consists of data collection

and analysis to determine effectiveness and value of a course or program. Do not confuse course
evaluation with student assessment. Evaluation consists of both formative and program
evaluations. Formative evaluation is the internal look at the process during course development.
25
Program evaluation occurs post instruction and uses data collected during course development,
implementation, as well as post instruction.
(1) The QAO and course developers share responsibility for evaluation of course
materials. Developers evaluate the materials as a quality control function of AIS; the QAO does
so from a quality assurance perspective against Army accreditation standards.. Developer
responsibilities include soliciting input and feedback from a number of sources including peers,
co-workers, objective observers, curriculum advisers, and ideally a sample target audience
during the course development process.
(2) Formative evaluation. Formative evaluation is ongoing during ADDIE and involves
making adjustments. For further information on formative evaluation, see chapter 3.
(3) Program evaluation. Program evaluation takes place after implementation. It answers
questions such as, was the course worth the effort, and did the lesson or course accomplish what
it set out to do? For more information, see chapter 3.
Chapter 3
Evaluation
3-1. Introduction
Evaluation is a systematic continuous method to appraise the quality, efficiency, and
effectiveness of a program, process, or product. It provides the mechanism for decision makers
to assure quality. In learning organizations, such as Army educational institutions, evaluation
results in improvement of programs for enhancement of collective student learning.
3-2. Types of evaluation

There are two types of evaluation that are part of an ADDIE process: formative evaluation and
program evaluation (also referred to as summative evaluation).
a. Formative evaluation is the evaluation of the infrastructure during the ADDIE process.
Formative evaluation involves making adjustments during the development process to improve
the procedure. All new processes and procedures adopted within the educational institution
should follow the ADDIE process and use formative evaluation.
b. Program evaluation (summative evaluation) is the use of research to investigate

systematically the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of a program, process, or product. After
completion of the data collection and analysis, the curriculum developer writes the final program
evaluation report or document. The curriculum developer may collect data throughout ADDIE;
but he or she will not write the final program evaluation document until after analyzing and
collecting all data. Program evaluations should include executive summaries, conclusions, and
recommendations. The curriculum developer should present the results of program evaluations
so leadership can make decisions about improvement of student learning grounded in evidence.
The audiences for program evaluations include curriculum developers, faculty, and accrediting
bodies.
26
3-3. Formative evaluation

Formative evaluation is the internal look at the process of building curricula, systems, programs,
and infrastructure. Formative evaluation allows the curriculum developer to make adjustments
during all phases of ADDIE. Formative evaluation increases the chances of having a quality
product at the first implementation, thereby preventing the need for adjustments to the product
during or after first implementation. A curriculum developer should ask questions during each
phase of the ADDIE process.
a. Analysis. The following are proposed questions for each part of the analysis.
(1) Goal. How is the goal linked to the program learning outcomes? Is the goal statement
clear and concise? Does the statement include the scope of the curriculum?
(2) Topic. Were all possible sources used (for example, general officer guidance, centers
of excellence, previous evaluation data, and SMEs)? Are the topics grouped with major and
subtopics? Is the learning hierarchy developed?
(3) Target audience. What do they need? How have they changed? What is their
profile?
(4) Gap. Is there a comparison of the topic list to the target audience profile? Does the
comparison between what they need to know and what they already know influence the profile?
Does resulting gap analysis support the goal?
(5) Evaluation. Is there a description of potential evaluation procedures?
(6) Resources. Does the analysis identify enough equipment, time, funds, and personnel?
Are there any constraints?
(7) Milestones. Are milestones realistic, and do they contain a cushion for crisis? Does
the milestone chart include a plan for program evaluation?
b. Design.
(1) Learning objectives. How are learning objectives tied to the goal that supports the
program learning outcomes?
(2) Assessment plan. How does the assessment plan measure the learning objectives? Do
the sample assessments measure the learning objectives to the prescribed learning level?
(3) Evaluation plan. Does the evaluation plan design include course context, metrics
(student and faculty success, graduate approval, direct or indirect measures), plan for analysis of
data, data collection tools, and research questions (as appropriate)?
(4) Course plan. Is the course plan progressive and sequential?
(5) Course materials. How do course materials support the learning? Are they practical?
Are they current? Are the resources (time, personnel, and money) acceptable?
27
c. Development.
(1) Methods. Are they appropriate methods for adult students? Do they achieve the
learning objective to the prescribed learning level?
(2) Media and materials. How do they support the achievement of the learning objectives
to the prescribed learning level? Is the distributed learning curricula exportable (methods,
media, materials, and readings)?
(3) Lesson plans. Are lesson plans experiential? Do they support the new
instructor/facilitator?
(4) Milestone and resource update. Are there issues or events that if not met, could cause
the course to be adjusted, delayed, or not conducted?
(5) Evaluation plan, data collection plan, and data collection tools. These may include
curriculum reviews, internal and external surveys, focus groups, interviews, and student
assessment data. Does the plan have timelines associated with each tool? Does the plan also
include when and how analysis is done, and where results will be presented?
d. Implementation.
(1) Faculty development. What do the faculty need (content "train-up")? Are the lesson
plans complete and clear? Are student materials available to the faculty?
(2) Student assessment. How will faculty collect and record the data for student
accomplishment of the learning objectives? Are there both formative and summative
assessments? Are there direct and indirect measures of student learning?
(3) Evaluation data collection. Was the data collected according to the evaluation plan?
If not, then capture the reasons for change.
a. Evaluation. How well was the evaluation plan for data analysis followed? What were the
challenges? What were the successes? How will the results be presented per the evaluation
plan?
b. Report. The formative evaluation report should be part of curriculum developer records so
that it may be presented to the leadership as part of a post-instructional conference or review or a
program evaluation. (See chapter 2 for an example of the ADDIE process.)
3-4. Program evaluation

Program evaluation is a systematic investigation process used to collect information to determine
the worth or merit of a process, program, or procedure. The leadership should use a program
evaluation to facilitate deciding a COA for the researched process, program, or procedure. In the
case of Army educational institutions, the organization's evaluation plan identifies by year each
program evaluation.
28
a. Program evaluation plan. Program evaluations begin with an evaluation plan. The
evaluation plan is a document that describes the context, purpose, tools, implementation plan,
and final report for the program evaluation.
(1) The first part of evaluation plan describes the context of the evaluation, such as the
school, department, dates of the research, and the population, if applicable.
(2) The second part of the evaluation plan describes the purpose of the research. Is it for
curriculum review, funding issues, quality of life, curriculum redesign or new curriculum, or any
specific research questions?
(3) The third part of the evaluation plan describes the data collection tools. These tools
may include interviews; surveys (internal and external); focus groups; observations, insights, and
lessons; viability inspections; and historical documents. In the case of a curriculum program
evaluation, an external curriculum review using the ADDIE process is imperative. Also, in the
case of curriculum program evaluation, there must be a tool to capture and analyze student
assessment. The curriculum developer must present all these tools in appendices to the
evaluation plan.
(4) The fourth part of the evaluation plan describes the methodology, to include the
implementation of the data collection and the method of analysis of the data collected. This may
include specific schedules or rules for implementation of data collection tools.
(5) The fifth part of the evaluation plan describes the implementation plan. The
curriculum developer may write in chart or narrative form, but the description should explain the
expectation for implementation of the tools.
(6) The sixth part of the evaluation plan describes how, when, and where the presentation
of the evaluation results will happen. Examples include a formal meeting of leadership,
administrators, faculty, and curriculum developers or at a post-instructional conference or
review.
b. Evaluation of the Army Enterprise Accreditation Standards. A program evaluation should

include a review of the applicable Army Enterprise Accreditation Standards. This should be
done annually to affirm the course meets and maintains the Army accreditation.
Chapter 4
Faculty Development
4-1. Introduction
All TRADOC schools must support their faculty by designing and implementing faculty
development programs tailored to support the specific needs of their audiences and to satisfy
their accrediting bodies (TRADOC, regional accrediting agencies, joint accreditation, etc.).
Since faculty assigned to educational learning organizations must support all staff and faculty in
maintaining their professional military and educational competency, each school should rely on
the ADDIE process to build an appropriate program.
29
4-2. Variation in faculty composition

The complexities and challenges of the 21st century have been the catalyst for change within the
walls of all schools. Students have a vast amount of field experience, curriculum has
transformed, and faculty composition varies among educational institutions. Some institutions
have a large civilian faculty who will be at a school long-term; this is in direct contrast to the
past and to other schools where faculty continue to be largely a short-term military composition.
4-3. Common faculty development threads

What should be the common thread throughout TRADOC educational institutions follows:
a. Mission: To develop and certify faculty members and provide educational services.
b. Goal: That everyone partner in the development of teaching and learning, regardless of
school, department, team, subject matter expertise, or leadership role.
c. End state: The faculty development program supports all staff and faculty members in
continuing professional development.
4-4. Faculty and staff development divisions

These divisions partner with faculty in creating a positive adult learning environment. In
general, educational institutions ensure that they are using research-based best practices in their
academic and faculty development programs. Institutions should publish
competencies/outcomes, criteria, and standards for faculty performance.
4-5. Faculty development governance

Each educational institution will have a bulletin or standing operating procedure outlining their
particular faculty development program. As an example, see Fig 4-1 for the four-phased
USACGSC Faculty Development Program.
30
CGSC Faculty Development Job Aid

FDP 3
 Focus : Curriculum Change
Management
Focus: Curriculum Change
Purpose: Overview of the CGSC Faculty Development Program
Purpose:: Overview
Proponent Faculty andof the
StaffCGSC Faculty Development
Development Division (FSD)Program
FDP 2 Management
Proponent:: TRADOC
Faculty and Staff Development Division (FSD) • Accountable Instructional System
References Reg. 350- 70; CGSC Bulletin No. 7 • Lesson/Course Authors System
References : TRADOC Reg. 350 - 70; CGSC Bulletin
Note: This job aid is not a substitute for regulation andNo. 7
policy. Accountable Instructional
Note
For : Thisdetails
specific job aidsee
is not
theareferences
substitute for regulation and policy.
above. • Open to all faculty
Lesson/Course Authors
For specific details see the references above.  Open to all Faculty
• Required to author or revise
 Lesson Implementation Workshops Required to author or revise
courseware
• Initial & continuing courseware
Proponent:
Proponent: FSDFSD
• Course specific – blends
(Course
(Coursemanaged
managedlocally)
locally)
FDP 1 + FDP 2 = “5K ” content & methodology
• Teaching team integration
“Qualified Instructor ”
(See FSD Job Aid, JA-1) Proponent: School/Department/ Team
(Course managed locally)
 ILE Workshops
 Foundational Workshops
FDP 1 • Collaborative Learning Groups
• Assessment of Learning
 Focus : Learning • Critical Reasoning
• Principles of adult learning
• Personal educational philosophy Proponent: FSD
• Experiential Learning Model
(Course managed through ATRRS) Maturing Mentoring
• Learning Styles theory
• Critical reasoning & creative FDP 1 & 2 required
thinking to teach at CGSC AFDP1
Proponent: FSD (See FSD Job Aid, JA-3)
• Recertification every 5 years
(Course managed through ATRRS) Proponent: FSD
Instructor Assignment Life Cycle (Course managed through ATRRS)
CGSC Mentoring
Orientation
FDP 4
Proponent: G - 1
 Focus : Continuing Education
• Continuous process that can occur at any time or
Learning Developing exist concurrently with FDP1, FDP2, or FDP3. Maturing
• Conferences
• Workshops
• Individual research and learning Developing
“Professional opportunities for
Proponent: FSD/School/Department/Individual
the faculty ”
(Program managed locally)
Learning
Faculty and Staff Development Division JA - 13 FDP.doc
U.S. Army Command and General Staff College March 2008
July 2012
Figure 4-1. USACGSC Faculty Development Program (FDP) Job Aid
31
Appendix A
References
Army regulations (ARs), Department of the Army (DA) pamphlets, field manuals (FMs), and
DA forms are available at www.apd.army.mil. TRADOC publications and forms are available at
http://www.tradoc.army.mil/publications.htm.
Section I
Required Publications
This section contains no entries.
Section II
Related Publications
A related publication is a source of additional information. The user does not have to read a
related reference to understand this publication.
Army Enterprise Accreditation Standards

https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/588687
Army Regulation 350-1

Army Training and Leader Development
USACGSC Circular 350-1

http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/repository/350-1.pdf
Field Manual (FM) 5-0

The Operations Process
FM 6-22
Army Leadership
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Available at

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-110hrpt477/pdf/CRPT-110hrpt477.pdf
Section I
Prescribed Forms
Section II
Referenced Forms
DA Form 1045
Army Ideas for Excellence Program Proposal
DA Form 2028
Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms
32
Appendix B
Relationships Among Learning Domains, Levels of Learning, and Learning Objectives
B-1. Introduction
Objectives are the cornerstones of learning. Objectives are developed for all levels of instruction
where measurement of learning is required.
B-2. Learning domains

One of the most common ways to categorize types of learning is the following learning domains
(see figure B-1):
Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives
after Bloom, Krathwol, et al.
Learning Objectives Learning Domains Levels of Learning
- Action - Evaluation
verb or - Synthesis
phrase Cognitive - Analysis
- Condition - Application
- Comprehension
- Knowledge
- Standard Affective
- Characterization
by Value
- Organization
- Valuing
Psychomotor - Responding
- Receiving
Figure B-1. Taxonomy of educational objectives.
a. Affective domain. The affective domain concentrates on emotions, beliefs, attitudes,

values, and feelings.
b. Cognitive domain. The cognitive domain refers to intellectual skills. Intellectual skills
consist of discrimination, concept, rule-using, and problem-solving capabilities. Educational
environments commonly focus on intellectual skills.
c. Psychomotor domain. The psychomotor domain refers to motor skills learning, and
primarily refers to training tasks, not educational performance. (See TRADOC Pamphlet 350-
70-6 regarding analysis, design and development of training tasks, which are primarily
psychomotor in character.)
B-3. Relationship between learning domains and levels of learning
33
Each learning domain is broken down into identifiable levels that progress from the lowest level
through increasingly more complex levels, and finally to the highest complexity level.
a. Krathwohl's Taxonomy identifies five affective levels of learning that progress from
receiving at the lowest level to characterization by a value complex at the highest level.
b. Bloom's Taxonomy identifies six cognitive levels: knowledge, comprehension,

application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The progression is from the simple recall or
recognition of facts at the lowest level, through increasingly more complex and abstract
mental levels, to the highest order that is classified as evaluation.
B-4. Relationship between learning objective action verb and level of learning
Select the appropriate action verb for each objective being taught. The action verb tells what
behavior the student is expected to achieve. Although action verbs are an indication of the level
of learning expected, look at the total behavioral statement (action, condition, and standard) in
order to accurately determine the learning objective level, because the same verb may appear in
different levels of learning.
Appendix C
Assessment Instruments
C-1. Introduction
Schools should develop assessment instruments that clearly measure the course learning
objectives. The level of learning for the TLO and ELO is the determining factor in the type of
assessment instruments developed. For example, if the level is "evaluation," then require an
assessment item measuring the ability to evaluate a situation or product.
C-2. Description of assessment instruments

Design assessment instruments to determine how well students achieve a given standard.
C-3. Guidelines for constructing assessment instruments
a. General guidelines.
(1) Assessment instruments must be valid. They must measure the objective they are
supposed to measure.
(2) Assessment instruments must be reliable. They must consistently measure the same
knowledge or performance.
(3) Assessment instruments must be comprehensive. They must include enough

assessment items or questions to ensure students have achieved the learning objectives.
(4) Assessment instruments must be free of opinions and other biases caused by wording,
grading, etc.
34
(5) Assessment instruments should differentiate between students who have achieved
learning objectives from those students who have not achieved learning objectives.
(6) Assessment instruments must assess only essential information; do not measure
unimportant details.
(7) The assessment instruments should focus student attention on standards reflected in
the appropriate TLOs and/or ELOs.
(8) Weight assessment instruments according to importance of materials and amount of

time devoted to the topic.
(9) The assessment instrument should emphasize learning rather than a rote response or
correct answer.
(10) The assessment instrument should require the student to apply knowledge and reason
and to organize ideas.
(11) Avoid problems related to grammar, work form, and phrasing.
(12) Assess the amount of time needed to complete assessment instruments to ensure
students have time to satisfactorily complete all requirements.
(13) Design computer-generated assessment instruments to provide immediate feedback

to students.
b. Types of assessment items.
(1) Problem-situation items. A problem-situation item provides a realistic problem and

asks the student to find a solution. When using the problem-situation item, require the student to
think reflectively.
(a) Problem-situation items may measure the student's ability to:

 Classify data.
 Accurately interpret data.
 Determine relationships.
 Apply scientific principles and laws of logic to new or different situations.
 Test conclusions.
(b) A problem-situation item, when properly constructed, is characterized by the

following advantages:
 Is effective in obtaining evidence of the student's degree of understanding.
 Can be written to measure the student's ability to reason, either deductively or
inductively.
35
 Assesses the student's skill in the application of principle to a new situation. In other
words, it can be used to measure effectively the degree of transfer of knowledge.
(c) General construction guidelines for problem-situation items.

 There are two major parts to every problem-situation assessment item:
 The situation setting the stage.
 The problem the students must solve, given the situation.
 In developing problem-situation items:
 Design the situation to provide the student with the basis to find a solution.
 Add charts, maps, sketches, or diagrams to the situation to increase clarity or realism.
 Make both the situation and the problem realistic.
 When possible, use an actual situation.
 Be specific in both the problem and the situation, allowing no confusion regarding
details or student requirements.
 Limit problem response to an allotted time span.
 Require the use of the same principles and ideas presented to the student previously.
 The problem should assess student's achievement of the learning identified in the
TLO/ELOs.
 Prepare a rubric.
(2) Essay items. Use essay items when students are required to think reflectively or
creatively, to organize knowledge in the solution of a problem, and to express their solutions in
writing.
(a) The essay response may embody a number of elements, including comparisons,
relationships, explanations, analyses, illustrations, criticisms, summarizations, and/or
descriptions.
(b) The most common objection to the essay item is that it lacks reliability because of its
subjective nature. This objection largely can be overcome by proper phrasing of the item and by
employing a rubric. In this manner, a reasonable degree of the essay assessment instrument can
be valid and comprehensive.
(c) General construction guidelines for essay items:

 State the item clearly so the student knows exactly what is expected.
 The essay item should ask for comparisons, decisions, solutions, cause-effect
relationships, explanations, or summaries.
 Set limits on essay items.
 Inform the student prior to administering the assessment instrument what weight each
item will have on the final grade.
C-4. Simulations
36
Simulations allow students to practice required learning in a protected environment that closely
approximates the actual environment. Students learn from their errors without negatively
affecting personnel or resources. (Simulations use technology as the media for instruction.)
a. Recommendations for using simulations.
(1) Allow enough time for processing and feedback.
(2) Ensure that the simulation matches course objectives and enhances those objectives.
(3) Ensure that faculty and students know how to use the simulation properly.
b. Benefits of simulations. Challenge students to:
(1) Think.
(2) Practice skills (for example, counseling, active listening, etc.).
(3) Learn to work as teams.
(4) Enhance or learn problem-solving skills.
(5) Visualize problems or issues from their reading assignments.
c. Using simulations as assessment instruments. The purpose of the simulation determines

how students are assessed. Decide what is being assessed: the process (way in which the
student goes about a simulation), the product (what is produced as a result of the simulation), or
a combination of both product and process. Regardless of the assessment measure, faculty and
students must know what is being assessed and how their performance is being measured.
Types of simulations include role-play, simulation exercises, simulation games, and computer
models.
(1) Role-play. Role-play provides an opportunity for students to try out theories and
techniques that they may know only from lectures, readings, etc. The purpose of the role-play
determines the types of roles and how the roles are played. Generally, some of the class (and
often the faculty member) participate in the role-play while others in the class observe and assess
the performance.
(2) Simulation exercises and simulation games. Simulation exercises and simulation
games most often involve the total class with each member assuming a different role and the
whole class acting out a scenario. Design the scenarios either to teach a concept or to allow
students to put theory into practice. Simulation exercises more closely resemble role-play, while
simulation games most often resemble board games and packages. Simulation games most often
have "winners" and "losers." Faculty may have to control the competition when it interferes with
the purpose of the game.
(3) Computer models. Computer models are simulation exercises packaged and designed
to be used on computers. Computer simulations allow for more interaction than paper-based
37
exercises and allow students to deal with situations that involve practice of skills and problem
solving. Computer simulations allow students to perform tasks that are too dangerous or too
expensive to deal with directly.
C-5. Process assessment

Faculty assess students based on their ability to perform a task. For example, faculty assess
students' ability to use a computer-based exercise. In this case, faculty focus on the process
students go through rather than the final product. Use process assessment techniques when the
product requires the procedural steps be performed in proper order and at a certain level of
proficiency. Using rubrics is an effective means of providing guidelines for assessing student
attainment of the learning objectives.
C-6. Product assessment

Assess students based on the quality of the product. For example, faculty assess students'
solutions to a computer-based exercise rather than how they went about solving the exercise.
The product assessment approach also makes use of a rubric. However, in this case, faculty
assess the correctness, completeness, quality, etc., of the product. Identify the characteristics that
distinguish an acceptable product from an unacceptable product and provide students with the
appropriate guidance.
Appendix D
Examples of Lesson Plans
D-1. (Name of School) lesson plan example
NAME OF SCHOOL
Title of Academic Program
Course number and title
Lesson Plan for Lesson CXXX

Introduction to Critical Thinking
Theme Author: Title plus First and Last Name

Lesson Author: Title plus First and Last Name
Date prepared: January 6, 2011
1. SCOPE
a. This two-hour lesson introduces the students to the fundamentals of critical thinking
(CT) and sets the stage for subsequent lessons in the CT module. As a result of completing this
lesson, the students should be familiar with the development of CT doctrine, theory, and
philosophy, and have at least a passing familiarity with some of the key historical figures.
Historical figures in CT will be briefly discussed in order to provide context for the review of
contemporary critical thinkers. This lesson includes an overview of the CT module from the
Foundations block through the remainder of the Core Curriculum, and explains how CT applies
to all subjects in the curriculum. Instructors and students should have read the assigned article(s)
38
before class in order to be informed and able to contribute to the classroom discussion. The
learning objective for this lesson is to understand what CT is and how it helps individuals make
good decisions in both their personal and professional lives. This learning objective supports the
core curriculum terminal learning objective, TLO-CC-2, “Refine CT skills to solve problems and
make decisions.” The specific skills and behaviors emphasized in this lesson are application of
CT in classroom discussions and practical exercises, as well as in all academic work throughout
the year.
b. Students should have gained an appreciation of the history and background of CT, and
begin to apply fundamental CT skills in all aspects of their studies. As a result of completing
this lesson, students should realize that CT is not a new topic resulting from challenges
experienced in contemporary military operations or the evolution in military operational
doctrine. Students should see the integral nature of CT on the part of key historical figures with
whom they should already have at least a passing familiarity, such as Socrates and Plato. The
desired end state for each student is a critically-thinking skills should be evident in the classroom
discussions as individuals explain, defend, and critically examine their own points of view and
perspectives and the perspectives of other students in the classroom. An improved or higher
level of CT skill may manifest itself in the first lesson, but the first lesson should lay the
groundwork for further development of those skills in later lessons and throughout the rest of the
academic year.
c. The intent of the concrete experience is to highlight the commonalities of individual
failures to think critically. This sets the conditions for the students to begin to see the importance
of CT and establish the value of this and the next several lessons in this module. By identifying
instances in their own experience in which bad decisions were made — perhaps even by them —
the students will realize the value of being able to habitually think critically and begin to apply
effective CT skills in all their academic endeavors.
2. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Terminal Learning Objective (TLO): TLO-CC-2

Action: Refine CT skills to solve problems and make decisions.
Condition: Acting on a problem-solving team or individually and drawing on
references, class presentations, discussions, exercises, personal experience, and
individual learning while faced with ambiguous, ill-structured problems characteristic of
the current operational environment.
Standard: Refinement includes—
1. examination of CT and creative thinking tools
2. analysis of mental models
3. analysis of probable solutions for an ambiguous problem
Learning Domain: Cognitive
Level of Learning: Analysis
JPME I Learning Areas Supported: None
Enabling Learning Objective (ELO): ELO-CC-2.01

Action: Assess individual cognitive developmental stage.
39
Condition: Given individual reading and writing assignments, lectures, small group
discussions, and the Learning Environment Preferences (LEP) instrument.
Standard: The assessment includes—
1. pre-test
2. post-test
Level of Learning: Analysis
ELO-CC-2.02
Action: Describe theories of CT.
discussions, and practical exercises.
Standard: The description includes—
1. key theorists
2. historical underpinnings
Level of Learning: Comprehension
ELO-CC-2.03
Action: Describe fundamentals of CT.
Standard: The description includes—
1. elements of CT
2. intellectual standards
Level of Learning: Comprehension
ELO-CC-2.04
Action: Demonstrate critical thought in oral and written communications.
Standard: The demonstration includes—
1. elements of CT
Level of Learning: Application
ELO-CC-2.05
Action: Solve complex, ill-structured problems.
Standard: The solution includes—
40
1. elements of CT
Level of Learning: Synthesis
3. ASSIGNED STUDENT READINGS:
a. Advance Issue:
The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts & Tools
C100, Foundations Readings Book
Learning Environment Preferences (LEP) Inventory
FM 6-22, Army Leadership
FM 5-0, The Operations Process
b. Issue During Class: None.
c. Read:
(1) The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts & Tools. [19 pages]
(2) The Role of Critical Thinking in Effective Decision Making (Egan). [14 pages]
(3) A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking (Paul and Elder).
http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/a-brief-history-of-the-idea-of-critical-thinking/408
[5 pages]
(4) Defining Critical Thinking.
http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutct/define_critical_thinking.cfm
[3 pages]
d. Instructor Notes: None.
4. INSTRUCTOR ADDITIONAL READING(S)/MATERIAL: None.
5. TRAINING AIDS, REFERENCES, AND RESOURCES
Appendix A: Assessment Plan

Appendix B: Slides
Whiteboards
Smartboard
6. CONDUCT OF LESSON
a. Lesson Timeline:
First hour:
10 minutes Concrete Experience: Worst Decision Ever Made
15 minutes Publish and Process
25 minutes Generalize New Information (GNI): Define Critical Thinking and its
Components
41
10 minutes Break
Second hour:
40 minutes GNI: Critical Thinking requirements and skills; historical figures in
development and evolution of CT
10 minutes Develop: How this applies to Contemporary Operating Environment (here
and now)
10 minutes Summary/conclusion (check on learning)
b. Concrete Experience: (10 minutes). Hand out 3x5 index cards to each student. Ask the
students to individually think about what they think was the worst decision ever made. It can be
one that was made by the individual sitting in class thinking about this task or one that was made
by another person or organization. Have them make notes on the index card describing the
decision that was made and how they reacted to it. Ask them to be prepared to discuss their
selection. The concrete experience should get the students into the affective domain as they
recall the bad decision and their reaction to it. The concrete experience should further establish
the value of the learning that is about to occur and its importance to each individual from the
perspective of improving his or her own CT and decision making skills. An alternative method
is to pair up the students and have each pair brief back their selection. The advantage to this
method would be fewer experiences to process out in the publish and process (P&P); the
disadvantage is that it may take more time for pairs of students to decide on a “worst decision.”
c. Publish and Process (P&P): (15 minutes). Ask the students to voluntarily share their
worst decision. Some students may be reluctant to publish out loud to the group if the decision
they recorded is personal or embarrassing to them. As students publish their worst decisions, ask
probing questions to model CT behaviors you will look for in them in later classes. For example:
1) Why did you think this was the worst decision ever made?
2) What criteria did you use in selecting the worst decision ever made?
3) Was this a difficult selection for you to make? Why or why not?
4) What CT do you think may have been absent or misapplied in the decision you
selected?
d. Generalize New Information: (25 minutes). This lesson introduces the fundamentals of
CT and some of the key figures in the history and evolution of CT. The learning objectives are
highlighted in the slides as a reminder for both the students and the instructor. The approach to
these objectives will consist of two parts: the components of CT and effective decision making
in the first hour; and an overview of key historical figures in the second hour.
The first couple of slides provide an overview of the CT module as it will be taught in the
Foundations block and throughout the remainder of the core curriculum. It is important to
communicate the idea that CT is not just an 8- to 10-hour block of instruction that begins and
ends in the Foundations block. Students should apply CT throughout all their academic
endeavors.
42
Slide 1, Title Slide.
Lesson 1:
Introduction
The Overview slide should provide not only an overview of the lesson and how it fits into the
rest of the Foundations instruction, but also a broad look at the history and evolution of CT.
Slide 2, Overview. Overview
 Establishes foundation for critical thinking in

rest of intermediate level education (ILE)
 Introduces critical thinking (CT) concepts,

theories, and techniques for application
 Five lessons in Foundations block, five more in

remainder of Core Curriculum, with assessment
of CT at conclusion
 Key component is completion of Learning

Environment Preference instrument before and
after instruction
This slide may be redundant, but the intent is provide a little more detail on how the CT
instruction is divided into two parts and what those parts are going to look like. Not worth
spending a lot of time on, but helps clarify expectations for students who are so inclined.
43
Slide 3, Overview (cont’d) Overview (cont’d)
 Part 1: Foundations Part 2: Core Curriculum


 Lesson 1: Introduction - DJIMO case study
Lesson 2: Contemporary - CTAC case study
critical thinkers - DLRO case study
 Lesson 3: Perry; LEP - DCL case study
 Lesson 4: Models, debate - DMH case study
 prep & set-up - Post –course LEP
Lesson 5: Debate
It is often helpful to begin each lesson with a graphic showing where they are in the sequence of
events. The intent is to show this same slide at the beginning of each lesson with different boxes
highlighted for that particular lesson. Not fancy, but it has proven effective. Not essential to the
learning objective, and you may find it either a waste of time or just too much information.
Slide 4, Critical Thinking Lesson Outline. Critical Thinking Lesson Outline
Lesson 1: Introduction Introduction, overview,

History and evolution of CT
Lesson 2:Contemporary Paul & Elder; Kitchener &

Critical Thinkers King; Meier; Brookfield
Lesson 3: Perry; LEP Perry; Learning Environment

Preference (LEP) instrument
Lesson 4: Models; Set-up CT applied to models;

debate prep and set up
Lesson 5: Debate Design; Pro or Con?
Show the slide and allow the students some time to think about their response. Feel free to
clarify if they have questions about who, when, what, and so forth, but allow plenty of latitude
for their own reflection and creativity. Ask them to make some notes or jot down specifics they
can share with the rest of the class.
44
Slide 5, Concrete Experience: Worst Decision

Ever Made.
Think about the worst decision
Ever made - - by anyone - - and
write it down; be prepared to
discuss your selection and why you
chose that particular decision.
This is the students’ opportunity to express their thoughts about CT and why they think it’s
important . . . or not. Don’t rush the P&P, but stay engaged in order to be able to recognize and
react to unexpected “teaching moments.” A fundamental P&P approach initially will probably
work best: “What happened? How did you react?” Then, if you feel some additional
development of the students’ experiences would be worthwhile, show the next slide to help them
peel apart the nuances.
Slide 6, Publish and Process.

- Why did you choose that particular
decision?
- What aspects or characteristics of the

decision were most significant?
- What role did CT play in the bad

decision you chose?
Transition to the GNI by reviewing the learning objectives. The TLO is from the Foundations
module; the ELOs are for the CT module, both the Foundations parts and the rest of the Core
Curriculum parts.
Ensure students have an understanding of what they can expect; query a couple of individuals,
have them respond back with their own words.
45
Slide 7, Learning Objectives. Learning Objectives
 TLO: Develop CT skills
 ELOs:
- Assess individual congnitive developmental

stage
- Describe theories of CT
- Describe fundamentals of CT
- Demonstrate critical thought in oral and
written communications
- Solve complex, ill-structured problems
You may want to keep this slide hidden or make it a build slide to provide time for students’
input - - what do THEY think CT is?
The students should have had exposure to enough different perspectives on CT in the assigned
readings to formulate a rational response to this question. Give them some time to think about it,
but then you should be comfortable calling on some individuals to solicit their input. Not the
first time they’ve seen or heard of CT; everyone should be capable of rendering an opinion.
Slide 8, What is Critical Thinking. What do you think Critical Thinking is?
Let’s examine what some CT

theorists say about it…
The intent in the next hour is to generate discussion on the part of the students about what they
think CT is. There are a number of misconceptions, false beliefs, and misunderstandings about
CT and how it fits into the military mindset. It is worth spending some class time soliciting input
from the students, perhaps even asking them to jot down some of their ideas and having them go
to the white boards and collaborate in small groups, to drive home the importance of their views
on the subject.
The following slides provide various definitions of CT by different contemporary CT authorities.

Try to show them only briefly in order to communicate that there are a lot of different
perspectives and opinions about CT, and that each of them needs to develop a definition that
works. You may find it unnecessary to use any of them, in which case simply jump forward to
the next part of the lesson or fast forward through them.
An alternative is to select one of the definitions, then use it as a “strawman” to discuss why it is a
good definition, why it might be an incomplete definition, what might be missing from it, and so
forth. The resulting definition arrived at through collaboration may be as good as or better than
any in the readings.
46
Slide 9, Critical Thinking is . . . (1 of 4) Critical Thinking is…
Active, persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or

supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds
which support it and the further conclusions to which it
tends. - Dewey, 1909
…an investigation whose purpose is to explore a situation,

phenomenon, question, or problem to arrive at a hypothesis
or conclusion and that can therefore be convincingly
justified. - Kurfiss, 1988
…reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on

deciding what to believe or do. - Ennis, 1989
No need to use all the slides, no need to use any of them if the ensuing discussion is serving its
purpose. If the students have explored different perspectives and aspects of how they define CT,
you’re there.
Slide 10, Critical Thinking is . . . (2 of 4). Critical Thinking is…

1. An attitude of being disposed to consider in a
thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come
within the range of one’s experience.
2. Knowledge of the methods of logical enquiry and
reasoning.
3. Some skill in applying those methods.
Section II- Glaser, 1941
…that mode of thinking…in which the thinker improves

the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge
of the structures inherent in thinking an imposing
intellectual standards upon them.
- Paul, Fisher, and Nosich, 1993
An alternative is to select one slide, for example, and focus on what it says CT is, soliciting input
and perspectives from the students: do they agree or disagree, why or how do they agree or
disagree, what is their reasoning or rationale for either one, and so forth.

…skilled and active interpretation and evaluation of
observations and communications, information, and
argumentation.
- Fisher and Scriven, 1997
…the art of raising what is subconscious in our reasoning

to the level of conscious recognition. It is the art of taking
control of our thinking processes so as to understand the
pathway and inputs that our thinking employs.
- Egan, 2005
47

...contrasted with the kind of thinking w hich occurs when
someone jumps to a conclusion, or accepts some evidence,
claim, or deision at face value, witnout really thinking
about it. CT requires skill in the interpretation and
evaluation of observations, communications, and other
sources of information, skill in identifying assumptions, in
asking pertintent questions, and in drawing out
implications.
- Fisher, 2001
Slide 13, Components of Critical Thinking (#1). Components of Critical Thinking

 Structure of thought we are better able to find
errors in our thinking if we are able to take our
thinking apart
 Standards for thinking it is impossible to
judge the quality of one’s thinking if there are
no standards with which to compare
 Ethics developing a sense of fair mindedness
and applying the barb of our criticism evenly.
- Egan, 2005
Another way to take apart CT and examine it. The next two slides address some contemporary
critical thinkers’ perspectives on what CT consists of. Students may be able to add to their lists
as part of the ongoing discussion.
48
Slide 14, Components of Critical Thinking (#2). Components of Critical Thinking
Three important areas of CT are

logic, epistemology, and ethics.
 Ethics is most important for its contributions to
the standards for evaluating the morality of
actions
 Logic studies the principles of valid and invalid
reasoning. The domain of logic is narrower
than the domain of CT, which is concerned
with evaluating the justification of beliefs and
actions.
 Epistemology studies the origin, nature, and
limits of knowledge.
- Carroll, 2004
As you send the students on break, ask them to think about what they think some of the
fundamental requirements are for CT to occur, if there are any. If there aren’t any, that might
also be worth explaining and discussing when they return to class.
Slide 15, Stained Glass Quote — Break.
Some
Some problems
problems areare sosocomplex
complexthatthat
you
youhave
have to
to be
be highly
highly intelligent
intelligent and
and
well-informed
well-informedjustjusttotobe
beundecided
undecided
about
aboutthem.
them.
Laurence
Laurence J. Peter
Peter
15
Requirements might be the wrong word to use or a poor choice, and if re-framing or re-phrasing
the question helps, feel free. Others will have no trouble discerning the point of the question and
begin formulating a response relatively quickly. Ask the students to think about this a little after
returning from their break, make some notes to themselves, and then share with the rest of the
class to try and keep the internal influences minimized.
Slide 16, What are Requirements for Critical What are Requirements for
Thinking? Critical Thinking?
CT requires skill in the interpretation and evaluation

of observations, communications and other sources
of information, skill in identifying assumptions, in
asking pertinent questions and in drawing out
implications.
- Fisher, 2001
49
How do the students define competencies? Are there characteristics of individuals who think
critically? Does anyone notice how old this critical thinker is, or when these competencies were
published?
Slide 17, Critical Thinking Competencies. Critical Thinking Competencies

1. Recognize problems
2. Determine feasible solutions
3. Gather pertinent information
4. Recognize assumptions and values
5. Communicate effectively and
accurately
6. Interpret and analyze data
7. Recognize logical relationships
8. Make rational conclusions; test them
9. Adjust beliefs based on experience
10. Render judgments
-Glaser, 1941
This could easily be viewed as another way of serving up the same information as the previous
slide. How much difference is there between competencies and skills? Do students see some of
the same items in both lists? Can they add any of their own that they think are important?
Slide 18, Fundamental Critical Thinking Skills. Fundamental Critical Thinking Skills
 Identify the elements in a reasoned case.
 Identify and evaluate assumptions.
 Clarify and interpret expressions and ideas.
 Judge the acceptability (credibility) of claims.
 Evaluate arguments of different kinds.
 Analyze, evaluate, and produce explanations.
 Analyze, evaluate, and make decisions.
 Draw inferences.
 Produce arguments
-Fisher, 2001
This would be a good opportunity to only show the title of the slide and ask the question to the
students. They should be able to develop a fairly detailed listing or rationale for why they think
CT is important. Such an exercise would help model CT and encourage the same in the students.
50
Slide 19, Why is Critical Thinking Important? Why is Critical Thinking Important?
(1 of 2)
CT ability is significantly related to
job performance in the areas of:
 Analysis and Problem Solving
 Judgment and Decision Making
 Professional/Technical Knowledge and
Expertise, and
 Overall Performance.
- Ejiogu, et al (2006)
Same approach could be used here, either instead of using it with the previous slide, in addition
to using it with the previous slide, or some other permutation. One of these slides could easily be
left out and still achieve the lesson’s learning objective, which may be a viable option if you find
yourself beginning to get short on time.
Slide 20, Why is Critical Thinking Important? Why is Critical Thinking Important?
(2 of 2)
 Helps us interpret information.
 Assists us in making better decisions.
 Helps us see what is not so evident and obvious
at first glance
 Encourages us to think about our own prejudices.
 Challenges prevailing social, political, cultural,
and technical ways of thinking and acting.
 Encourages us to go beyond the traditional boxes
of knowledge and understanding.
 Helps us critique, reject, or adapt tools and
methods.
Any number of different ways to approach this part of the lesson, but the least preferred is to
read from the slide. One alternative is to assign each of these critical thinkers to a student ahead
of class or on the break and have them publish back to the rest of the class. Another is to divide
the class into two, three, or four groups and have them research contributions of each critical
thinker. The key is going to be consideration of how much time you have available as you near
the end of your second hour and how much detail you want to provide. A broad overview was
included in the assigned reading, so everyone should have at least an inkling of who these people
are and what some of their contributions to CT were. The check on learning at the end of the
lesson may be informative.
51
Slide 21, Historical Figures in Critical Thinking. Critical Thinking Theorists

 Socrates (500 BC)  Robert Boyle
 Thomas Aquinas  Voltaire
(Middle Ages)
 Colet, Erasmus,  Isaac Newton
Moore  Adam Smith
 (Renaissance)
 Francis Bacon  Karl Marx
 John Dewey
 Rene’ Descartes  Jean Piaget
 Hobbes
 Locke
e. Develop: (20 minutes). This part of the experiential learning model belongs to the
students; allow them time to reflect and develop their responses to the question of how they
think they will be able to use what they have learned in the future. There are no wrong answers
from a content perspective; however, there are incorrect answers from a format perspective if
individuals fail to answer the question posed. Try to ensure everyone has an opportunity to
provide his or her response. In some, perhaps many cases, you may observe instances of good
CT skills; it would be worthwhile to point them out — timing may be an issue in terms of when
you point out the good examples. An alternative is to organize the class into two or three smaller
groups and have them collaborate and develop group consensus.
This is one of the most critical phases in the lesson. If the first hour ends without the students'
having realized the value of what they have learned and will continue to learn, the learning will
not stick. They will fail to see why learning CT is important and this module will continue to be
a “bumper sticker” for USACGSC instruction. Take the time to execute this part of the
experiential learning model as well as possible. Taking some time out of the GNI or APPLY
phase may be a necessary course of action.
f. Apply: (10 minutes). This is the “check on learning.” Take a few minutes to
determine if the students learned what you had intended. This may be verbal, random questions
thrown out to the group, specific questions posed to individual students, a review of the learning
objectives slide, or some other quick method of checking what the students think they learned.
This phase also belongs to the students. You can’t tell them what they learned; the students have
to recognize and verbalize what they think they learned.
Slide 22, Review/Check on Learning. Review

Check on Learning
 What is critical thinking?

 What are some components of critical
thinking? Competencies? Skills?
 Why is critical thinking important?
 Who are some of the key historical figures
in the evolution of critical thinking?
52
Try to leave enough time to respond to students’ input in this phase. If they have clearly not
learned or even begun to understand the learning objectives as described in the beginning of the
lesson, you will need to revisit these topics in the next lesson. Moving on to another lesson
without having learned the key parts of the current lesson will be counterproductive in this
module; each lesson builds on and adds to the previous one. You may find it helpful to record
the students’ inputs on the white boards to add substance to their responses.
Slide 23, Stained Glass Quote — Conclusion.
When
When the
the mind
mind isis thinking
thinking itit isis
talking
talkingtotoitself.
itself.
-- Plato
Plato
23
7. ASSESSMENT PLAN: (See Appendix A.)

US ARMY NAME OF SCHOOL
Level of course
C1XX: Foundations
C1XX: Title of Instruction Block
Lesson C1XX: Introduction
Appendix A
Assessment Plan
Part of your performance for the complete C1XX Foundations Block is assessed in this lesson
through class participation. Class participation consists of 10% of the overall C100 Block grade.
Class Participation (Individual) 100%. Instructors assess each student’s demonstrated

understanding of the course material and his or her ability to develop and deliver cogent
arguments or relevant insights from course material in a clear and concise fashion. Students
demonstrate their knowledge, skill, and ability through the quality and focus of their discussion
comments and questions, their preparation for class, their ability to reason critically, their
performance during in-class exercises, and contributions to group work. Class participation is
assessed on a daily basis. Specifically for this lesson, instructors focus on the following leader
behaviors: "seeks and is open to diverse ideas and points of view" and "conveys thoughts and
ideas to ensure shared understanding" (see FM 6-22, appendix A,).
53
US ARMY NAME OF SCHOOL

Level of course
C1XX: Foundations
C1XX: Title of Instruction Block
Lesson C1XX: Introduction
Appendix B
Slides
Slide Number Description/Title

Slide 1 Lesson 1: Introduction
Slide 2 Overview
Slide 3 Overview (cont’d)
Slide 4 Critical Thinking Lesson Outline
Slide 5 Concrete Experience: Worst Decision Ever Made
Slide 6 Publish and Process
Slide 7 Learning Objectives
Slide 8 What is Critical Thinking?
Slide 9 Critical Thinking is . . . (#1)
Slide 13 Components of Critical Thinking (#1)
Slide 14 Components of Critical Thinking (#2)
Slide 15 Break Slide
Slide 16 What are Requirements of Critical Thinking?
Slide 17 Critical Thinking Competencies
Slide 18 Fundamental Critical Thinking Skills
Slide 19 Why is Critical Thinking Important? (1 of 2)
Slide 20 Why is Critical Thinking Important? (2 of 2)
Slide 21 Historical Figures in Critical Thinking
Slide 22 Review/Check on Learning
Slide 23 Conclusion Slide (Quote)
54
D-2. TDC USACGSC lesson plan example
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
D-3. TDC ALU lesson plan example
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Appendix E
Rubric Examples
E-1. Command and General Staff College (USACGSC) form 1009c (Assessing Classroom
Participation), May 2011
Assessing Classroom Participation
STUDENT NAME: STAFF GROUP: DATE:
COURSE TITLE: ASSIGNMENT:
INSTRUCTOR: DEPARTMENT:
Classroom Participation Standards: Communicates ideas effectively, demonstrating critical thinking that contributes to
group learning.
Overall Grade:
97+: 96-94: 93-90: 89-87: 86-84: 83-80: 79-70:Sometimes
Usually <70: Never Total
Critical
Comments Thinking
often respondedAssessment
to or built logically on those of others. Helped the group keep a line of
A+
reasoning going.
A A- B+ B B- C U :
Questions and comments were thought-provoking and relevant.
Not hesitant to state an alternate, creative, and/or controversial position.
Supported positions and comments with evidence indicating critical reasoning, modes of analysis,
synthesis, and judgment.
Did not make random, superficial, or off topic comments that distracted the group from the on-going
discussion.
Tied thoughts to previous instruction or other writings and information about the topic at hand.
Questions and comments made the group think about alternative positions.
Communicated clearly and concisely.
Respectfully challenged others to provide evidence or support for their position.
Approached the discussion or problem in a creative manner.
Approached the discussion in a thoughtful, reasoned manner.
Comments were precise, and accurate.
Comments demonstrated breadth and depth of understanding.
Logic was sound.
Comments demonstrated depth of analysis.
Asked tough questions that challenged deeply held beliefs.
Showed tolerance toward opposing beliefs, ideas or opinions.
Encouraged peers not to dismiss out of hand the opinions and ideas of others.
Instructor Comments:
Cognitive Level Attained Universal
(Higher levels include Elements of Thought Intellectual
characteristics of lower levels) Standards
EVALUATION (Judging or weighing
by building and using criteria and -Clarity
standards)
-Accuracy
SYNTHESIS (Integrating parts into a
new whole) -Precision
ANALYSIS (Breaking material down
into component parts to determine --Relevance
structures and relationships)
-Depth
APPLICATION (Use of knowledge to
solve problems)
-Breadth
-Logic
COMPREHENSION (Understanding
of the material)
-Significance
KNOWLEDGE (Recall of specific
information)
Figure E-1. Command and General Staff College (USACGSC) form 1009c (Assessing
Classroom Participation), May 2011
91
E-2. USACGSC form 1009s (Assessing Speaking and Presentations), June 2011
ASSIGNMENT/COURSE TITLE:
INSTRUCTOR/DEPARTMENT:
ARMY STANDARD: Transmits a clear, concise, organized message that communicated the speaker’s
intent.
Grade Assessment
U C B- B B+ A- A A+ 1 2 3 4 5
Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Outstanding Exceptional
(Average)
Instructions: Immediately following the end of the presentation ask the student(s) to assess their
own performance using the questions below as a guide.
Student Assessment of Performance:
Briefing Start: ____
Student Question: How do you think you did?
Briefing Stop: ____
1 2 3 4 5
Overall: Total Time: ______

(Average)
Did you practice/

1 2 3 4 5 rehearse?_______
Content:
(Average)
Delivery: 1 2 3 4 5

(Average)
Describe one thing that you did well in this presentation.
Describe one thing that you would change about your preparation of this presentation and do
differently next time.
Synopsis of Instructors Comments:
USACGSC Form 1009s

June 2011 (Supersedes USACGSC Form 1009s dated Jun 2002) © USACGSC
Figure E-2. USACGSC form 1009s (Assessing Speaking and Presentations), June 2011
92
Instructions: Use the following scale to assess the student’s performance for each criterion below:
1 = Unsatisfactory; 2 = Marginal; 3 = Satisfactory (Average); 4 = Outstanding; 5 = Exceptional
SUBSTANCE/ORGANIZATION STYLE
(Discernible, balanced plan of presentation)
Introduction Physical Behavior
Greeting (poised, confident)

Eye Contact (maintains with audience, natural, avoids
excessive reference to slides or notes)
Purpose (presents BLUF, relevant, focused, clearly and concisely stated
controlling idea/ thesis)
References (current, meaningful)

Movement (appropriate, not excessive, uses pointer
properly)
Procedure/Outline (logical, posted and/or embedded throughout brief)

Body Gestures (meaningful, appropriate, well timed,
provided emphasis)
Accuracy/Completeness (all major points, facts/assumptions
precisely stated, information is relevant and accurate, no major points
omitted, level of detail suitable)
Speaking Voice (appropriate volume,

comfortable pace, uses pauses effectively)
Support/Significance (appropriate use of facts; ample evidence
and other perspectives/ examples/ opinions, offered; answers the
“So what?” and/or “Therefore…”; demonstrates analysis)
Vocabulary (clear/concise vocabulary,

pronounces words correctly, enunciates clearly)
Sequence (conveys information in clear, logical, and meaningful
sequence; easy to follow)
Enthusiasm/Confidence (conveys sense of “

ownership” and confidence in own knowledge
and abilities)
CORRECTNESS
Transitions (appears rehearsed, present logical flow, maintains
appropriate tempo)
Visuals/Slides/Graphics
Format (sequencing, numbering, font, centering,

abbreviations)
Closing
Summary (emphasizes main point, no new information) Content (relevant, appropriate use of pictures/graphics,
not to busy)
Ask for Questions
Conclusion (appropriate, meaningful, clear and concise) Handouts/Video-clips, etc. (introduced, relevant)
USACGSC Form 1009s

June 2011 (Supersedes USACGSC Form 1009s dated Jun 2002) © USACGSC
Figure E-2. USACGSC form 1009s (Assessing Speaking and Presentations), June 2011,
continued
93
E-3. USACGSC form 1009w (Assessing Writing), May 2011
Assessing Writing
COURSE TITLE: ASSIGNMENT:

INSTRUCTOR: DEPARTMENT:
Requirement: Write effectively as defined by the Army standard as “understandable in a single, rapid reading and generally
free of errors in grammar, mechanics, and usage.”
Standard: Writing includes—
1. Substance;
2. Organization;
3. Style; and,
4. Correctness.
Overall Grade:
97+: 96-94: 93-90: 89-87: 86-84: 83-80: 79-70: <70:

Total:
A+ A A- B+ B B- C U
Instructor Comments
Cognitive Level Attained Universal Intellectual

(Higher levels include Elements of Thought Standards
characteristics of lower levels)
EVALUATION (Judging or weighing
by building and using criteria and -Clarity
standards)
-Accuracy
SYNTHESIS (Integrating parts into a
new whole)
-Precision
ANALYSIS (Breaking material down
into component parts to determine -Relevance
structures and relationships)
APPLICATION (Use of knowledge to
-Depth
solve problems)
-Breadth
COMPREHENSION
(Understanding of the material) -Logic
KNOWLEDGE (Recall of specific -Significance
information)
USACGSC Form 1009W, May 2011. (Supersedes USACGSC Form 1009W dated May 2009) © USACGSC
Figure E-3. USACGSC form 1009w (Assessing Writing), May 2011
94
Instructions: The rubric below integrates the Elements of Thought and Universal Intellectual Standards, IAW Paul and Elder, with the four
standards of effective writing: Substance, Organization, Style, and Correctness. Substance is further divided into Content and
Analysis/Problem-Solving/Conclusions. The underlined and bolded words directly correspond with Elements of Thought and Universal
Intellectual Standards and demonstrates the relationship between effective writing and critical thinking. This rubric provides a means to
explicitly assess critical thinking while assessing writing. Faculty should assign points based on the requirements of the assignment. Assess
writing based on the descriptions in the Exceptional, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory blocks.
Student Self-
Faculty Assessment
Assessment
Exceptional Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Substance
Points Content Points
Thesis is clear and concise. Content is Thesis is not clear. Small omissions or No thesis. Information (facts,
fully compliant with the assigned inadequacies in content, but assumptions, concepts/theories)
requirement and the needs of the reader; adequately covers the written are not accurate, and/or content is
everything is accurate; level of detail is requirement and needs of the reader. irrelevant, missing, or
suited to the needs of the assigned Some minor inaccuracies, but primarily misrepresented, and/or insufficient
requirement and reader. Explanations accurate. May occasionally include detail, and/or inaccurate or
and descriptions of content are clear and irrelevant details or omit important ineffective management of
precise. Quantitative information is details. Explanations and descriptions quantitative information.
relevant and accurate, expressed with are almost always clear and precise.
appropriate examples, and well Quantitative information is accurate,
integrated into the text. and related to the text.
Points Analysis/Problem-Solving/Conclusions Points
Attains highest cognitive level that is Attains an adequate cognitive level Remains at a low cognitive level.
appropriate to the assignment. appropriate to the assignment. Thorough Analysis superficial; little or no
Insightful, original analysis; conclusions analysis, though perhaps not as relation between conclusions and
superbly supported by evidence clearly insightful or original as it could be; evidence; ethical/legal issues
explained; consideration of ethical/legal conclusions adequately supported by ignored; fails to address alternative
issues when relevant; consideration of evidence clearly explained; legal/ethical points of view or counter evidence.
alternative points of view or counter- issues addressed but may be
evidence is fully addressed. superficially treated; alternative points of
view or counter-evidence, but may not
be fully addressed.
Points Organization Points
Points are clear and logically arranged Points are clear. In general, points Points are not clear or the
so as to develop the content and establish a logical line of reasoning. sequence of points is illogical or
analysis most productively for the inadequate to the needs of the task
audience. or audience.
Points Style Points
Words are precise; language is concise Some language is imprecise but The language is awkward, hard to
and without wordiness; writer’s tone is generally understandable. Style is read. The reader must backtrack to
appropriate to the audience and adequate but lacks polish and understand the writer’s meaning, or
purpose; sentences track clearly even directness. the reader cannot understand the
to the rapid reader; transitions lead meaning. Language is extremely
smoothly from one idea to the next. wordy; or primarily in passive voice,
Active voice predominates. Sources, as or inappropriate in tone. Citation of
relevant, are appropriately cited. sources is missing or inaccurate.
Points Correctness Points
Few if any departures from the A few departures from the published Departures from the published
published standard (grammar, standard (grammar, punctuation and standard (grammar, punctuation and
punctuation and usage). usage), but not enough to confuse or usage) significantly confuse or
distract the reader. distract the reader.
Total Points
USACGSC Form 1009W, May 2011. (Supersedes USACGSC Form 1009W dated May 2009) © USACGSC
Figure E-3. USACGSC form 1009w (Assessing Writing), May 2011, continued
95
E-4. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric

TASS Accreditation Rubric AY2012
Situational Awareness
Table E-1. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Environmental

Teaching and Learning (each staff group)
Category
(TRADOC Needs Meets Comments or
Unsatisfactory Superb Exemplary
Enterprise Improvement Requirement Not Observed
Standard)
And
high
speed
Access to access
Students And a local
CARL is Library to CARL
can access research library
Library difficult and resources are both in
CARL but no with a research
(Gov 9) no local available and and out
local library librarian are
library is accessible. of the
is available. available.
available. classroo
m is
availabl
e.
Classrooms
have adequate
The space, learning
The
classroom support
classroom is
marginally materials (e.g.,
not well lit,
meets basic boards, light,
not
educational and projection
environment And has
classroom capability) and And breakout areas
ally break
standards. comfortable have commercial
controlled, or out
Classrooms One of the seating wireless Internet
does not areas
(Gov 6) following is sufficient for access available to
provide for small
deficient: the ILE students and
adequate group
Lighting, educational faculty.
desk/work work. .
climate environment.
areas or
control & Classrooms
seating. No
HVAC, have Wi-Fi
Internet
furnishings Internet
Access.
and facility. Access for
students and
faculty.
And
Billeting is single
single room for room
each ILE living
Billeting Shared And billeting
Shared participant. accomm
Accommodatio billeting and includes
billeting and The room has odations
ns limited housekeeping
no internet. Internet access with
(Gov 6) internet. services.
that will non-
support shared
Blackboard. bathroo
m.
Environmental (page 1 of 2)
Acronym Key 12 MARCH 2012
CARL – Combined Arms Research
Library
Gov – Governance
96
Table E-1. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Environmental, continued

Category
Comments
(TRADOC Needs Meets
Unsatisfactory Superb Exemplary or Not
Enterprise Improvement Requirement
Observed
Standard)
And
And
Billeting is maintenance
Billeting Health or safety Facility maintenance
adequate, requests are
Maintenance issues are maintenance is requests are
sufficient and accomplished
(Gov 6) evident. deficient. a priority for
functional. in a timely
ILE facilities.
manner.
Dining
Facilities are
And dining
Dining facility sufficient and And dining
Dining facility facility
Dining hours do not are facility with a
lacks healthy provides
(Gov 6) meet the needs conveniently variety of food
food choices. healthy food
of the school. located from choices.
choices.
the classroom
and billeting.
Internet access
And students
No Internet is not Faculty and
have And students
Computers access is convenient for Students have
Commercial have Wi-Fi
Lab Access available faculty or access to Wi-
access to the Access in
(Gov 6) outside the student use Fi after class
Internet in lodging.
classroom. after class hours.
lodging.
hours.
Environmental (page 2 of 2)
12 MARCH 2012
Acronym Key
Gov – Governance
97

Table E-2. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Logistics

Category
Comments
(TRADOC Needs Meets
Observed
Standard)
A waiver is in
the classroom
that exceeds
There is
No waiver is on 16::2 or falls
documentary And
hand for each below 8:1
evidence the classroom
Waivers (if classroom that student to No interns
organization meets JPME
needed) exceeds 18:2 faculty ratios. count as
has taken standard. No
(Gov 17) or falls below a All students are students.
steps to greater than
8:1 student to properly
alleviate class 4:1.
faculty ratios. registered in
size limitations.
ATRRS and
confirmed by
DDE as eligible.
Classrooms
have adequate
Limited access
space, learning
or availability And And
support
Required of courseware additional additional
materials (e.g.,
instructional or references. instructional instructional
Class boards, light,
materials and Or classroom materials or materials or
Supplies and projection
references are supplies are references references
(CAC 34) capability) and
not available in provided at are made are made
comfortable
the classroom. faculty or available by available by
seating
student faculty. students.
sufficient for the
expense.
ILE educational
environment.
Limited
And
multimedia
The classrooms whiteboards And
No multimedia tools are
Presentation have sufficient or butcher smartboards
tools are available in the
Tools multimedia tools paper are are available
available in the classroom
(Gov 12) are available in available in in the
classroom. limiting
the classroom. the classrooms.
presentation of
classrooms.
curriculum.
Logistics
CAC- Combined Arms Command

Gov – Governance
98

Table E-3. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Teaching

Category
Comments
(TRADOC Needs
Unsatisfactory Meets Requirement Superb Exemplary or Not
Enterprise Improvement
Observed
Standard)
Encouragement And faculty And faculty

No student Some student
Student from faculty to portfolios uses
feedback is feedback is
Feedback to students to have student
evident in evident in
Faculty provide faculty abundant feedback to
faculty faculty
(CAC 20) feedback is feedback from improve
portfolios. portfolios.
evident . students. teaching
Some And faculty And faculty
No feedback
feedback Feedback from a portfolios uses
Feedback from others is
from others is variety of others is have feedback
from Others evident in
evident in present in faculty abundant from others
(CAC 20) faculty
faculty portfolios. feedback from to improve
portfolios.
portfolios others teaching
And the
students have
Students And
been given
Evidence of demonstrate they student
feedback
Assessments student can achieve dialogue
Assessments using a
are without assessment learning exceeds
(CAC 32) completed
feedback. is limited or objectives at the the learning
rubric that is
generic. required learning objective
maintained in
levels. levels.
the student
portfolio.
Teaching
CAC – Combined Arms Command
99

Table E-3. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Teaching, continued
Category
Comments
(TRADOC Needs
Unsatisfactory Meets Requirement Superb Exemplary or Not
Enterprise Improvement
Observed
Standard)
The classroom
There are no And
provides adequate And students
opportunities to There is poor students
Practical opportunity for get feedback
accomplish or no self monitor
Exercise (if students to from their
learning feedback their
observed) demonstrate peers and
objectives from peers or success on
(CAC 32) accomplishment of faculty on their
during practical faculty. practical
learning performance.
exercises. exercises.
objectives.
And faculty
Adult And
Instruction is fosters a
Learning Faculty uses adult dialogues
Faculty lectures faculty student-
Environment learning principals are student
centered centered
(CAC 32) lead
classroom
And
Faculty is current And has a
Missing any instructors
in USACGSC curriculum
Faculty element of have
Missing CV FDP1 and vitae or
Portfolios faculty graduate
or resume. foundational resume in
(CAC 32) qualification degree
workshops and faculty
requirements. transcripts
Battalion Train-up. portfolio.
in portfolio.
No evidence of Little faculty Written feedback
Feedback to And written And written
faculty feedback to to students is
students feedback is feedback
feedback to students is evident in student
(CAC 20) precise. detailed.
students. evident. portfolios.
And a plan is
Minimal apparent in And there
Student
feedback in IDP and is is evidence
Student IDPs counseling is
No IDP IDP or no signed by of student
(CAC 24) conducted using
faculty faculty for success in
the IDP.
signatures. every phase IDP
attended.
Student
Portfolio Student Portfolio
Student Student And evidence And rich
missing exhibits evidence
Portfolios Portfolio of faculty with faculty
evidence of all Phases
(CAC 32) Missing. feedback. feedback.
from previous attended.
phases.
Teaching
IDP – Individual Development Plan
100

Table E-4. USACGSC Enterprise Standards Rubric: Phase 3 and Graduation

Category
Comments
(TRADOC Needs Meets
Observed
Standard)
and AER is
and AER is prepared by
Academic AER is
prepared by TASS Faculty,
Efficiency No AER is AER is not prepared by
TASS Faculty signed by
Report issued to prepared by TASS faculty
and issued to student and
(AER) student TASS faculty and mailed to
student prior issued to
(CAC 22) student
to departure student prior to
departure
No diploma
and students
tubes or Diplomas are or students and students
are presented
Diplomas facsimile are mailed to are presented receive their
diploma tubes
(CAC 22) presented at students. See the diploma at AERs at
or facsimile at
graduation Note. graduation. graduation.
graduation.
ceremony.
Graduation and the

Graduation
Graduation ceremony in And students ceremony
No graduation ceremony in
Ceremony an auditorium walk across includes a
ceremony classroom
(CAC 22) or other the stage graduation
environment
suitable venue speaker.
Phase 3 and Graduation
Note: Grades must be certified by the USACGSC Registrar's Office

prior to issuing diplomas.
101
Glossary
Section I
Abbreviations
ADDIE analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation

AER Academic Efficiency Report
AIS Accountable Instructional System
CAC U.S. Army Combined Arms Center
CARL Combined Arms Research Library
CC core curriculum
COA course of action
CT critical thinking
DA Department of the Army
ELO enabling learning objective
FDP Faculty Development Program
FM field manual
GNI generalize new information
ILE intermediate level education
JPME joint professional military education
LEP Learning Environment Preferences
P&P publish and process
PE practical exercise
QAO Quality Assurance Office
SME subject matter expert
TASS The Army School System
TLO terminal learning objective
TRADOC U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command
USACGSC United States Army Command and General Staff College
USAWC United States Army War College
Section II
Terms
Accountable Instructional System (AIS)

The USACGSC ADDIE process.
ADDIE
Analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation.
Assessment of learning
The process of documenting the extent to which the students achieved the learning objectives. It
is usually defined in measurable terms gathered using any number of assessment instruments
designed to measure the intended learning outcomes.
Course
A discrete body of subjects arranged in a prescribed program.
Course author
A lead curriculum developer at the USACGSC who designs the courses and coordinates with the
lesson authors, other course authors, and teaching departments or schools. This allows for
building on other courses, avoiding unnecessary duplication of course materials, and ensuring
both horizontal and vertical alignment.
Curriculum developer
Anyone who develops curriculum (courses or lessons) in any school. Those individuals having
oversight responsibilities of curriculum are also considered curriculum developers.
Enabling learning objective (ELO)

The prerequisites required to achieve TLO. They are the minor topics identified in the topic
analysis. These are the standards identified in the TLOs written in action verb form.
Evaluation
A systematic formalized process of gathering and analyzing data (both qualitative and
quantitative) to determine the merit, worth, and significance of the program.
Learning outcome
A clearly defined snapshot of what graduates should be able to do at the end of a significant
learning event.
Lesson
A structured period of time designed to teach a particular subject or activity.
Lesson author
A curriculum developer who determines what and how much instruction needs to be developed
to meet the course goal.
Program
The integrated courses and other formally planned or scheduled experiences which constitute a
particular body of study.
Terminal learning objective (TLO)

A major topic identified during topic analysis. The level of learning of the TLO is always equal
to or at a higher level than the ELO.
Theme
A broad topic — an umbrella. Within the theme, curriculum developers design the academic
content and lesson materials appropriately integrating the themes throughout the curriculum.
103
Section III
Special Abbreviations and Terms
104

TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7 Army Educational Processes (2013)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7 Army Educational Processes (2013)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7 Army Educational Processes (2013)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department of the Army TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-7

Headquarters, United States Army

ARMY EDUCATIONAL PROCESSES

FOR THE COMMANDER:

OFFICIAL: MARK MACCARLEY

CHARLES E. HARRIS, III

Distribution. This TP is available only on the TRADOC Web site

This new publication, dated 9 January 2013-

o Addresses the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation processes

1-3. Explanation of abbreviations and terms

1-6. Philosophy of educational institutions

1-7. Degree programs

1-8. Accreditation agencies

a. Regional. Regional accreditation agencies include the Middle States Association of

e. Specialized accreditation. Some schools are accredited by specialized accreditation

2-2. ADDIE phases

2-3. ADDIE examples for educational institutions

Figure 2-1. Accountable Instructional System (AIS)

Figure 2-2. Hierarchy of educational outcomes, objectives, and standards

2-4. The five phases of the ADDIE

(1) Analysis components.

(e) Resource analysis. Identifies resources and constraints.

(f) Evaluation plan. Determines potential evaluation processes to measure course

(g) Milestone plan. Establishes target dates.

(2) Conducting an analysis.

(1) Design components.

(e) Design the evaluation plan and sample evaluation tools.

(f) Update resource analysis.

(g) Update milestone plan.

(2) Producing the design components.

 Action. An action statement specifies what a student should do as a result of the

(d) Writing learning objectives.

Caution: If statement has a conjunction, there may be two objectives.

(1) Select the method of instruction.

(2) Select the instructional media.

(3) Select and develop instructional material.

(4) Develop evaluation tools.

(5) Update resource analysis.

(6) Develop lesson plans and advance sheets.

(7) Develop assessment instruments.

(9) Produce the development components.

approximately 2 weeks, followed by a comparison of among the scores between the

3. ELO A.02 Application 4 Hours Independent PE 1 Product Application a. 10 points (Product)

 Figure 2-3 is an example of an assessment plan.

a. A 500-word, double-spaced, typed paper. This paper will be a critical discussion of

Figure 2-3. Sample assessment plan

(h) Develop assessment instruments. At this point in ADDIE, develop assessment

(1) Make final coordination.

(3) Teach the course. Focus implementation on teaching and learning.

(b) Assess student accomplishments of learning objectives. As appropriate, use

(e) Conduct formative evaluations with faculty. It is extremely helpful to provide

e. Evaluation. Evaluation in ADDIE is a continuous process that consists of data collection

3-2. Types of evaluation

b. Program evaluation (summative evaluation) is the use of research to investigate

3-3. Formative evaluation

(5) Evaluation. Is there a description of potential evaluation procedures?

(4) Course plan. Is the course plan progressive and sequential?

3-4. Program evaluation

b. Evaluation of the Army Enterprise Accreditation Standards. A program evaluation should

4-2. Variation in faculty composition