The Instructional Design Knowledge Base

Theory, Research, and Practice

Rita C. Richey, James D. Klein, Monica W. Tracey

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2010
• ISBN:
  9781136895401
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Education
• Categoría: Education General

The Instructional Design Knowledge Base: Theory, Research and Practice provides ID professionals and students at all levels with a comprehensive exploration of the theories and research that serve as a foundation for current and emerging ID practice. This book offers both current and classic interpretations of theory from a range of disciplines and approaches. It encompasses general systems, communication, learning, early instructional, media, conditions-based, constructivist design and performance-improvement theories.

Features include:

• 
  
  

• rich representations of the ID literature
• concise theory summaries
• specific examples of how theory is applied to practice
• recommendations for future research
• a glossary of related terms
• a comprehensive list of references.

A perfect resource for instructional design and technology doctoral, masters and educational specialist certificate programs, The Instructional Design Knowledge Base provides students and scholars with a comprehensive background for ID practice and a foundation for future ID thinking.

1
THE DIMENSIONS OF AN INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN KNOWLEDGE BASE

Instructional design (ID) today is an established profession, as well as an area of study. As a profession, it consists of a series of well-defined competencies, and an active group of practitioners who work in increasingly complex and sophisticated environments. As an area of study, it has a rich and growing foundation of research and theory viewed from increasingly diverse points of view. Both the practice and the study of ID can be seen in two ways: as strategies for creating particular products and as the implementation and management of the overall design process. In either of these orientations ID is a planning process. As such, it is distinguished from development processes, the actual production of instructional materials.

The immediate precursors of this field were research and development of training materials produced during World War II and the programmed instruction movement (Reiser, 2007a). However, the ID field did not emerge in a formal sense until the 1960s in higher education settings, even though the term “instructional design” was not typically used until the 1970s. Instead many designers thought of themselves as educational psychologists, media specialists, or perhaps training designers (Dick, 1987). Since the 1980s, the preponderance of ID practice has occurred in the private sector, primarily in business and industrial settings. However, designers also work in government and military settings, health care, P–12 schools, and even in nonprofit and community settings. Correspondingly, there are hundreds of academic programs that educate and train these professionals.

Designers work with all types of instruction, including employee training workshops, online and web-based instruction, and train-the-trainer programs. Moreover, in the current milieu, instructional designers also deal with noninstructional interventions created to solve workplace problems for which training is not the appropriate solution.

This book is not about how to design instruction, but rather it explores the intellectual foundations of the ID field, its knowledge base. We will consider the wide range of ID theoretical and conceptual foundations that currently shape the field. In doing so, we will examine eight clusters of theories, the underlying philosophical orientations of each, the evolution of such thinking, and the research which supports these theories. In addition, we will explore the traditional and emerging applications of each theory to ID. Before we begin this task, however, we will discuss:

• The dimensions of ID; and

• The nature of disciplinary knowledge bases, including the role of theories and models.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN: AN OVERVIEW

ID, even though it is an established field, is at times viewed from various perspectives. In this section we will first examine alternative definitions of ID and then present the one that we are using here. In addition we will explore the scope of the field and its major areas of concern.

The Definition of Instructional Design

ID has been defined over the years in a variety of ways. Most of the definitions highlight process. Smith and Ragan’s (2005) definition fits into this genre, although theirs is quite generalized. To them, ID is “the systematic and reflective process of translating principles of learning and instruction into plans for instructional materials, activities, information resources, and evaluation” (p. 4). This definition emphasizes ID’s scientific foundations and the range of products emanating from ID projects. The vast majority of process-oriented definitions, however, are closely tied to the traditional instructional systems design (ISD) process (i.e., analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation). Dick, Carey, and Carey (2009) simply say that ID is ISD. While others may not be as direct, in essence they are agreeing with this approach (see Morrison, Ross, & Kemp, 2007; Piskurich, 2006; Seels & Glasgow, 1998 for example).

One exception would be Reigeluth (1983), who interprets ID as a facet of instruction, “the process of deciding what methods of instruction are best for bringing about desired changes in student knowledge and skills for a specific course content and a specific student population” (p. 7). Reigeluth’s orientation accentuates strategy selection and de-emphasizes the analysis phase; it is also less compatible with the current emphasis on non-instructional interventions. Nonetheless, here too design is viewed as a planning activity.

Some ID definitions stress function more than process. Gustafson and Branch (2007) say that “Instructional design (ID) is a systematic process that is employed to develop education and training programs in a consistent and reliable fashion” (p. 11). Piskurich (2006) posits that “Instructional design stripped to its basics is simply a process for helping you to create effective training in an efficient manner” (p. 1). Another function-oriented interpretation of ID is presented by Reigeluth (1983). He describes ID as “a body of knowledge that prescribes instructional actions to optimize desired outcomes, such as achievement and affect” (p. 5).

In spite of the alternative emphases of these various definitions, we believe that there would likely be little fundamental disagreement among these scholars as to the essential nature of ID. We presume that most would agree with Smith and Ragan’s (2005) position that “Design is distinguished from other forms of instructional planning by the level of precision, care and expertise that is employed in the planning, development, and evaluation process” (p. 6). In keeping with this position, we think:

ID is the science and art of creating detailed specifications for the development, evaluation, and maintenance of situations which facilitate learning and performance.

The Scope of Instructional Design

ID encompasses a broad range of activity from analysis through evaluation. It includes the initial planning steps in a project and often works through the creation of procedures that ensure the continued operation of the intervention. At times, design tasks are blurred with development tasks. Some designers write materials such as trainer’s guides, work sheets, or job aids. While they typically make media selection decisions, they seldom produce the final piece of mediated instruction. Even though many view evaluation as a separate activity, designers typically write test items and collect performance data. They also often conduct evaluations of existing products. While designers are intimately concerned with the delivery of instruction, they are not necessarily teachers or trainers.

To many designers, ID processes are almost synonymous with the various design phases. But ID knowledge (and consequently the entire knowledge base) addresses more than the procedural steps in these phases. ID knowledge relates to a wide variety of topics that impact many parts of the design process. We picture the ID knowledge base as relating to the following six content domains:

• Learners and Learning Processes;

• Learning and Performance Contexts;

• Content Structure and Sequence;

• Instructional and Noninstructional Strategies;

• Media and Delivery Systems; and

• Designers and Design Processes.

These topics cover the most critical ID concepts, processes, and research.¹ Design is intimately involved with learning and with learners. The arrays of instructional and noninstructional strategies are often dependent upon our understanding of how people learn and perform and how their backgrounds impact learning and performance. Design processes are also dependent upon the nature of the content, the type of learning environment, and the many media and delivery options that can be incorporated into a particular design. Moreover, design processes are impacted to some extent by the characteristics of the designers themselves.

These domains encompass a broad array of specific elements that play a role in ID. Learning contexts, for example, refer to instructional settings as well as organizational climates. Each domain impacts the traditional design phases in multiple ways. These domains, however, are not distinct unto themselves, and in many cases they overlap. Figure 1.1 portrays a view of the major domains of the ID knowledge base.

1 While evaluation is usually considered a part of the instructional design process, we are viewing the general field of evaluation as a separate area of research and practice, one upon which designers draw as they do their work. We discuss evaluation topics at various points in this book, but do not view it as a distinct ID domain.

Figure 1.1 The Domains of the Instructional Design Knowledge Base.

Throughout this book, we will build on this framework as we explore the ID knowledge base in detail. We will identify the many elements of ID and thereby expand these domains through an investigation of the major sources of ID knowledge.

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A KNOWLEDGE BASE

In this section we will discuss knowledge bases in general, beginning with an examination of what a knowledge base is from our point of view. Theory is a principle component of any disciplinary knowledge base, and we will describe the various types of theory and their uses. However, in the ID field many types of models also dominate thinking. Consequently, we also explore the nature of models here.

The Nature of Disciplinary Knowledge

In the simplest interpretation, a knowledge base is what a field has learned about itself over time. As such, a knowledge base is always growing and is never static; there is an evolutionary quality to it. A knowledge base is dependent upon the collective ingenuity of those who have worked or studied in a field. Knowledge bases can also be influenced by the advancements in other related disciplines and professions, since fields are seldom isolated entities. Finally, knowledge bases are infused with the problems and issues that have defined a field throughout its history, and by the various positions taken with respect to these issues.

The Components of a Knowledge Base

In simpler and more concrete terms, Lundvall and Johnson (1994) see knowledge bases as consisting of four components:

• Know-what;

• Know-why;

• Know-how; and

• Know-who.

This view can be applied to ID knowledge. Design consists of factual knowledge relating to many topics, such as the definitions of a mental model or a learning hierarchy. The knowledge base also consists of scientific knowledge, such as information processing theory or findings from current brain research and their implications for formal learning. The knowledge gained from research provides the rationale for solving design problems in a given way. Designers, of course, have skills—how to perform the many tasks that are part of ID. For example, they need to know how to conduct a task analysis or how to construct a design document. Finally, designers (especially those with academic training) know of the people who have contributed to the ID field, and in turn to its knowledge base. For example, they would know of Robert Gagné’s contributions to the field.

The components of the ID knowledge base can be viewed in two ways: as theoretical knowledge and as practical knowledge. Wallace (1979) distinguishes these two concepts in this way: “Theoretical knowledge has for its end the attainment of truth and that alone, whereas practical knowledge seeks truth as a means to an end, so as to order it to practice or operation” (p. 263). In other words, knowledge can be an end in itself, or the end can be exemplary practice. These orientations, however, are not mutually exclusive. Theories can be practical and applied as well as abstract, and practical knowledge can be based upon theoretical knowledge. Wallace (1979) calls disciplines that are both theoretical and practical the practice sciences. This is similar to John Dewey’s very early discussion of “linking sciences”—those whi...

Índice

• CONTENTS
• LIST OF TABLES
• LIST OF FIGURES
• PREFACE
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• 1 THE DIMENSIONS OF AN INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN KNOWLEDGE BASE
• 2 GENERAL SYSTEMS THEORY
• 3 COMMUNICATION THEORY
• 4 LEARNING THEORY
• 5 EARLY INSTRUCTIONAL THEORY
• 6 MEDIA THEORY
• 7 CONDITIONS-BASED THEORY
• 8 CONSTRUCTIVIST DESIGN THEORY
• 9 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT THEORY
• 10 A TAXONOMY OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN KNOWLEDGE BASE
• GLOSSARY
• REFERENCES
• INDEX