Scribd
Upload
5 views3 pages

TRANSLATE 2

Instructional design theory focuses on applying principles and strategies to facilitate learner progression from not knowing to knowing, emphasizing design and targeted outcomes. It differs from instructional theory by incorporating design elements that connect instructional methods with desired results, while also considering learner characteristics and contexts. The document discusses various types of learning and instructional methods, highlighting the complexity of instructional design and the importance of aligning learning objectives with appropriate strategies.

Uploaded by

ppg.dandidwiprasetiyo92
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
5 views3 pages

TRANSLATE 2

Instructional design theory focuses on applying principles and strategies to facilitate learner progression from not knowing to knowing, emphasizing design and targeted outcomes. It differs from instructional theory by incorporating design elements that connect instructional methods with desired results, while also considering learner characteristics and contexts. The document discusses various types of learning and instructional methods, highlighting the complexity of instructional design and the importance of aligning learning objectives with appropriate strategies.

Uploaded by

ppg.dandidwiprasetiyo92
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Instructional Design Theories

Given the description of instructional theory as the development of


principles and strategies to help learners move from states of not knowing
and not being able to do certain things to states of knowing and being
able to perform, one can characterize instructional design theory as
focused on how best to deploy those principles and strategies in various
circumstances. According to Reigeluth (1983, 1999), instructional design
theory is prescriptive in nature; that is to say, the theory suggests with
some degree of probability how to sequence material and activities using
various strategies in order to achieve desired or targeted outcomes with a
particular group of learners. Instructional design theory is different from
instructional theory as previously described because it is both design- and
goal-oriented. Learning theory is primarily descriptive, as is constructivist
epistemology. Instructional theory provides a bridge between descriptive
theories and instructional design by including a goal or targeted outcome.
Instructional design theory goes one step further by including the notion
of a design that links methods of instruction based on instructional theory
with targeted outcomes in an efficient manner. This may seem like a fine
distinction to some, but adding the aspect of design creates an entirely
new set of considerations and challenges for both researchers and
practitioners. Figure 10.4 depicts a concept map representing instructional
design theory and its components (adapted from Reigeluth, 1999).

For the sake of illustration, consider the task of learning to tie knots.
Based on a behavioral task analysis, the skill involved might be
characterized as a psychomotor skill, but that would probably be overly
simplistic as the truly critical aspect of knot tying is determining which
kind of knot to tie for a particular purpose, and that involves an
intellectual skill, as a cognitive task analysis would probably reveal (see
Gagné, 1985). Who the learners are might make a huge difference in
determining appropriate methods of instruction. If the learners are rescue
personnel who might be required to piece together ropes and other
materials in a rescue effort, then the desired outcome is the ability to
identify the kind of knot required for a particular rescue situation given the
resources available along with the ability to tie that kind of knot. With
other learners, such as boy scouts, the desired outcome might be much
more relaxed. The desired outcome then affects the appropriate methods.
In the case involving training rescue personnel, the training must be to
the point of automatic recognition and performance with repeated
practice sessions until mastery of a large set of cases is complete.

The point is that instructional design is far from a formulaic and static
enterprise. The components are tightly interconnected. Deciding how best
to select materials, develop effective learning activities, and sequence
these is far from a simple task. Moreover, the materials, activities, and
sequences can change dramatically based on a change in only one of the
components to be considered when designing instruction. All of the things
represented in Figure 10.4 are subject to interpretation by different
theorists, and that representation of instructional design is itself the
subject of much debate (see Richey, Klein, & Tracey, 2011). To conclude
this discussion of instructional design theories, representative examples of
some of the critical components of instructional are elaborated next.

Types of Learning It is possible to characterize the kinds of knowledge,


skills, and attitudes in a number of ways, and several will be mentioned
below. A traditional assumption in instructional design theory is that the
type of thing to be learned significantly influences how best to design
optimal instruction (support for achieving the desired outcome). What has
been challenged in recent years is not the connection between the type of
learning and the instructional methods, but rather how significant that
connection is given other factors such as learners’ characteristics and
interests. The traditional chain of design factors is from the desired
outcomes to learning needs (based on gaps between what learners know
and can do, and what they are targeted to know and be able to do; this
can and often does involve significant attention to learner differences) to
assessment items, and on to design of appropriate support and activities,
and finally to evaluation of outcomes. Some have referred to that generic
chain as the ADDIE model—Analysis, Design, Development,
Implementation, and Evaluation (see, for example, Dick, Carey, & Carey,
2009).

In the analysis phase of planning instruction, it is reasonable for a


designer to consider the kinds of things to be learned (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001). According to Gagné (1985), there are five different
kinds of things that can be learned: (a) verbal information (e.g., facts), (b)
intellectual skills (e.g., using rules to solve a problem), (c) cognitive
strategies (e.g., selecting a process to address a problem situation), (d)
motor skills (e.g., riding a bicycle), and (e) attitudes (e.g., dislike of
mathematics). Figure 10.5 shows how Gagné’s types of learning to
common instructional strategies.

A quite different approach consistent with Merrill’s (2002) principles of


instruction (that places solving problems at the center of instruction) is to
distinguish types of problems and use the type of problem to be solved as
a guide to planning and implementing instruction (see, for example,
Jonassen, 2000, 2004, 2007), as shown in Figure 10.6.
Problems can be characterized along a continuum from well structured
(i.e., clearly and completely specified initial situation and desired outcome
situation along with appropriate and recognizable means to transform the
initial situation into the desired outcome situation) to ill structured (i.e.,
missing some of the aspects of a well-structured problem). Problems can
also be characterized in terms of the concepts and principles relevant to
the problem situation, again along a continuum from concrete to abstract.
Problems involving abstract concepts and principles that are also ill
structured are generally complex and more challenging for learners to
master. Design problems that occur in so many different domains (e.g.,
economics, education, engineering, management, manufacturing,
technology) are among the most challenging to support with effective
instruction (see Figure 10.6)

The purpose here is not to argue that one of these or another method of
classifying types of learning is best. Rather, the main point is to suggest
that the type of thing to be learned is an important aspect of instructional
planning as it can help one identify a likely instructional method and
strategy that might be appropriate. There are, of course, other aspects to
be taken into account, including the learners and the setting in which
learning will take place (see, for example, Eckel, 1993; Spector, Johnson &
Young, 2014).

You might also like