Design: The topic that should not be closed

2015

Coming from a background in the visual arts (MFA, Printmaking, 1983), I was puzzled when I began to work in instructional design and technology by the apparent centrality of design process models to the overall enterprise. While every field incorporating design uses and teaches processes for design, most do not seem to view the design process itself as a central object of focus in teaching and learning design. The focus of teaching in these fields is centered on developing habits of mind within those who will be designers, using design activities as the primary focus and design models as one possible support for those activities. In discussions with colleagues in the IDT Futures group we have speculated on why this may be so – we want to be seen a scientific ally-oriented field instead of craft- or arts-oriented one; we have traditionally embraced systems and communication theory, which tend to place process models front and center; our models started out as conceptual frameworks an...

Instructional-design theories and models, 1999

The purpose of this chapter is to provide some ideas that will help you analyze and understand the instructional-design theories presented in this book. First, we will explore what an instructional-design theory is. This will include a discussion of the role that values play in instructional-design theories and a discussion of what an instructional-design theory is not. In the second half of the chapter, we will explore the Deed for a new paradigm of instructional-design theory. In particular, we will look at the Deed for a paradigm of training and education in which the learner is at the top of the organizational chart rather than the bottom. Then we will look at the implications that such a paradigm has for instructional-design theory, including the extent to which some of the design decisions should perhaps be made by the learners while they are learning.

Instructional design (ID) models have been developed to promote understandings of ID reality and guide ID performance. As the number and diversity of ID practices grows, implicit doubts regarding the reliability, validity, and usefulness of ID models suggest the need for methodological guidance that would help to generate ID models that are relevant and appropriate to the ever-changing design challenges in our world. Because the construction of an ID model involves an intricate externalization of unique sets of design experiences as well as a logical synthesis of relevant research, the purpose of this study was to formulate a methodological framework for ID model development. Through the analysis of 20 selected studies, four critical dimensions and ten synthesized procedures for constructing ID models were formulated. The resulting framework is intended to provide a useful theoretical and practical contribution to the field of ID.

Performance Improvement Quarterly, 2015

practice on its own terms. While this was a promising start, a general lack of core understanding in the fi eld as a whole about how design is actually done has resulted in a number of attempts by researchers (Sugar, 2014) to explain the complexity of practice with limited success. Review of Literature Views of Design in the Field One approach has been to study practice based on how it conforms to existing ID theories or models. In Wedman and Tessmer (1993), 11 pre-identified ID activities were presented to instructional designers, who responded with how often these were used, whether or not they were used in their prescribed order, and whether or not they were all completed to the same degree. Noting that rarely do designers use most of these activities, and not always in order, Wedman and Tessmer proposed the layers of necessity model, later revisited by Winer and Vásquez-Abad (1995), which encouraged designers to input their needs into a base model for each unique situation. When ID practitioners began to move from a cognitive to a more constructivist approach, Kirschner, Carr, van Merriënboer, and Sloep (2002) began describing how ID models were becoming more of an inspiration for designers, and less a prescribed set of rules. The focus on how designers prioritize activities introduced by these authors, and the sense of temporal awareness that came with these ideas, also led to the Cox and Osguthorpe (2003) study of how ID practitioners use their time. The focus of this study was moving away from what instructional designers do and toward how they incorporate other aspects of designing, such as time management and task prioritization. Following these studies, Visscher-Voerman and Gustafson (2004) and Christensen and Osguthorpe (2004) turned back to the question of how designers interact with prescribed models, theories, and methods they had been taught. Both studies came to the conclusion that homogenous design methods were not widely practiced by instructional designers, but that a more adaptable, diverse, and heterogeneous approach is typically followed. Several of these efforts have led to the development of new models for designing, presumably reflecting better in their conception what designers actually do, but ultimately prescribing what they should do in an effort to ensure that following the model will produce optimal practice-an approach antithetical to broader views of design (Boling & Gray, 2015; Lawson & Dorst, 2009; Stolterman, 2008).. .. a general lack of core understanding in the fi eld as a whole about how design is actually done has resulted in a number of attempts by researchers to explain the complexity of practice with limited success.

Educational Technology Research and Development, 2006

Mental models are one way that humans represent knowledge (Markman, 1999). Instructional design (ID) is a conceptual model for developing instruction and typically includes analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (i.e., ADDIE model). ID, however, has been viewed differently by practicing teachers and instructional designers (Kennedy, 1994). In a graduate ID course students constructed their own ID models. This study analyzed student models for (a) what ADDIE components were included (by teacher, nonteacher), and (b) model structural characteristics (by teacher, nonteacher). Participants included 178 students in 12 deliveries of a master's level ID course (115 teachers, 63 nonteachers). Our conceptual ID model is presented, and the ID model task is described. Students most frequently represented design, followed by program evaluation, needs assessment, development, and implementation. In terms of structural characteristics, 76 models were characterized as metaphoric, 61 dynamic, and 35 sequential. Three interrelated conclusions and implications for ID learning are offered.

Journal of Education and Research

Instructional Design (ID) is a procedure for developing an educational or training programme, curricula, or courses sequentially and authentically (Branch & Merrill, 2011). This procedure enables instructors to create instructions, which involves the “systematic planning of instruction” (Smith & Ragan, 2005, p. 8), ranging from instructional analysis to evaluation (Mager, 1984). Thus, ID can be referred to as a “systematic and reflective process of translating principles of learning and instruction into plans for instructional materials, activities, information resources, and evaluation” (Smith & Ragan, 2005, p. 4). As such, taken as a framework, ID provides the process to create instructions based on the necessity of a teaching and learning environment. Thus, ID can be defined as a process to develop directions and specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction.

2007

This review examines instructional design models and the construction of knowledge. It further explores to identify the chilling benefits of these models for the inputs and outputs of knowledge transfer. This assessment also attempts to define instructional design models through the eyes and the minds of renowned scholars as well as the most outspoken educational psychologists such as Gagne, John Keller and so on. The review also summarizes a brief outline of these state of the art models for a better understanding and designing of future instructional design in the field of education. This critical analysis further investigates the significance of having a sound instruction in motivating our young learners to gain knowledge faster, to remember and the same time to continue learning. This paper also attempts to outline the good futures of an effective instructional design from the lens of distinguished scholars such as ASSURE, Gagne and John Killer. The role of interactive multimedi...

2005

The purpose of this literature review was to determine what evidence there is that instructional designers apply ID Models, as well as to establish what other activities and processes they might use in their professional activities. Only ten articles were located that directly pertained to this topic: seven reporting on empirical research and three case descriptions recounting development experiences. All ten papers pertained to process-based ID models. Results showed that, while instructional designers apparently do make use of process-based ID models, they do not spend the majority of their time working with them nor do they follow them in a rigid fashion. They also engage in a wide variety of other tasks that are not reflected in ID models.

The purpose of this literature review was to determine what evidence there is that instructional designers apply ID Models, as well as to establish what other activities and processes they might use in their professional activities. Only ten articles were located that directly pertained to this topic: seven reporting on empirical research and three case descriptions recounting development experiences. All ten papers pertained to process-based ID models. Results showed that, while instructional designers apparently do make use of process-based ID models, they do not spend the majority of their time working with them nor do they follow them in a rigid fashion. They also engage in a wide variety of other tasks that are not reflected in ID models.

2015

The purpose of this literature review was to determine what evidence there is that instructional designers apply ID Models, as well as to establish what other activities and processes they might use in their professional activities. Only ten articles were located that directly pertained to this topic: seven reporting on empirical research and three case descriptions recounting development experiences. All ten papers pertained to process-based ID models. Results showed that, while instructional designers apparently do make use of process-based ID models, they do not spend the majority of their time working with them nor do they follow them in a rigid fashion. They also engage in a wide variety of other tasks that