This is a course about the often contradictory ideas involved in trying to ensure that a learning experience which is created to function in a technological environment will succeed in enhancing student learning. That learning may be conceptualized in different ways depending on the environment for which it is intended; the age, education, and life experiences of those who will use it; the delivery options available to the designer; and the background, education, and beliefs of the designer. The learning product is usually for use by individuals and small groups (although the total number of users may be huge), but the design techniques may also be applied to class size groups or very large groups of concurrent users. You will note that we did not use the word classroom in the last example as sometimes these very large groups of learners are employees watching presentations delivered by satellite television, or parts of a distance education class of over 4,000 students also watching classes delivered by television.

When we think about beginning the design of a technology-based learning experience or learning environment we can 'just do it' or we can try to apply some approach to the design process in an effort to make the result more effective. The approach we try is likely different if we were trained as a software engineer, or a graphic artist, or a teacher. Each of those approaches will be different, and each will meet with some success if the person uses their training and talent to the best of their ability. People who like to emphasize creativity and the 'look and feel' of an interactive lesson are likely to champion a more open and artistic approach. Those who are concerned about the speed and reliability of the application, the overall size of the file, and ensuring that they can maximize their design flexibility by assuring computer tools can work together will lean toward a software engineering approach. And, assuredly, the software design is important, as are the visual design and the curriculum issues.

However, we are concerned with designing materials for learning and, as a result, we are primarily interested in focussing on the learning process and seeing the learning products we develop used in people's work and lives, or as a platform for other learning. Those who have studied the effectiveness of learning from a variety of media, have come to believe that there are important dimensions of learning, student assessment, choice of instructional strategies, choice of media, implementation and a variety of other factors which should be considered in the design of instruction. Such a belief has been promulgated since the early 1950's, based originally on ideas from communications theory, general systems theory, theories of learning and instruction, and theories from psychology, such as those related to perception and motivation.

So what, exactly does an instructional designer do? According to Morrison, Ross, and Kemp the instructional designer is the individual who has "the primary responsibility of ensuring that the instruction is designed, developed and produced in a systematic manner that will consistently produce efficient and effective learning" (p. 344).

That instructional design, or instructional development as it is sometimes called, has a large number of definitions and process models and process descriptions is probably not a surprise to anyone. Gustafson and Branch (1997) claim that their investigation has turned up hundreds of different models in the literature. The adherents of each feel strongly, sometimes passionately, that their approach is the one. You will have to make your own decision about what you feel are the most effective approaches, and the ones which you feel are best justified and which you will use. At the same time you must learn the basic terminology which is used throughout the industry. Different models can imply very different beliefs about how learning occurs and the extent to which instructional interventions can make a difference. On the one hand, a strict behaviorist might argue that only specifically designed direct instruction will assure that the desired behaviours will be performed subsequently to an expected level of execution. On the other hand, a radical constructivist might argue that each individual makes sense of the world in his or her own way and that most direct instruction designed for large groups of learners has too many assumptions and compromises built into it for it to be very useful.

There are, nonetheless, a number of aspects of the process of designing instruction which provide a useful frame for study and discussion. No matter what a person’ s orientation is, it is likely that they will needs to be involved in most of aspects at one time or another. These general headings are: Analysis; Development; Production; Implementation; and Evaluation.

Analysis: The process of investigating a situation to discover whether or not an instructional solution is the best and most viable solution to a problem. Sometimes, especially in industry, government, and military organizations, the most viable solution to a problem is not instruction, some other form of organizational or procedural change. Most often, though, instructional designers are asked to work in environments in which instruction has already been stipulated and analysis involves exploring the context for the instruction, the people who will be involved in approving and implementing it, and trying to make sure it will solve the educational or organizational problem it was intended to solve.

Development: The process of designing and producing the learning experience. According to Seels and Richey (1991) this process will include designing the message, which is content driven; and choosing learning strategies, which is theory driven. It will also include the development of those documents necessary to describe, specify, and guide the production process. It is also at this point that the methods of assessing student learning are discussed and specified.

Production: This is the point in the process where the multimedia elements are produced, the data elements are produced, and the look and feel of the program are created. It also includes the process of trying out the program materials and revising them, a process which is referred to as formative evaluation and can contained a variety of approaches and methods. A production may go through several iterations of production and revision before it is considered finished.

Implementation: This involves both the initial pilot testing and field trials of  the material and the preparation for the longer term utilization of it. The process should involve ensuring the materials work well with students, that instructors are prepared and willing to work with the materials and the students in whatever ways are necessary.  It is also important to assure that the administration or management tasks related to providing the necessary equipment, space, and other support have been taken care of.

Evaluation: All through the instructional design process there is another, ongoing, iterative process going on.  It is called formative evaluation, and, on one level, is designed to improve the quality of the learning resource. On a second level formative evaluation is also looking at the process of development and trying to devise ways of doing development better within the project. At the end of a project there also should be a summative evaluation which may be undertaken for a number of purposes, but all of these purposes should be related to things other than improving the learning resource itself. Summative evaluation may be done for financial or management reasons, to decide if other similar projects should be done, to describe how other projects could be done in the future, or for a number of other purposes.

In this course we will use the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp model which further subdivides these processes into nine 'elements' as you will see in chapter 1 of the textbook.

Definitions:

Instructional Design:   The science and art of creating detailed specifications for the development, evaluation, and maintenance of situations which facilitate the learning of both large and small units of subject matter.

Instructional Strategies:   Specifications for selecting and sequencing events and activities within a lesson (Seels and Richey, 1991). Reigeluth (1983) further differentiates this into micro and macro strategies. The micro- strategies relate to instruction on a single idea, such as one concept or principle), while macro- strategies relate to more than one idea, such as in sequencing or summarizing.

Instructional Systems Design:  An organized, systematized procedure that includes the steps of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating instruction.

Message Design:   Message design involves planning for the physical form of the message (Grabowski, 1991).

In this module you are asked to read Chapters 1 and 13 of Morrison, Ross, and Kemp and to participate in the conference threads for Module 1 which are found on the WebBoard through the 'Conferences' link to the left.

Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.

Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42 (2), 21-29.

Glaser, R. (1976). Components of a psychology of instruction: Towards a science of design. Review of Educational Research, 46 (1), 29-39.

Gustafson, K., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Survey of instructional development models (3rd edition). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.

Grabowski, B. (1991). Message Design: Issues and trends. In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional Technology: Past, Present, and Future. Englewood, Co: Libraries Unlimited.

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42 (2), 7-19.

Reigeluth, C. (1983). Instructional Design: What is it and why is it? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Seels, B., & Richey, R. (1991). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.