You are here:

Creative Needs Assessment in Instructional Design: Selected Examples

, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vancouver, BC, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-24-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


Typically, needs assessment is conducted to identify the gap between an actual product or situation and the perceived optimal solution. However, what is the ‘problem’ and what is the ‘optimal solution’, are questions that different stakeholder will answer in different ways. Needs assessment is thus first and foremost a communicative task that benefits greatly from creative techniques that address wicked problems. The paper offers hands-on examples for using design thinking and serious play to collaboratively find solutions for wicked problems. It provides readers with participatory development techniques and tools for orchestrating conflicting ideas, identifying singular needs and common goals, making productive use of diverse backgrounds and developing a shared vision.


Panke, S. (2016). Creative Needs Assessment in Instructional Design: Selected Examples. In Proceedings of EdMedia 2016--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 349-353). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 24, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Cantoni, L., Marchiori, E., Faré, M., Botturi, L., & Bolchini, D. (2009, October). A systematic methodology to use lego bricks in web communication design. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM international conference on Design of communication (pp. 187-192). ACM.
  2. Christensen, T.K., & Osguthorpe, R.T. (2004). How Do Instructional Design Practitioners Make Instructional Strategy Decisions?. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(3), 45-65.
  3. Kenny, R., Zhang, Z., Schwier, R., & Campbell, K. (2005). A review of what instructional designers do: Questions answered and questions not asked. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 31(1).
  4. Melles, G., Howard, Z., & Thompson-Whiteside, S. (2012). Teaching design thinking: Expanding horizons in design education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 31, 162-166.
  5. Merrill, M.D. (2002). Pebble-in-the-pond model for instructional development. Performance Measurement, 41(7), 41-44.
  6. Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance improvement, 42(5), 34-37.
  7. Reiser, R.A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational technology research and development , 49(2), 57-67.
  8. Rittel, H.W., & Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4(2), 155-169.
  9. Rossett, A. (1987). Training needs assessment. Educational Technology.
  10. Sanders, E.B.N., & Stappers, P.J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1), 5-18.
  11. Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Hirst, T., Mor, Y., Gaved, M., Whitelock, D. (2014). Innovating pedagogy 2014. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact