5000-4DI

Task_Analysis_Methods_for_Instructional_Design_----_Part_I_Task_Analysis_Processes.pdf

Chapter 1

What is Task Analysis?

Purpose of Task Analysis

"The first step in the design of any instruction is a task analysis to detennine what should be taught" (Polson, 1993, p. 219). Task analysis for instructional design is a process of analyzing and articulating the kind of learning that you expect the learners to know how to perform. Instructional designers perform task analysis in order to determine:

• the goals and objectives of learning • the operational components of jobs, skills, learning goals or objectives, that is, to de-

scribe what task performers do, how they perform a task or apply a skill and how they think before, during, and after learning

• what knowledge states (declarative, structural, and procedural knowledge) character- ize a job or task

• which tasks, skills, or goals ought to be taught, that is, how to select learning out- comes that are appropriate for instructional development

• which tasks are most important - which have priority for a commitment of training re- sources

• the sequencc in which tasks are performed and should be learned and taught. • how to select or design instructional activities, strategies, and techniques to foster

learning • how to select appropriate media and learning environments • how to construct performance assessments and evaluation

In order to design instruction that will support learning, it is essential that we understand the nature of the tasks that learners will be performing. This is true whether you are de- signing traditional, direct-instruction or problem-based constructivist learning environ- ments. If you are unable to articulate the ways that you want learners to think and the act, how can you believe that you can design instruction that will help them?

Assumptions of Task Analysis

This book is premised on a few important assumptions.

Task analysis is essential to good instructional design. Intellectually and practi- cally, task analysis is probably the most important part of the instructional systems design (IS D) process, and it has been thought so for some time. "If I were faced with the problem of improving training, I should not look for much help from the well-known learning prin- ciples like reinforcement, distribution of practice, response familiarity, and so on. I should look instead at the technique of task analysis, and at the principles of component task achievement, intratask transfer, and the sequencing of subtask learning to find those ideas of greatest usefulness in the design of effective learning" (Gagne, 1963). Task analysis provides the intellectual foundation for instructional design. It guides the process by ar- ticulating the goal or mission for the design process. Nearly every one of the instructional design models that were listed by Andrews and Goodson (1980), which is the most com- prehensive list of ISD procedures, includes some task analysis process. Some prominent design models ignore task analysis, relying (we suppose) on inspiration to direct the design process. We have seen too many instructional design projects fail to produce effective in- struction or learning because the designers did not understand the learning outcomes.

Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W. H. (1998). Task analysis methods for instructional design. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open('http://ebookcentral.proquest.com','_blank') href='http://ebookcentral.proquest.com' target='_blank' style='cursor: pointer;'>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from ncent-ebooks on 2021-02-27 11:27:58.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

4 Task Analysis Processes

Although task analysis emerged as a process in the behaviorist era of instructional design, task analysis methods have followed the paradigm shifts to cognitive psychology and onto constructivism. We argue that task analysis is just as important to the design of constructivist learning environments as it is to direct instruction, performance support sys- tems, or any other form of learning support. Obviously, designing learning environments to support constructive learning requires different analysis methods. However, whether designing programmed instruction, intelligent tutoring systems, or constructivist learning environments, designers must understand the nature of the learning they are directing, guiding, or supporting (depending on your philosophical perspective).

Task analysis is the least understood component of the instructional design process. Instructional design, as a process, is often generically described by the ADDIE Model-Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (Gustafson & Branch, 1997). Of those processes, implementation is probably the most poorly per- formed, however the analysis procedures are most often under-performed. Although analy- sis procedures, including needs analysis, learner analysis, context analysis (Tessmer & Richey, 1997) and task analysis are taught in most preparation programs, most instruc- tional designers possess insufficient skills in performing task analysis methods. They learn about task analysis, but they too seldom do task analysis. Most programs provide insuffi- cient design cases and practice in performing task analyses. When they do, they most often teach a single method. Probably two thirds of all task analyses that are conducted in prac- tice use some form of procedural analysis, so most instruction is procedurally oriented de- spite the cognitive needs of the learner. Procedural analysis is the methode de jour not be- cause it is the most appropriate, but because that is the only method the designers know. The primary purpose of this book is to show designers that there are numerous, more ap- propriate, and effective methods for conducting task analysis.

The apparent ambiguity of task analysis results from a lack of clear conceptions about the task analysis process. For instance, some (Miller, 1962) have argued that task analysis is an art, and as an art, is most dependent upon the skill of the task analyst. If task analysis is to be conceived of and performed scientifically, then some predictability needs to be added to the decision making process. Military and corporate operations reject the artistic conception, claiming that task analysis is a series of operations that must be per- formed in a consistent manner (too often defaulting to the procedural).

The ambiguity of task analysis also results from the confusing array of methods for performing it. Zemke and Kramlinger (1982) described the five most common ways of doing task analysis: the look-and-see (observation) approach, structure-of-the knowledge (hierarchical analysis) approach, critical incident approach, the process/decision flowchart (information processing) approach, and the use of consumer research techniques (surveying, interviewing). In this book we describe these and many other task analysis methods.

Task analysis also appears ambiguous because there are so many applications that result in so many methods. Task analysis, in some form, is performed by personnel psy- chologists, human factors engineers (including human-computer interaction designers, oc- cupational safety inspectors, and many others), curriculum developers, and, of course, in- structional designers. Task analysis is recognized as an essential process in the design of human-computer interactions (Diaper, 1989). However, most of the methods used to de- sign human-computer interactions focus on specific, procedural tasks to support computer interfaces and so do not transfer to instructional design. Task analysis methods for in- structional design are relatively specific to instructional design.

The ambiguity of task analysis also results from the myriad of contextual con- straints imposed by the setting in which the analysis is being performed. Task analysis is used in higher education resources centers, in training centers, and in management devel- opment and corporate board rooms. Instruction is needed in virtually every type of public and private agency. Where instruction is needed, task analysis should be performed.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? 5

However, each of these venues provides a different set of physical, sociocultural, organ- izational constraints. Tessmer and Richey (1997) have identified the range of factors that can affect the design process. The most troublesome constraint is the lack of commitment to task analysis. Too often training organizations design instruction without any compre- hensive understanding of the nature of the learning outcome.

The values accorded to task analysis is often low. Even when designers are skilled in performing task analysis, time constraints prevent them from undertaking any kind of analysis. Project managers do not perceive the need or importance of adequately articulat- ing tasks, preferring to begin development in order to make the process more efficient. We have seen too many elaborately packaged task analyses that clearly indicated an inadequate understanding of the cognitive and performance requirements of the task. Again, if you are unable to articulate how you expect learners to think and perform, how can you believe that you can design effective instruction?

Task analyses is uncertain. The irony of the ambiguity just discussed is that task analysis, as a process, seeks to reduce ambiguity in instruction by conscientiously defining the paramcters of any performance or learning situation. Yet, instructional design is replete with uncertain knowledge and multiple interpretations. So is task analysis. Not every as- pect of human thought and behavior can be identified or articulated. How can we reconcile this discrepancy? We cannot, so live with it. That is the nature of the design process.

If we attempted to eliminate all ambiguity in the task analysis, we would have to over-proceduralize a complex set of decisions - to develop a cookbook of task analysis. To develop recipes for task analysis would treat the vast variety of instructional problems the same. Although instructional design is not an art, McCombs (1986) claims that the success of the design process is largely dependent upon the reasoning ability of the de- signer. Instructional designers, including task analysts, need to be able to "think on their feet" in order to make effective decisions. Instructional design is a problem solving proc- ess, not a procedure. As part of this problem solving process, task analysis helps to iden- tify and structure what must be learned. Task analysis, we assume, is most effective when the right techniques and tools are carefully selected and applied by intelligent and well in- formed designers while solving instructional problems. Designers need to be informed about what task analysis procedures are available and given guidelines for selecting and using them. That is the purpose of this book.

Different contexts demand different task analysis methods; one size do es not fit all. Again, instructional designers too often leam only one or two methods for performing task analysis and thereafter try to force-fit all learning situations into those methods, often without success. As we said before, different instructional goals and con- tents require different approaches to deigning instruction, including task analysis. First, you need to decide what kind of analysis to perform Gob analysis, learning analysis, cog- nitive, activity, or subject matter analysis) and to learn how to select the appropriate method. There are many methods for performing each. Then, you must decide which of the many methods will produce the most appropriate outcomes for the given context. Each method for performing task analysis yields a different outcome that will result in a different kind of instruction. It is important to keep in mind the goal of all forms of instructional task analysis - producing better instruction.

We are not suggesting that designers become skilled in every method described in this book. Rather, we believe that it is important that instructional designers learn to per- form a variety of task analysis approaches Gob, learning, cognitive, activity, and subject matter) and investigate specific methods once a decision about the kind of desired instruc- tion a has been made. This book is designed as a handbook in order to facilitate that proc- ess - to provide just-in-time instruction on how to perform a variety of task analysis methods for the purpose of designing different kinds of instruction. So, let's begin with definitions.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

6 Task Analysis Processes

Task Analysis: A Description

Task analysis has many definitions, depending on the purpose for conducting it, the con- text in which it is performed, and the performers involved. Definitions of task analysis range in clarity from "the breakdown of performance into detailed levels of specificity" to "front-end analysis, description of mastery performance and criteria, breakdown of job tasks into steps, and the consideration of the potential worth of solving performance prob- lems" (Harless, 1979, p.7). Task analysis means many things because it is a complex process.

There are several purposes for conducting task analysis. Task analysis is used ex- tensively in developing job descriptions (job analysis). While the time-motion studies used to decompose jobs into assembly-line activities are no longer prevalent, employers still systematically analyze the jobs that are performed in their organizations in order to integrate workers' efforts more efficiently, especially in the military. Task analysis is used exten- sively in designing human-computer interactions. Designing software interfaces requires detailed analysis of users' needs and actions. Finally, task analysis is used extensively in designing different forms of instruction, including performance support, direct instruction, and open-ended learning environments. This final application of task analysis is the focus of this book.

In this book, we describe five general classes or kinds of task analysis that have emerged: job or performance analysis, learning analysis, cognitive task analysis, content or subject matter analysis, and a new class of analysis, activity-based methods (see FIG. 1.1). Not only do these approaches involve different procedures for fulfilling the purposes of task analysis, they also make different assumptions about how people learn and so provide different recommendations for how they should be instructed. They also delineate the ma- jor parts of this book (see Table of Contents).

FIG. 1.1. Domain of task analysis

Activity Analysis

Cognitive Task Analysis

Learning Analysis

Subject Matter/ Content Analysis

Job/ Procedural Analysis

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? 7

Job analysis is a broad category of processes that evolved from the industrial revo- lution. Industrialization brought about a reduction of jobs into elemental tasks that are per- formed by individuals in isolation. Industrial engineers used time-motion study techniques to reduce jobs to their simplest activities so that they could be learned quicker and per- formed more reliably. This approach produced a variety of job oriented task analysis tech- niques that were intended to describe the elemental behaviors involved in performing a job. Job analysis techniques (Part II) evolved as a planning tool for technical training. Although the trend injob design is to add complexity and constructive components to many industrial jobs, the same techniques can be used to describe those procedures.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, subject matter analysis evolved as the dominant curriculum planning tool in education. Bruner and his disciples focused on the structure of the discipline in order to plan curricula. This entailed analyzing subject matter content for its constructs and more importantly for how those constructs were related. The structure of subject matter became the focus of instruction. Subject matter remains a popular method for structuring instruction. Several methods are described in this book for performing subject matter analysis (Part VI) .

The revolution in learning psychology in the 1960s focused the attention of design- ers on the way learners were processing information as they performed tasks. Techniques such as learning hierarchy analysis and information processing and path analysis were de- veloped as part of this movement. Later, when learning psychology assumed a more cog- nitive psychological basis, methods for conducting cognitive task analysis (Part IV) emerged. The growth of cognitive task analysis methods was fueled by military efforts in designing intelligent tutoring systems. The human-computer-interaction research commu- nity contributed to the movement as well, albeit to a much lesser extent. Cognitive task analysis is a distinct enough kind of learning analysis with different enough assumptions and methods for other leaming analysis methods, so we have included their chapters in a separate part of the book.

More recently, anthropological mcthods have been applied to analyzing the learning process, ushering in situated and everyday conceptions of the human activity, only some of which are briefly described in this book. These activity analysis approaches (Part V) ana- lyze how people perform in natural, everyday settings. They attempt to document how humans act and the social and contextual values that affect that activity.

Each of these general approaches to task analysis focuses on a different aspects of the job or task being learned. Job analysis focuses on the behaviors engaged in by the per- former. Content analysis examines the concepts and relationships of the subject matter. Learning analysis approaches focus on the cognitive activities required to efficiently learn. Activity analysis examines human activity and understanding in context. Cognitive task analysis focuses on the performances and their associated knowledge states. Each ap- proach entails a different set of assumptions about how learner acquire skills and knowl- edge and how they ought to be instructed. Each of these approaches are represented by a variety of techniques that we describe in each section of this book.

Task Analysis for Instructional Design

Within the ADDIE Model instructional designers perform many different kinds of analysis, including needs analysis, task analysis, learner analysis, and context or environmental analysis. All of these forms of analysis are intended to define the requirements and pa- rameters of the learning situation - who the learners are, what they need to know, how they should perform, what skills they need to develop, and how the context may affect the design and learning processes.

Task analysis is most often confused with needs assessment. Why? Sometimes task analysis (or job analysis) is considered a type or part of needs assessment (Rossett, 1987), while others (Kaufman, 1977, 1986) distinguish between needs analysis

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

8 Task Analysis Processes

(prioritizing needs and determining their training and non-training solutions) and needs as- sessment that generates the needs for analysis . Also, task analysis and needs assessment use the same knowledge elicitation tools (see Part VII) and frequently the same or similar techniques to produce the same or similar results. In many respects, needs analysis mirrors task analysis. However, there are two basic differences between task analysis and needs analysis: purpose or function and sequence.

The purpose of needs analysis is to determine if learning is a solution to an identi- fied need, and if so, how serious the learning need is. The result is a prioritized inventory of learning goals. Essentially, needs assessment is the data gathering and decision-making process that instructional designers go through to determine the goals of any instructional system. Needs analysis identifies the present capability of prospective learners or trainees, the desired outcomes, and the discrepancies between those (Kaufman & English, 1979).

Task analysis, on the other hand, determines what must be learned to achieve those goals. So, starting with a statement of learning goals, task analysis is used to determine what actually gets taught or trained. It analyzes the learning situation for the purpose of making instructional design decisions. Its major function is organizing tasks and task com- ponents, as well as sequencing them.

Needs analysis first determines that an instructional need exists; task analysis ana- lyzes that need for the purpose of developing the instruction and assessment. In cases where a needs analysis is not conducted, when training goals are mandated or already es- tablished, then the analysis process usually begins with task analysis.

Task Analysis Functions

Much of the confusion about task analysis that frustrates inexperienced instructional de- signers results from a lack of agreement about what the process of task analysis involves. What exactly do designers do when they conduct a task analysis? That varies greatly be- tween situations and contexts. In some contexts, task analysis is limited to developing an inventory of steps routinely performed on a job. In others, task analysis may include all of the instructional design procedures prior to determining instructional strategies. Hersch- back (1976) described task inventory, description and analysis as the fundamental activi- ties. According to Romiszowski (1981), task analysis procedures pervade different levels of instructional design. At the course level, task analysis defines overall objectives. At the lesson level, objectives are refined and sequenced, and entry level requirements are speci- fied by task analysis. At the instructional event level, the detailed behaviors are classified. And at the learning step level, task statements are elaborated on, as individual steps in the task are identified. Each step of this top-down, macro-to-micro instructional design proc- ess is heavily dependent on task analysis.

Task analysis occurs in two separate phases. The task description phase consisted of identifying, refining and ordering tasks. The instructional phase consists of the proc- esses of (a) specifying goals, needs, and objectives; (b) developing analysis tools (such as taxonomies and learning hierarchies); and finally (c) identifying outcome specifications (such as product descriptions and training considerations). There is considerable disparity among instructional development models in terms of the components each includes as part of the task analysis process.

Next, we perform a simple task analysis of the task analysis process. We believe that task analysis consists of five distinct functions:

• Inventorying tasks • Selecting tasks • Decomposing tasks • Sequencing tasks and task components • Classifying learning outcomes

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? 9

These are functional descriptions of what designers do while performing task analysis. The task analysis process, as performed in different settings, may involve some or all of these functions. The combination of functions that are performed depends upon the context or situation in which instruction is being designed. Likewise, each function may be ac- complished by using the different techniques that we describe in this book. Just as the function being performed constrains the technique, each technique constrains each func- tion. So we must exercise care in selecting a procedure for accomplishing each of the task analysis functions. But first, let us describe the task analysis functions.

Inventorying Tasks and Content

The task inventory involves a process of identifying or, in some cases, generating a list of the relevant tasks that should be considered for instructional development. This inventory may result from a variety of processes, such as job analysis, concept hierarchy analysis, needs assessment procedures, and so on. How we arrive at the list of topics or tasks to be included in our system depends on the instructional context, the sociocultural context, the audience we are training/educating, and the organizational context and the goal orientation of the educational system (Tessmer & Richey, 1997). The inventory function of task analy- sis (discussed earlier) frequently functions similarly to determining optimals in needs as- sessment (Rossett, 1987).

JOB

Inventotng Tasks

TASK

Descr;lng Tasks

ACTIONS

FIG. 1.2. Task analysis and outcomes.

Selecting Tasks for Analysis

Some instructional development models, especially those in the military, include a separate procedure for selecting from the task inventory those tasks for which training should be developed. Since it is impossible to train every person on every task to a level of profi- ciency that might be required by the job, developers often must select certain tasks for training that are feasible and appropriate. According to Tracey, Flynn, and Legere (1966), tasks that are feasible and appropriate for on-the-job, school, and follow-up training should be selected. This selection process may also result from a consideration of various con- textual constraints, such as available time and resources, and so on (Tessmer & Richey, 1997). In order to select tasks for training, developers need to rank or assign priorities to their training objectives. Task selection is also performed to avoid instructing or training students on material they already know. Thus, those tasks that have already been acquired

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

10 Task Analysis Processes

are eliminated from the list of training objectives. As illustrated in Figure 1.3, task selec- tion normally follows the task inventory. It is not part of most task analysis methods. Rather it is part of the process of planning for task analysis and so is described in Chapter 2 in this first part of the book. There is no sense in describing or further elaborating tasks that learners do not need to know or which the organization cannot begin to train or assess. The result of the task selection is the final list of training objectives. In many design mod- els, selection is an implicit function, not one that is performed systematically. Having se- lected tasks for development, they need to be described and later sequenced.

Select Task Analysis Method

Chapter 2

Inventory Tasks

Select Tasks

Chapter 3

Discarded Tasks

Select Task Analysis Method

Chapter 2

Describel Decompose

Tasks Parts II - VI

FIG. 1.3. Sequence of task analysis process.

Describing Tasks, Learning and Content

Sequence Tasks

Classify Tasks

Chapter 4

Task description is the process of identifying and describing the components of the tasks, goals, or objectives identified in the inventory. Task descriptions may include listing: (a) the tasks included in performing a job, (b) the knowledge required to performs a task, or (c) the enabling objectives for a terminal objective. The exact motive for performing the task description function depends upon the nature of the information provided in the in- ventory. Task description always involves an elaboration of the tasks/goals stated in the inventory to a greater degree of specificity or detail. The emphasis here is thoroughness- ensuring that important instructional components are not excluded. This, in fact, is a pri- mary rationale for conducting the task analysis process.

Sequencing Tasks, Learning, and Content

Task sequencing is often implied by the inventory and description. However, the task se- quence is more than a simple description of the sequence in which the task is performed. It indicates the sequence in which the instruction should occur. Frequently, the sequence for performing the task implies an appropriate instructional sequence. For example, in training employees to perform certain jobs, the most appropriate sequence of tasks may be the one that models the job. However, the task performance sequence does not always imply the instructional sequence. The instructional sequence may also be determined by the content analysis or learning analysis processes or by the design model being used. For instance, elaboration theory (Reigeluth & Stein, 1983) prescribes a specific top-down, general-to- specific conceptual sequence for presenting material. According to other taxonomies of

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? 11

learning, the lowest levels of skills are taught first. Other methods suggest a procedural sequence identified in a flowchart form while other approaches, such as situated learning, prescribe a more concurrent learning of tasks and their subordinates, so the sequence is more simultaneous. The sequence that is recommended by any method depends on the as- sumptions that it makes about learning, which vary considerably.

Classifying Learning Outcomes

The final function in the task analysis process is where the performance and knowledge states required of learners are classified as to the kind of learning outcome required. What kind of information processing, cognitive activity, or physical performance is required to accomplish the task being analyzed? This usually takes the form of classifying the task statement using various learning taxonomies. Beginning with the lowest level or most fun- damental forms of behavior (reflexes), they describe increasingly more complex mental re- sponses or behavior (evaluation, problem solving, or strategies). The purpose of classify- ing learning varies with different instructional design models. Normally, however, taxo- nomic classification of tasks has at least three functions. Classifying learning tasks helps to ensure that there is (a) congruity between the tasks and the assessment; (b) congruity be- tween the task and the instructional methods (especially practice) that support learning the task; and (c) prerequisite sequencing (not requiring more complex task performances prior to learning simpler, prerequisite skills and knowledge).

Classifying learning outcomes pervades the task analysis process. That is, it is per- formed throughout the process. The classes of learning outcomes mayor may not be spe- cific to the kind of task analysis being performed, but since it is a requirement of virtually all forms of task analysis, it is described in Chapter 3 in this first part of the book.

Objectives: The Outcome of Task Analysis

Another component of the task analysis process that could arguably be included in the list of functions is the writing of behavioral, instructional, learning, or performance objectives. They are the most common component of all instructional development models (Andrews & Goodson, 1980). However, objectives are not a process; they are an important product of the task analysis process. Learning objectives may result from task analysis or from some other process, such as needs assessment. Kaufman (1986) claims that needs as- sessment is the birthplace of objectives, that is, objectives are often determined by needs assessment prior to the instructional developer being consulted. However, task analysis also is frequently responsible for identifying the learning objectives that guide instruction. as well as the standards and conditions that should be specified in the objective. Task analysis may start with objectives, or task analysis may produce objectives, but objectives are an epiphenomenon of the task analysis process.

Sequence of the Task Analysis Process

Task analysis, as performed in various instructional development models, involves some or all of the functions that we just described. The point is that the task analysis process varies as it is performed in different settings. So performing task analysis may entail only one, a few, or perhaps all of these functions. Not all task analysis processes involve all five functions. However, we believe that all task analysis procedures, regardless of the design model employed, can be described by one or more of these functions. That is, these func- tions are distinct enough to be identified in any task analysis process. An analyst perform- ing task analysis may perform two or more functions simultaneously.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

12 Task Analysis Processes

A concern of this chapter is the sequence in which the functions are performed when conducting a task analysis. Romiszowski (1981) recommended a top-down se- quence: inventory-sequencing-analysis-description. Many designers perform the inventory first, followed by a description. The point is that task analysis, however it is performed, includes one or more of the functions described above. Because the inventory, description, selection, sequencing and classification functions are the most universally performed, they are the ones that we recommend for conducting task analysis.

Although there is no universal temporal sequence in which task analysis functions are performed, we recommend the following as a general sequence that can be applied in most situations.

1) Inventory Tasks

The obvious first step is to identify the tasks for analysis. First, you must select a task analysis method that is appropriate for inventorying tasks (recommendations are available in each chapter). The inventory of training or instructional tasks frequently results from the needs assessment process. However, the inventory produced by the needs assessment process may be too vague. In other cases, training is mandated or automatic, so no needs assessment is conducted. The tasks involved in automatic training need to be identified. In many cases, an inventory results from the normal conduct of task analysis. Generally, when a needs assessment has not been performed, the first step is to inventory the tasks to be trained or taught.

2) Select Tasks for Analysis

Having identified all of the tasks involved in a job or curriculum, it is usually obvious that there are too many tasks to analyze or to develop training for, so the inventory needs to be evaluated in order to select the tasks. Feasibility is the primary concern here. Given limited resources, the analyst must evaluate the tasks identified in the inventory to determine which have priority in terms of criticality, frequency, or client preference (Chapter 2)."

3) Describe or Decompose Tasks

Having decided which tasks to further analyze and develop, the next step is to break down those selected tasks into their component parts. This is the step or function that most peo- ple associate with task analysis. This is where the type of task analysis is selected one of its methods utilized for task analysis. First, you must select a task analysis method that is appropriate for describing tasks (recommendations are available in each chapter). In de- scribing the task, you are identifying the operations (physical, mental, or activity) required to complete the task, the sequence of prerequisite tasks, or the constituent parts of a concept or principle. Description of a task is important because you want to avoid omitting an im- portant part of the instruction.

4) Sequence Task Components

Having broken down the task into its components parts, you next need to determine the instructional sequence that best conveys the task or that best facilitates learning the task. It is important to note that the instructional sequence does not always recapitulate the se- quence in which the task is performed. Many task analysis techniques recommend an in- structional sequence that contradicts the task performance sequence. The instructional se- quences most often recommended by task analysis techniques are top-down, bottom-up, or procedural.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? 13

5) Classify Learning Outcomes

Each of the tasks and task components need to be analyzed for the type of learning re- quired. Analyzing tasks serves to verify the sequencing of the tasks, particularly bottom- up or prerequisite sequences. The types oflearning are also used for determining appropri- ate instructional strategies, designing test items, and other instructional design operations. Analyzing tasks and components is used primarily to ensure that objectives, test items, and instruction are equivalent. Taxonomies for classifying learning outcomes are described in Chapter 3.

The sequence of task functions above provides a model which is applicable in many or most situations, but not all. As we indicated before, there is no universal temporal se- quence in which task analysis functions are performed. Analyzing tasks frequently pre- cedes the sequencing. In some cases, when tasks are already specified by a curriculum guide, the inventory and sometimes description and sequencing are not performed. The functions that are performed and their sequence are specific to the setting in which they are performed.

Selecting Task Analysis Methods

Parts II through VI describe 21 different methods for conducting task analysis for instruc- tion design. There are many more methods for conducting task analysis that are described in the literature, but we believe that they are too task-specific and therefore not generally appropriate for instructional design. These 21 methods may be thought of as the best task analysis methods for instructional design (we did not address many of the knowledge elicitation methods used in artificial intelligence and expert systems design). Understanding of any combination of the methods that we describe will likely expand your repertoire. Our primary goal in this book is to convince you that there are many methods for conducting task analysis. You should become familiar or facile with as many as possible. At the very least, you should be familiar with one or more methods of each kind Oob, learning, cogni- tive, activity, and subject matter).

Since we presume that you are currently familiar with only a few of these methods and therefore unable to accurately prescribe which method to use in any given instructional design context, an important question is probably which method should you use. Next, we briefly describe a decision-making process that reduces some, but not all, of the uncertainty in selecting a method for conducting task analysis. That is, we provide some suggested questions to ask. However, in order to make the best recommendation, you need to ex- periment with them. In order to select a task analysis procedure, you need to consider: • What kind of instruction do you plan to design?

- For performance support or procedural instruction, use a job analysis method. - For direct instruction, use a learning analysis method. - For problem solving or guided learning, use a cognitive task analysis method. - For more constructivist learning environments, use an activity-based method. - For content, subject, or topic-oriented instruction, use a subject matter analysis

method. • What task analysis function (described before) do you need to perform (inventorying, se-

lecting, describing, sequencing, or classifying)? Most methods in this book focus on in- ventorying and describing tasks. Many of them also provide suggestions about se- quencing tasks for instruction.

• What is the scope of the design - macro or micro (single task or complex performance in- volving many tasks)? The methods used to inventory tasks are more effective for macro-

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

14 Task Analysis Processes

level analysis, while the methods that focus on describing tasks are better for micro-level analysis .

• What context will instruction be delivered in? Leaming situations vary dramatically from assembly lines to large classroom to independent home study.

- For workplace learning, use ajob analysis method. - For direct instruction, use a learning analysis or subject matter analysis method. - For more constructivist learning environments, use a cognitive task analysis or an

activity-based method. - For information retrieval, use a subject matter analysis method.

• What experience or training do you or other designers have in conducting task analysis? Since most instructional design preparation programs provide limited opportunities to learn how to conduct task analysis and many design groups de-emphasize the importance task analysis, this will vary. The more skilled that you are in task analysis, the better will be the instruction that you design.

• How much time and what resources are available in any instructional design context to support different forms of task analysis, since they vary in complexity. The more com- plex a process is, the costlier it will be to perform. Cost is closely tied to the time re- quired for analysis, because analysis is a labor-intensive process. We believe that time invested in competent task analysis is easily justified. When instruction is inadequate, more often than not, it is because the task analysis did not identify important instructional requirements.

• What resources are available? Some TA methods will require access to subject matter ex- perts, workplace observations, considerable time to analyze the data, or multiple partici- pants at different stakeholder levels. Be sure that your project has the resources for the specific task analysis method chosen. Each chapter has an Advantages and a Disadvan- tages section to help you make this decision

Conclusion

Task analysis, we believe, is an essential part of any instructional design process, regard- less of whether you are designing technical training or constructivist learning environ- ments. Understanding and articulating the ways that learners need to think or perform is absolutely essential to designing effective instruction or learning environments. Too often, instruction fails to support learning because the instructional designers fail to perform a competent task analysis, resigning themselves to redundant, inappropriate, reproductive forms of instruction that do not support the kind of learning that the designers had really intended but were unable to analyze and articulate. Instructional design is premised on the congruity between learning objectives and instruction. That is, every theory and model of instructional design assumes that different learning outcomes require different forms of in- struction. We argue that different learning outcomes require different forms of task analy- sis. Just as no form of instruction fits all objectives, no form of task analysis fits all objec- tives or instruction. So it is important that instructional designers become competent with a variety of different forms of task analysis. Why? If you, as an instructional designer, are unable to articulate the ways that learners need to think and perform using appropriate task analysis methods, you have no business designing instruction to support their learning or performance.

This chapter has described the purposes, assumptions, and kinds of task analysis. We intend this handbook to function as a resource for instructional designers - to intro- duce them to methods for conducting task analysis and provide informational supports to help them begin to better articulate learning outcomes during the instructional design proc- ess. If you are one of those people, we hope that we provide some assistance through this book.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

What is Task Analysis? i5

References

Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A.(1980). A comparative analysis of models of instruc- tional design. Journal of instructional Development, 3(4),2-16.

Diaper, D. (1989). Knowledge elicitation: Principles, techniques, and applications. Lon- don: Ellis Horwood.

Gagne, R. M. (1963). Military training and the principles of learning. American Psycholo- gist, 83-91.

Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Survey of instructional development models, 3rd Ed. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.

Harless, J. H. (1979). Guide to front-end analysis. Newnan, GA: Harless Associates Herschback, D. R. (1976). Deriving instructional content through task analysis. Journal of

industrial Teacher Education, 13(3),6373. Kaufman, R. (1977). A possible taxonomy of needs assessment. Educational Technology,

17( 11), 60-64. Kaufman, R. (1986). Obtaining functional results: relating needs assessment, needs analy-

sis, and objectives. Educational Technology, 26(1), 24-27. Kaufman, R. & English, F. W. (1979). Needs assessment: Concept and application.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. McCombs, B. L. (1986). The instructional systems development (ISD) model: A review of

those factors critical to its successful implementation. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 34(2),67-82.

Miller, R. B. (1962). Task description and analysis. In R. M. Gagne (Ed.), Psychological principles in systems development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Polson, M.e. (1993). Task analysis for an automated instructional design advisor. In J. M. Spector, M. e. Polson, & D. J. Muraida (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Concepts and issues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Reigeluth, e. M., & Stein, K. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction. In e.M. Rei- geluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing instructional systems. London: Kogan Page. Rossett, A. (1987). Training needs assessment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Tech-

nology Publications. Tessmer, M., & Richey, R. (1997). The role of context in instructional design. Educa-

tional Technology: Research and Development, 45 (3). Tracey, W. R., Flynn, E. B., & Legere, e. L. (1966). The development of instructional

systems. Fort Devens, MA: u.S. Army Security Agency Training Center. Zemke, R. (1981). Needs analysis: A concept in search of content. Training, i8(8), 57-58. Zemke, R., & Kramlinger, T. (1982). Figuring things out: A trainer's guide to needs and

task analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

This page intentionally left blank

C op

yr ig

ht ©

1 99

8. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed