The practice of educational/instructional design

Handbook of Design in Educational Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 5-19

  Ertmer, Peggy A ^a   Parisio, Martin L ^a   Wardak, Dewa ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886702112     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203075227-7     Document Type: Chapter

References (91)

1. Archer, L. B. (1965). Systematic Method for Designers. London: Council for Industrial Design.
2. Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 427–441.
3. Bennett, S., Thomas, L., Agostinho, S., Lockyer, L., Jones, J., & Harper, B. (2011). Understanding the design context for Australian university teachers: Implications for the future of learning design. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(2), 151–167.
4. Bird, J., Morgan, C., & O’Reilly, M. (2007). Exploring the tensions in educational and instructional design in Australian universities. In M. Keppell (Ed.), Instructional Design: Case Studies in Communities of Practice (pp. 19–35). Hershey, PA: Information Science.
5. Blackwell, A. F., Eckert, C. M., Bucciarelli, L. L., & Earl, C. F. (2009). Witnesses to design: A phenomenology of comparative design. Design Issues, 25(1), 36–47.
6. Booch, G., Maksimchuk, R. A., Engle, M. W., Young, B. J., Conallen, J., & Houston, K. A. (2007). Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7. Boot, E., & Kremer, J. (2006). Communicating complex instructional designs to different stakeholders. Paper presented at the The Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation & Education Conference (I/ITSEC). Retrieved November 30, 2011, from http://ntsa.metapress.com/link.asp?id=0xhtb2jpq75ftq69.
8. Boot, E., Nelson, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Gibbons, A. S. (2007). Stratification, elaboration and formalization of design documents: Effects on the production of instructional materials. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 917–933.
9. Boot, E., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Theunissen, N. C. M. (2008). Improving the development of instructional software: Three building-block solutions to interrelate design and production. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1275–1292.
10. Boot, E., van Merriënboer, J., & Veerman, A. (2007). Novice and experienced instructional software developers: Effects on materials created with instructional software templates. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 647–666.
11. Botturi, L. (2005). A framework for the evaluation of visual languages for instructional design: The case of E2ML. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(4), 329–351.
12. Botturi, L. (2006). E2ML: A visual language for the design of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54, 265–293.
13. Botturi, L. (2008). E2ML: A tool for sketching instructional designs. In L. Botturi & T. Stubbs (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Languages for Instructional Design: Theories and Practices. New York: Information Science Reference.
14. Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31, 399–413.
15. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24, 413–426.
16. Cameron, L., & Gotlieb, C. (2009). Students participating in the learning design process using LAMS. In L. Cameron & J. Dalziel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International LAMS Conference 2009: Opening Up Learning Design. Sydney: LAMS Foundation.
17. Carr, A. (1997). User-design in the creation of human learning systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 5–22.
18. Carr-Chellman, A., Cuyar, C., & Breman, J. (1998). User-design: A case application in health care training. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 97–114.
19. Conole, G. (2010). An overview of design representations. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning. Aalborg, Denmark.
20. Cook, D. A. (2007). Web-based learning: Pros, cons and controversies. Clinical Medicine: Journal of the Royal College of Physicians, 7(1), 37–42.
21. Cox, S., & Osguthorpe, R. (2003). How do instructional design professionals spend their time? TechTrends, 47(3), 45–47.
22. Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer.
23. Cross, N. (2007). From a design science to a design discipline: Understanding designerly ways of knowing and thinking. In R. Michel (Ed.), Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects (Part 2; pp. 41–54). Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser Verlag.
24. Dell’Era, C., & Verganti, R. (2010). Collaborative strategies in design-intensive industries: Knowledge diversity and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(1), 123–141.
25. Derntl, M., Figl, K., Botturi, L., & Boot, E. (2006). A classification framework for educational modeling languages in instructional design. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2006). Retrieved December 10, 2011, from http://eprints.cs.univie.ac.at/539/.
26. Der-Thanq, C., Hung, D., & Wang, Y. M. (2007). Educational design as a quest for congruence: The need for alternative learning design tools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 876–884.
27. Dicks, D., & Ives, C. (2008). Instructional designers at work: A study of how designers design. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 32(2), 91–108.
28. Dudczak, C. A. (1995, November). Heuristic elements of plausible reasoning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association. San Antonio, Texas.
29. Eckert, C. M., Blackwell, A. F., Bucciarelli, L. L., & Earl, C. F. (2010). Shared conversations across Design. Design Issues, 26(3), 27–39.
30. Ertmer, P. A., & Cennamo, K. C. (2007). The Denny Clifford case. In P. A. Ertmer & J. Quinn (Eds.), The ID Case-Book: Case Studies in Instructional Design (pp. 27–31). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
31. Ertmer, P. A., Stepich, D. A., York, C. S., Stickman, A., Wu, X., Zurek, S., et al. (2008). How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 17–42.
32. Ertmer, P. A., York, C. S., & Gedik, N. (2009). Learning from the pros: How experienced designers translate ID models into practice. Educational Technology, 49(1), 19–26.
33. Gentry, C. (1994). Introduction to Instructional Development: Process and Technique. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
34. Gibbons, A., Botturi, L., Boot, E., & Nelson, J. (2008). Design languages. In M. J. Spector et al. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 633–645). New York: Erlbaum.
35. Goodyear, P. (2010). Emerging methodological challenges for educational research. In L. Markauskaite, P. Freebody, & J. Irwin (Eds.), Methodological Choice and Design: Scholarship, Policy and Practice in Social and Educational Research (pp. 253–266). London: Springer.
36. Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. (2008). University students’ approaches to learning: Rethinking the place of technology. Distance Education, 29(2), 141–152.
37. Greer, M. (1992). ID Project Management: Tools and Techniques for Instructional Designers and Developers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
38. Gunawardena, C., Wilson, P., & Nolla, A. (2003). Culture and online education. In M. Moore & W. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education (pp. 753–775). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Hagstrom, F. (2006). Formative learning and assessment. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(1), 24–36.
40. Hardré, P. L., Ge, X., & Thomas, M. K. (2006). An investigation of development toward instructional design expertise. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 19(4), 63–90.
41. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23–48.
42. Hokanson, B. (2008). The virtue of paper: Drawing as a means to innovation in instructional design. In L. Botturi & T. Stubbs (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Languages for Instructional Design: Theories and Practices. New York: Information Science Reference.
43. Hoogveld, A. W., Paas, F., Jochems, W. M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2001). The effects of a Web-based training in an instructional systems design approach on teachers’ instructional design behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 363–371.
44. Hoogveld, A. W., Paas, F., Jochems, W. M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2002). Exploring teachers’ instructional design practices from a systems design perspective. Instructional Science, 30, 291–305.
45. Hoogveld, A. W., Paas, F., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2005). Training higher education teachers for instructional design of competency-based education: Product-oriented versus process-oriented worked examples. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(3), 287–297.
46. Jin, S. H., & Boling, E. (2010). Instructional designer’s intentions and learners’ perceptions of the instructional functions of visuals in an e-Learning context. Journal of Visual Literacy, 29(2), 143–166.
47. Johari, A., Bentley, J., Tinney, M., & Chia, B. (2005). Intercultural Internet-based learning: Know your audience and what it values. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 117–127.
48. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Technology as cognitive tools: Learners as designers. ITForum Paper, 1, 1–7. Retrieved December 10, 2011 from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper1/paper1.html.
49. Jones, C., Dirckinck-Homfeld, L., & Lindstrom, B. (2006). A relational, indirect, meso-level approach to CSCL design in the next decade. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 35–56.
50. Jones, T., & Richey, R. (2000). Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 63–80.
51. Keppell, M. J., & Gale, T. (2007). Instructional Design: Case Studies in Communities of Practice. Hershey, PA: Information Science.
52. Kirschner, P., Carr, C., van Merriënboer, J., & Sloep, P. (2002). How expert designers design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 15(4), 86–104.
53. Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547.
54. Könings, K., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. (2011). Participatory instructional redesign by students and teachers in secondary education: Effects on perceptions of instruction. Instructional Science, 39, 737–762.
55. Könings, K., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010). An approach to participatory instructional design in secondary education: An exploratory study. Educational Research, 52(1), 45–59.
56. Larson, M., & Lockee, B. (2004). Instructional design practice: Career environments, job roles, and a climate of change. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(1), 22–40.
57. Layng, J. (1997). Parallels between project management and instructional design. Performance Management, 36(6), 16–20.
58. Liang, C. C. (2000). Patterns of expert ID practitioners in the corporate world: A literature review. TechTrends, 44(1), 16–18.
59. Lim, C. P. (2008). Spirit of the game: Empowering students as designers in schools? British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 996–1003.
60. Lovitt, C., & Clarke, D. (2011). A designer speaks. Educational Designer, 1(4), 1–25.
61. Martin, F. (2011). Instructional design and the importance of instructional alignment. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 35(12), 955–972.
62. Mereba, T. (2003). Managing transformation: Aligning technology initiatives with institutional priorities. Tech-Trends, 47(3), 42–44.
63. Merrill, M., & Wilson, B. (2007). The future of instructional design (Point/Counterpoint). In R. Reiser & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (2nd ed., pp. 335–351). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
64. Reeves, T. C. (2000). Alternative assessment approaches for online learning environments in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(1), 101–111.
65. Reeves, T. C. (2006). How do you know they are learning? The importance of alignment in higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(4), 294–309.
66. Reiser, R. A. (2007). What field did you say you were in? Defining and naming our field. In R. A. Resier & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (2nd ed., pp. 2–9). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
67. Reswick, J. B. (1965). Prospectus for an Engineering Design Center. Cleveland, OH: Case Institute of Technology.
68. Rogers, P. C., Graham, C. R., & Mayes, C. T. (2007). Cultural competence and instructional design: Exploration research into the delivery of online instruction cross-culturally. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2), 197–217.
69. Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing Instructional Systems: Decision Making in Course Planning and Curriculum Design. New York: Kogan Page.
70. Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.
71. Rowland, G. (1993). Designing and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 79–91.
72. Schön, D. A. (1995). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Aldershot: Ashgate.
73. Simon, H. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
74. Sluijsmans, D., Prins, F., & Martens, R. (2006). The design of competency-based performance assessment in Elearning. Learning Environments Research, 9(1), 45–66.
75. Smith, G., Torres-Ayala, A., & Heindel, A. (2008). Disciplinary differences in E-learning instructional design: The case of mathematics. The Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 63–88.
76. Smith, K. M., & Boling, E. (2009). What do we make of design? Design as a concept in educational technology. Educational Technology, 49(4), 3–17.
77. Stolterman, E. (2009). The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design, 2(1), 55–65.
78. Struyven, K., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 325–341.
79. Summers, L., Lohr, L., & O’Neil, C. (2002). Building instructional design credibility through communication competency. TechTrends, 46(1), 26–32.
80. Taras, M. (2002). Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 501–510.
81. Tasker, M., & Packham, D. (1993). Industry and higher education: A question of values. Studies in Higher Education, 18(2), 127–136.
82. Tian, X. (2007). Do assessment methods matter? A sensitivity test. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 387–401.
83. van Merriënboer, J. J. (1997). Training Complex Cognitive Skills: A Four Component Instructional Design Model for Technical Training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
84. van Merriënboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5–13.
85. Van Rooij, S. W. (2010). Project management in instructional design: ADDIE is not enough. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 852–864.
86. Waters, S., & Gibbons, A. (2004). Design languages, notation systems, and instructional technology: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 57–68.
87. Williams, D., South, J., Yanchar, S., Wilson, B., & Allen, S. (2011). How do instructional designers evaluate? A qualitative study of evaluation in practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 885–907.
88. Winn, W. (1990). Some implications of cognitive theory for instructional design. Instructional Science, 19(1), 53–69.
89. Yanchar, S., South, J., Williams, D., Allen, S., & Wilson, B. (2010). Struggling with theory? A qualitative investigation of conceptual tool use in instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 39–60.
90. Yang, C., Moore, D., & Burton, J. (1995). Managing courseware production: An instructional design model with a software engineering approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(4), 60–70.
91. York, C., & Ertmer, P. (2011). Towards an understanding of instructional design heuristics: An exploratory Delphi study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 1–23.