3. Bloom, Gagné, WCAG, SCORM, Kirkpatrick: Are These Competing Frameworks? | Instructional Design

Bloom, Gagné, WCAG, SCORM, Kirkpatrick: are these competing theories? A new instructional designer is told to "use the right framework", picks one, ignores the rest… and the course fails an accessibility audit. In Part 03 of this series, we sort the most common instructional design frameworks into a simple four-layer "framework stack", using a real Grade 5 fractions eLearning module as the worked example. You'll learn: ✔ The 4 layers: process (ADDIE, SAM), design (Backward Design, Bloom, Mager ABCD, Webb's DOK, Gagné, Merrill), learning science (Cognitive Load Theory, Mayer, CRA, scaffolding, UDL, ARCS) and standards (CCSS, IM K–5, WCAG 2.1 AA, SCORM 1.2, Kirkpatrick) ✔ Why standards like WCAG and SCORM are requirements, not options ✔ Why Kirkpatrick Levels 1–2 are the realistic scope for a single K–12 module ✔ The rule of thumb: only cite a framework that changed a real decision ✔ A 12-minute practice activity and a 4-question knowledge check For instructional designers, eLearning developers, K–12 curriculum teams and L&D professionals. ⏱ Chapters 0:00 How do you decide what goes into a course? 1:11 Are these competing theories? 2:46 What you will learn 4:54 The framework stack: four layers 8:32 The four layers in a Grade 5 fractions project 12:10 Standards & quality frameworks 18:06 Framework & theory references 20:07 Try it: sort the frameworks 23:02 Check your understanding 24:01 Key takeaways Up next: Part 04 – Backward Design and Measurable Objectives 💬 Comment below: which layer do you lean on least in your own work, and what risk does that create? #InstructionalDesign #eLearning #LearningDesign