Research, Inspiration, and Methodology
There are many projects and much research that take place throughout a year. One meaningful starting point for me was the inspiration I found while studying the life of Buckminster Fuller. His concept of the “Dimensional Mind,” which he defined as the ability to think comprehensively across systems, forms, and scales, helped shape his era. This perspective opened new ways of thinking about solutions for a better world, and his contributions continue to resonate deeply today.
Allegra Fuller Snyder, Buckminster Fuller’s daughter, reflects on her father’s unique understanding of consciousness:
“I believe that Bucky’s concept of mind is fundamentally about processing through experience. By ‘experiencing,’ I mean fully engaging one’s entire self—not merely being present or observing something, but actively doing it” (Brammer & Bellerophon Publications, Inc., 2016).
Which Model to Use?
Some of my experiences this year involved using a variety of tools and software, but perhaps the most important foundation of all was the mental process behind course design. These cognitive processes were supported by instructional models and frameworks that guided the creation of effective learning experiences. Models such as ADDIE, SAM, and Kirkpatrick, along with taxonomies like Bloom’s and HTA, helped navigate the complexities of designing impactful courses.
Eventually, I came across a process, recommended to me by Dr. Reo McBride, that provides a more cohesive and evidence-based design workflow. The IDD Blueprint demonstrates how aligning frameworks such as TNA (Training Needs Analysis), FPI (Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction), and HTA (Hierarchical Task Analysis) can strengthen each phase of instructional design. Each framework addresses a distinct layer of analysis, and together, they ensure the instructional solution remains both strategic and performance-oriented.
