Teachers/Trainers
These are the people who will, in most situations, have the most direct control over the implementation of the instructional system you design. They can make it or break it (well, for certain, they can break it, if they want to).
Curricula
Academic or knowledge structures into which the instruction must fit should be known by the designer to assist making the new instruction “fit in.” The rest of the course of study, if there is one, should be known.
Philosophies. It is possible for opinion leaders, decision makers, teachers, or other critical players to hold general views, values and orientations which may need to be taken into account. An educator with a Education as Means for Social Revolution orientation, for example, may find it impossible to see instructional design as anything other than a tool of the military/industrial complex to indoctrinate the minds of the masses with knowledges and skills which will perpetuate and strengthen a corrupt social order.
Strategies or theories currently used. Teachers who subscribe to a variety of particular teaching method orientations, such as “inquiry learning,” “the learning cycle,” or the “whole language approach” will frequently find many of the basic tenants of instructional design to be intolerable (although it should be said that it is possible to accommodate most of these rather “natural enemies” when mutual respect, tolerance, and listening to ideas rather than terminology dominate the relationship).
Instructional hardware. Knowledge of what equipment such as computers and video equipment are available (what kinds and formats, in what numbers, where located, policies for use, current use levels).
General student information (classes, etc). Although more information about learners will be gathered specifically as learner analysis later, very early on we need to generally know who it is we are talking about developing instruction for. Frequently the kind of information which is conveyed by class and grade level in a school situation, or career field and career ladder information in a corporate or military situation is the kind of information needed. Your mind goes in very different directions when you know that the problem is with 2nd grade children versus management trainees (I think).
Facilities. Similar to equipment, we need to know what’s the realities for delivery. What if you were developing instruction that was to be used in the middle schools for an entire school system and you found out that every school was an “open building,” i.e., school buildings without partitioned classrooms. You would be glad you knew this, later on in the design process, when you were considering some delivery systems such as motion picture films which you might otherwise have considered using.
School or company organization & inst. decision-making info. You have to know how the organization is organized if instruction which you design is really going to be implemented. Who the decision makers are and how decisions are made are critical in actually performing the ID procedures—knowing who the real client is and who has the responsibility to approve design plans.
Community or corporate culture. Similar to above but broader. In systems terms, what’s the social and cultural supra-system in which this instructional system will operate? Knowledge of this can keep you out of all kinds of trouble, not only what kind of clothes to wear when you’re working there, but what words and even ideas are taboo in this particular sub-culture. If you’re developing instruction for IBM executives, it’s not a great idea to use Macintoshes in your example computer illustrations (this is not just a great joke—it’s really a true example from real experience). And when you’re working for 3-M, you don’t talk about making “xerox copies....”