NEED FOR RECLAIMING INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN

Necmi Esgi

Abstract


The aim of this study was to identify preservice teachers’ opinions regarding instructional design. In order to achieve this goal interviews with the sophomore students, who finished instructional design course, was conducted. Afterwards, interviews were transcribed, categorized and analyzed. Majority of the preservice teachers claimed that instructional design models were not applicable to classroom settings in real life. They also emphasized that technology integration did not included instructional design and there was excessive concentration on technology; and instructional design dimension was overlooked. Participants claimed that Robert Gagne’s approach was the most appropriate instructional design approach in classroom settings. They believe the theorist after Gagne was not very successful and instructional design lost its effectiveness. They underlined that the field required new theorists. 

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

Keywords


instructional design, pre-service, teachers, opinion, interview

References


Andrews, D., H. ve Goodson, L., A. (1980) A Comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development. 3(4).p2-16.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Esgi, N. ve Arslan, Ö. (2015) Öğretim Tasarımı üzerine birsöyleşi: Robert Gagne ve David Merril No: 1-2. Asosjournal, 4(27), 46-54.

Esgi, N. ve Arslan, Ö. (2016) Öğretim Tasarımı üzerine birsöyleşi: Robert Gagne ve David Merril No: 3. Asosjournal, 4(3), 481-493.

Esgi, N. veArslan, Ö. (2016) ÖğretimTasarımı üzerine birsöyleşi: Robert Gagne ve David Merril No: 4. Asosjournal, 3(21), 561-589.

Gagné, R. M. (1967). Learning and individual differences. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.

Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. 4th Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Rinehartand Winston.

Gagné, R. M. & Briggs, L. (1974). Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gagné, R.M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1988). Essentials of learning for instruction .Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ouimette, Surry, Grubb and Hall 747

Gagné, R.M. & Medsker, K.L. (1996). The conditions of learning: Training applications. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

Glesne, C. (2010). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction, 4th ed. Boston: Pearson.

Jonassen, D. (1996) There is no need to reclaim the field of ID: it is just growing. Division of Instructional Development Newsletter. https://notendur.hi.is //~joner/eaps/whDHJ01.htm 26.06.2016.

Jones, S. R., Torres, V. & Arminio, J. (2006). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research in higher education: Fundamental elements and issues. New York: Routledge.

Merrill, D. (1991) Second Generation Instructional Design (ID2) Educational Technology, 1991, 30(1), 7-11 and 30(2), 7-14.

Merrill, D., Drake, L., Lacy, M., Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming Instructional Design. Educational Technology, 36 (5), 5-7

Merrill, D. (2002) First Principles of Instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development. Vol. 50, No. 3, 2002, pp. 43–59.

Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.)., (1983). Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.)., (1987). Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Reigeluth, C. M. (1996). A new paradigm of ISD? Educational Technology, 36(3), 13-20.

Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 13-

Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J. V. (Eds.) (2006). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Richey, R., Fields, D., Foxon, M., Roberts, R., Spannaus, T. & Spector, J. M. (2001). Instructional design competencies: The standards (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology. http://www.eric.ed.gov80/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED483803

Rothwell, W. J. (2006). The handbook of training technologies: An introductory guide to facilitating learning with technology - from planning through evaluation. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Smith, P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (2004). Instructional design. Columbus, OH: Merrill.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2015. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing GroupAll rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).