Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology pp 77–87Cite as

Instructional Design Models

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter presents information about the role of models used for instructional design. While heuristics provide broad references for approaching instructional design, specific applications of procedures necessary to actually develop teaching and learning materials require more defined models. The purpose here is to promote a better understanding about the appropriate utilization of instructional design models. Instruction is posited here as including both teaching and learning, and that teaching and learning are inextricably connected with regard to the construction of knowledge and skills. Since the first appearance of instructional design models in the 1960s there has been an ever-increasing number of models published in both the instructional technology and other education literature based on the assumptions that instruction includes both teaching and learning. While there are hundreds of instructional design models, there have been only a few major distinctions among them, until recently. Still, instructional design models provide conceptual tools to visualize, direct, and manage processes for creating high-quality teaching and learning materials. The proper selection of instructional design models assists us in appropriately matching the right process with the right situation. Thus, instructional design models serve as a valuable source for matching the right creative process to the right design situation as well as an effective framework for conducting instructional design research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 3(4), 2–16. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 228 351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (1977). Educational technology definition and glossary of terms. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barson, J. (1967). Instructional systems development: A demonstration and evaluation project: Final report. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 020 673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bichelmeyer, B., Boling, E., & Gibbons, A. (2006). Instructional design and technology models: Their impact on research, practice and teaching in IDT. In M. Orey, J. McLendon, & R. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2006. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited (SERVICE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer, 21(2), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch, R. (1997). Perceptions of instructional design process models. In R. E. Griffin, D. G. Beauchamp. J. M. Hunter, & C. B. Schiffman (Eds.), Selected Readings of the 28th Annual Convention of the International Visual Literacy Association. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branch, R. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branch, R., & Merrill, M. D. (2011). Characteristics of instructional design models. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K. (1975). Interservice procedures for instructional systems development: Executive summary and model. Tallahassee, FL: Center for Educational Technology, Florida State University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 122 022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, K., & Kalk, D. (2005). Real world instructional design. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, L. (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dills, C. R., & Romiszowski, A. J. (Eds.). (1997). Instructional development paradigms. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsey, L., Goodrum, D., & Schwen, T. (1997). Rapid collaborative prototyping as an instructional development paradigm. In C. Dills & A. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms (pp. 445–465). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, G., Branch, R., & Mukherjee, P. (1994). A conceptual framework for comparing instructional design models. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 55–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, D. (1973). Defining the field of educational technology. Audiovisual Instruction, 8(3), 52–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ely, D. (1983). The definition of educational technology: An emerging stability. Educational Considerations, 10(2), 2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., & Quinn, J. (2006). The ID casebook: Case studies in instructional design (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (1997). Instructional design environments: Methods and tools for the design of complex instructional systems. In S. Dijkstra, N. Seel, F. Schott, & R. Tennyson (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K. L. (1981). Survey of instructional development models. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology, Syracuse University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. (2002). Survey of instructional development models (4th ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, Syracuse University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. (2007). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (2nd ed., pp. 11–16). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamreus, D. (1968). The systems approach to instructional development. In The contribution of behavioral science to instructional technology. Monmouth, Oregon: Oregon State System of Higher Education, Teaching Research Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mager, R., & Pipe, P. (1984). Analyzing performance problems: Or you really oughta wanna (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Lake.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markle, S. (1964). Good frames and bad—A grammar of frame writing. New York, NY: Wiley. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 019 867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markle, S. (1978). Designs for instructional designers. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieveen, N. (1997). Computer support for curriculum developers: A study on the potential of computer support in the domain of formative evaluation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology, part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 57–67. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 629 874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. C. (2005). Validating instructional design and development models. In J. M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaack, & D. A. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations in instructional technology (pp. 171–185). Mahwah, NR: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. C., Fields, D. C., & Foxon, M. (2000). Instructional design competencies: The standards (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, Syracuse University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2007). Design and development research. Mahwah, NR: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 446 270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury, D. (1990). General systems theory and instructional systems design. Performance and Instruction, 29(2), 1–11. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 408 935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seel, N. (1997). Models of instructional design: Introduction and overview. In R. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel, & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives (Vol. 1). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seels, B., & Richey, R. (1994). Instructional technology: The definitions and domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvern, L. C. (1965). Basic analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Education and Training Consultants Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamas, S. (1972). A descriptive study of a synthesized model, reporting its effectiveness, efficiency, and cognitive and affective influence of the development process on a client. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34. (University Microfilms No. 74-6139).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, T., & Richey, R. (2000). Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D. (1997). Planning and decision making: Introduction and overview. In S. Dijkstra, N. Seel, F. Schott, & R. D. Tennyson (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M., & Wedman, J. (1995). Context-sensitive instructional design models: A response to design research studies and criticism. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 8(3), 38–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tripp, S., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twelker, P. A. (1972). The systematic development of instruction: An overview and basic guide to the literature. Stanford, CA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Media and Technology, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Akker, J., Branch, R., Gustafson, K., Nieveen, N., & Plomp, T. (1999). Design approaches and tools in education and training. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Educational design research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visscher-Voerman, I. (1999). Design approaches: A reconstructive study in training and education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visscher-Voerman, I., & Gustafson, K. L. (2004). Paradigms in the theory and practice of education and training design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedman, J., & Tessmer, M. (1991). Adapting instructional design to project circumstance: The layers of necessity model. Educational Technology, 21, 48–52.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, University of Georgia, 129 River’s Crossing, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Robert Maribe Branch

  2. College of Education, University of Georgia, 218 River’s Crossing, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Theodore J. Kopcha

Authors
  1. Robert Maribe Branch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Theodore J. Kopcha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Maribe Branch .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Learning Technologies, C, University of North Texas, North Elm 3940, Denton, 76207-7102, Texas, USA

    J. Michael Spector

  2. W. Sunset Blvd. 1812, St. George, 84770, Utah, USA

    M. David Merrill

  3. , Centr. Instructiepsychol.&-technologie, K.U. Leuven, Andreas Vesaliusstraat 2, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Jan Elen

  4. Research Drive, Iacocca A109 111, Bethlehem, 18015, Pennsylvania, USA

    M. J. Bishop

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Branch, R.M., Kopcha, T.J. (2014). Instructional Design Models. In: Spector, J., Merrill, M., Elen, J., Bishop, M. (eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation