• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Buried in cloud files? We can help with Spring cleaning!

    Whether you use Dropbox, Drive, G-Suite, OneDrive, Gmail, Slack, Notion, or all of the above, Dokkio will organize your files for you. Try Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) for free today.

  • Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) was #2 on Product Hunt! Check out what people are saying by clicking here.


Wiki Report

Page history last edited by David Park 8 years, 7 months ago

HomeReport Presentation | Timeline  


The Kemp and ASSURE Models of Instructional Design
EDTC 6321.02

Group 2



I. Abstract


The purpose of this cooperative project is to compare and contrast the Kemp and the ASSURE Models of instructional Design. The Kemp Model is visually depicted with multiple ovals that demonstrate its nonlinear design process. While the ASSURE Model follows a set path of six steps that are progressive. The models both address common questions, which include who, and what do the learners know, where will the learning and actual performances take place, and what is the best delivery system to get the content to the learners.


II. The Kemp Model


Background and Model Description


The Morrison, Ross and Kemp model of instructional design, commonly referred to as the Kemp model, is one of many prescriptive design models (Ryder, n.d.)  that provide a framework to systematically design learning. Easily identified by its elliptical shape, the Kemp model uses nine key elements to design learning. The nine elements nest within two larger oval rings, each having its own key elements. While flexibility is a major part of this model, adaptivity, and multiple entry points are also important features.

As circles and ovals have no entry point, so the Kemp model does not have a single identifiable entry point to begin designing instruction. The nine key elements of instruction are:

 1.Identifying the instructional problem and articulating goals for designing the instructional program.

2. Identifying learner characteristics that will impact instructional decisions.

3. Identifying subject content and analyze  task components related to stated goals and purposes.

4. Stating instructional objectives for the learner.

5. Sequencing content within each instructional unit for logical learning.

6. Designing instructional strategies so that each learner can master the objectives.

7. Planning the instructional message and delivery.

8. Developing evaluation instruments to assess objectives.

9. Selecting resources to support instruction and learning activities.


Formative, summative and confirmative evaluation, along with revision reside in the inner oval model ring. The outer ring speaks to other learner environmental factors which impact learning: support services, planning, implementation, and project management. Thus, one can conclude the Kemp model displays a wide range of components and elements working simultaneously that are to be addressed in designing an instructional unit. For its seemingly completeness, the model is deemed to be holistic. (Hanley, 2009).


Designer and Learner Flexibility


The Kemp model is intended to allow instructional development to begin at any entry point and "...gives the designer the sense that the design and development process is a continuous cycle which requires constant planning, design, development and assessment to insure effective instruction." (Baturay,2008). The model design also allows a designer to work on multiple areas, choosing to focus as deemed by the designer.  As Baturay (2008) notes, along with the flexibility offered the designer, the flexibility is also built in for the learner. The learner can choose where to begin the instructional unit and also choose their own path of the instructional process to completion. This is the model's main characteristic that sets it apart from others.




The first Kemp model, an oval with the nine key elements nested inside, had one outer oval ring, which contained formative and summative evaluation components. In 1994, the model added the outer oval which include support services and implementation

(http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxh139/Kemp.htm)  The current model is the one described in this wiki and at the beginning of this article. The changes overtime in the model support Morrison, et al 's belief "...there is no single best way to design an instruction" (Baturay, 2008).




Formative, summative and confirmative evaluation, as previously mentioned, are named in this model. Formative and summative evaluation are common to most learning designs. Unique to Kemp's model is the addition of confirmative evaluation. Confirmative evaluation occurs after the summative assessment. This evaluation lets the designer know to what degree learner retention of content is successful over time after the instructional unit has been completed. The results may impact resource selection.





This instructional model for planning a lesson was developed by Heinich, Molenda, Russell, and Smaldino (1999). It provides an acronym that guides instructors in remembering the six steps that need to be completed to design and develop the learning environment for students. This model also serves as a guide to organize procedures, integrate technology and media, write lesson plans and do an authentic assessment of student learning.


  • The “A” - Analyze The Learner. This is a critical part of the design process because the instructor needs to know the background information of the student such as their prior knowledge, skills and attitudes. Without this information the instructor will not be able to develop measurable learning goals

  • The “S” - State Objectives. The objectives can be written in four basic parts starting with describing the intended audience, stating the expected student behaviors, stating the conditions of the observable performance and lastly a display of student proficiency.

  • The “S” – Select Media and Materials. Selecting a method of instruction, for example small groups, will facilitate the process of selecting the appropriate media and materials. The media and materials should enhance the method of instruction to help students master the learning objectives.

  • The “U” – Utilize Media and Materials. In this step the instructor will preview the material and make sure it is in working order. The learning environment will be prepared.

  • The “R” – Require Learner Participation. This is the stage of the active learning process where students are actively involved in the learning process. The instructor incorporates the teaching strategies that incorporate the power verbs in blooms taxonomy and they facilitate the learning process.

  • The “E” – Evaluate and Revise. It is identified as the final and most important step because revisions can be made to the instruction and the use of media and materials for lesson improvement and future student success.


How it should be used

This model should be used when the instructor is ready to integrate technology into their lessons and want to develop an assessment to “assure” that learning has taken place.


When it should be used

An instructor is ready to use this instructional model when they understand that integrating technology into the curriculum is the best way to make a positive difference in education.



IV. Compare and Contrast


Compare and Contrast Study of the Kemp and ASSURE Learning Design Models



 Linear process

 Incorporates Robert Gagne’s events of instruction

 Analysis is focused on the learner

 Popular with educators

 Emphasis on lesson planning and technology uses




  1. Analyze learners

  2. State Objectives

  3. Select methods, media, and materials

  4. Utilize media and materials

  5. Require learner participation

  6. Evaluate and revise




 Planning/Revision/Evaluation continuous throughout the development process

 Design is subject to constant revision

 Nonlinear; elliptical


 Does not address knowledge transfer

 Uses Gagne’s nine events of instruction:


  1. Identify instructional problems, and specify goals for design

  2. Examine learner characteristics that need attention

  3. Identify subject content

  4. State instructional objectives for the learner

  5. Sequence content within each unit

  6. Design instructional strategies for objective mastery

  7. Plan the delivery

  8. Develop evaluation for assessment

  9. Select resources for instruction and activities


 Useful for developing instruction that incorporates technology.



V. Conclusion


This paper compared and contrasted the Kemp and ASSURE Models of instructional design. The KEMP Model was found to be nonlinear and by design is subject to constant revision. It stands in stark contrast to the ASSURE Model which follows a linear path of six steps that need to be completed in order. Both models address the same questions of all instructional design models, which include who the learners, are, what they are to learn, where the learning and performances spaces will take place, and what is the best delivery system to convey the content to the learners. In conclusion, both models of instructional design are able to get the same job done and it is up to the individual designers to decide upon which one will be best for their project.  




VI. References


Baturay, M. H. (2008). Characteristics of Basic Instructional Design Models. Ekev Academic Review. Vol. 12. Retrieved from http://pathfinder.utb.edu:2080/ehost/detail?sid=d90ce896-fea4-4b64-8b29-5ce63506f2e4%40sessionmgr4&vid=9&hid=22&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=37018754.


Culatta, Richard (2011). Instructional design. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/


Grant, M. (2010). Comparing instructional design models. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/msquareg/comparing-instructional-design-models



Hanley, Michael (2009). E-learning curve at Edublogs. Retrieved from http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/10/discovering-instructional-design-11-the-kemp-model/


Kemp's Model retrieved from:http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxh139/Kemp.htm


Rakes, Glenda C., Dr. "ASSURE Model." ASSURE Model. The University of Tennessee at Martin, 11 Aug. 2002. Web. 01 Nov. 2013.


Ryder, M. (n.d.) Instructional Design Models. Retrieved from http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~mryder/itc/idmodels.html


Smaldino, S.E., Lowther, D.L., & Russell, J.D. (2012). Instructional technology and media for learning (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.




Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.