Environment and Social Psychology

ADDIE Instructional Design Model Empowering International Chinese Language Learning: Mechanisms and Practical Strategies

Di Gao

International College, Krirk University, Bangkok, 10220, Thailand

Meiyu Wang

International College, Krirk University, Bangkok, 10220, Thailand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v11i1.4417

Keywords: ADDIE model; international Chinese language teaching; self-efficacy; creative climate; learning outcomes; learning satisfaction

---

Abstract

With the rapid expansion of global Chinese language education, traditional instructional approaches have become insufficient to address the needs of diverse and cross-cultural learners. Systematic and learner-centered instructional design has therefore become an increasingly important topic in international Chinese language education. This study develops and validates an integrated model that incorporates the ADDIE instructional design framework, self-efficacy, and creative climate, aiming to examine how systematic instructional design influences international Chinese learners’ learning outcomes and learning satisfaction, as well as the psychological mediating mechanism and contextual moderating effect underlying this process. Based on 466 valid questionnaire responses, structural equation modeling was employed for analysis. The results indicate that: (1) the implementation of the ADDIE model significantly enhances learning outcomes and learning satisfaction, demonstrating the effectiveness of systematic instructional design in international Chinese teaching; (2) self-efficacy plays a significant mediating role between ADDIE and learning outcomes, suggesting that systematic instructional design can improve learning performance by strengthening learners’ confidence and sense of capability; and (3) creative climate positively moderates the relationship between self-efficacy and learning outcomes, indicating that an open, supportive, and exploratory learning environment amplifies the positive influence of self-efficacy. Theoretically, this study extends the applicability of the ADDIE model to the field of language education and reveals the interaction among instructional design, learning psychology, and learning context. Practically, the findings provide strategic implications for curriculum development, learner support, and classroom innovation in international Chinese language teaching. Finally, directions for future research are proposed to further deepen the understanding of systematic instructional design in cross-cultural learning settings.

---

References

[1]. 1.Moloney, R., & Xu, H. (2015). Transitioning beliefs in teachers of Chinese as a foreign language: An Australian case study. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1024960.

[2]. 2.Church, A. T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological bulletin, 91(3), 540.

[3]. 3.Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Acculturation and cross-cultural adaptation of British residents in Hong Kong. The Journal of social psychology, 133(3), 395-397.

[4]. 4.Andrade, M. S. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities: Adjustment factors. Journal of Research in International education, 5(2), 131-154.

[5]. 5.Jiang, X., & Cohen, A. D. (2012). A critical review of research on strategies in learning Chinese as both a second and foreign language. Studies in second language learning and teaching, 2(1), 9-43.

[6]. 6.Yang, L., Zhang, Y., Kang, S., Wang, Z., & Wu, C. (2021). Microplastics in soil: A review on methods, occurrence, sources, and potential risk. Science of the Total Environment, 780, 146546.

[7]. 7.Schott, C., & Marshall, S. (2018). Virtual reality and situated experiential education: A conceptualization and exploratory trial. Journal of computer assisted learning, 34(6), 843-852.

[8]. 8.Lee, S. H., Chan, C. S., Mayo, S. J., & Remagnino, P. (2017). How deep learning extracts and learns leaf features for plant classification. Pattern recognition, 71, 1-13.

[9]. 9.Branson, R. K. (1978). The interservice procedures for instructional systems development. Educational technology, 18(3), 11-14.

[10]. 10.Bandura, A. (1997). Bandura (Vol. 2). FrancoAngeli.

[11]. 11.Mercer, N. (2019). Language and the joint creation of knowledge: The selected works of Neil Mercer. Routledge.

[12]. 12.Zou, D., Kong, L., & Wang, F. (2023). Students’ perspectives on a collaborative mobile-assisted grammar learning approach based on social constructivism. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(2), 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13256

[13]. 13.Wagner, P. (2008). Modernity as experience and interpretation. Polity.

[14]. 14.Suprun, N. I., & Kuligina, T. (2010). Entwicklung kritischer Einstellung im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Das Wort. Germanistisches Jahrbuch Russland, 151, 163.

[15]. 15.Kuo, Y. H. (2011). Language challenges faced by international graduate students in the United States. Journal of International Students, 1(2).

[16]. 16.Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1982). Social difficulty in a foreign culture: An empirical analysis of culture shock. Cultures in contact, 161-198.

[17]. 17.Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach (Vol. 722). Springer.

[18]. 18.Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction.

[19]. 19.Khalil, M. K., & Elkhider, I. A. (2016). Applying learning theories and instructional design models for effective instruction. Advances in physiology education.

[20]. 20.Reinbold, S. (2013). Using the ADDIE model in designing library instruction. Medical reference services quarterly, 32(3), 244-256.

[21]. 21.Cheung, L. (2016). Using the ADDIE model of instructional design to teach chest radiograph interpretation. Journal of Biomedical Education, 2016, 1-6.

[22]. 22.Campbell, P. C. (2014). Modifying ADDIE: Incorporating new technologies in library instruction. Public Services Quarterly, 10(2), 138-149.

[23]. 23.Nichols Hess, A., & Greer, K. (2016). Designing for engagement: Using the ADDIE model to integrate high-impact practices into an online information literacy course. Communications in information literacy, 10(2), 6.

[24]. 24.Allen, W. C. (2006). Overview and evolution of the ADDIE training system. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 8(4), 430–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422306292942

[25]. 25.Rosenberg, M. J., Reiser, A. R., & Dempsey, V. J. (2018). Performance support. Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, 132-141.

[26]. 26.Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Journal of educational technology & society, 11(4), 29-40.

[27]. 27.Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

[28]. 28.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.

[29]. 29.Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

[30]. 30.Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). Academic Press.

[31]. 31.Honicke, T., & Broadbent, J. (2016). The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. Educational research review, 17, 63-84.

[32]. 32.Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students' academic performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 138(2), 353.

[33]. 33.Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 130(2), 261.

[34]. 34.Elias, S. M., & MacDonald, S. (2007). Using past performance, proxy efficacy, and academic self‐efficacy to predict college performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(11), 2518-2531.

[35]. 35.Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). An investigation of Taiwanese high school students’ science learning self-efficacy in relation to their conceptions of learning science. Research in Science & Technological Education, 31(3), 308-323.

[36]. 36.Wong, S. Y., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2021). Uncovering Malaysian secondary school students’ academic hardiness in science, conceptions of learning science, and science learning self-efficacy: a structural equation modelling analysis. Research in Science Education, 51(Suppl 2), 537-564.

[37]. 37.Kim, S., & Jeon, J. (2020). Factors influencing eHealth literacy among Korean nursing students: A cross‐sectional study. Nursing & health sciences, 22(3), 667-674.

[38]. 38.Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021302408382

[39]. 39.Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107-119.

[40]. 40.Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students' understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 224-232.

[41]. 41.Yip, M. C. (2021). The linkage among academic performance, learning strategies and self-efficacy of Japanese university students: a mixed-method approach. Studies in Higher Education, 46(8), 1565-1577.

[42]. 42.Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357

[43]. 43.Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(3), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<235::AID-JOB837>3.0.CO;2-C

[44]. 44.Ekvall, G. (1991). The organizational culture of idea management/J. Henry, D. Walker. Managing innovations.-London: Sage Publications.

[45]. 45.Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Climate for creativity: A quantitative review. Creativity research journal, 19(1), 69-90.

[46]. 46.Amabile, T. M., & Gryskiewicz, N. D. (1989). The creative environment scales: Work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 2(4), 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400418909534321

[47]. 47.Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184. https://doi.org/10.5465/256995

[48]. 48.Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of management journal, 39(3), 607-634.

[49]. 49.Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C., Léonard, M., ... & Marsolais, J. (2003). Les passions de l'ame: on obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 85(4), 756.

[50]. 50.Kelly, T., & Littman, J. (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America's leading design firm. New York: Currency/Doubleday.

[51]. 51.Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., & Chanal, J. (2008). Optimal learning in optimal contexts: The role of self-determination in education. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 233.

[52]. 52.Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Holland’s theory. Research in Higher Education, 53, 550-575.

[53]. 53.Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

[54]. 54.Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., Keller, J. M., & Russell, J. D. (2005). Principles of instructional design.

[55]. 55.Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. New York, NY: Springer.

[56]. 56.Isaksen, S. G., Lauer, K. J., Ekvall, G., & Britz, A. (2001). Perceptions of the best and worst climates for creativity: Preliminary validation evidence for the situational outlook questionnaire. Creativity research journal, 13(2), 171-184.

[57]. 57.Kline, P. (2015). Personality (psychology revivals): Measurement and theory. Routledge.

[58]. 58.Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.

[59]. 59.Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological bulletin, 103(3), 411.

[60]. 60. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.