Abstract
This study is an analysis of empirical studies published in major Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)-sponsored journals: Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), TechTrends, Journal of Applied Instructional Design (JAID), and Journal of Computing in Higher Education (JCHE). Through this analysis, we addressed two primary constructs within diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)—power and positionality—and how they do, or do not, intersect with research in instructional design technology (IDT). The focus of the study is on investigations in which interventions are implemented and conclusions are drawn. Our goal was to provide a critique and possible future directions to IDT researchers regarding DEI dimensions in their inquiry. The studies analyzed (n = 383) did not, to a degree we might have hoped, include DEI concerns, or these concerns are not fundamental enough to be included in reports of research. Limitations of the study and implications for future research are presented.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bohman, J. (2003). Critical theory as practical knowledge: Participants, observers, and critics. In P. S. Stephen & P. A. Roth (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of the social sciences (pp. 91–109). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756485.ch4
Borge, M., Ong, Y. S., & Goggins, S. (2020). A sociocultural approach to using social networking sites as learning tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1089–1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09721-z
Chen, C. H. (2020). Impacts of augmented reality and a digital game on students’ science learning with reflection prompts in multimedia learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 3057–3076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09834-w
Creswell, J., & Poth, C. (2018). Five qualitative approaches to inquiry: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE.
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., Harney, O. M., & Kavanagh, C. (2017). Facilitating a student-educator conceptual model of dispositions towards critical thinking through interactive management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 47–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9460-7
de Alvarez, M. S., & Dickson-Deane, C. (2018). Avoiding educational technology pitfalls for inclusion and equity. TechTrends, 62(4), 345–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0270-0
Friedman, B., & Hendry, D. G. (2019). Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7585.001.0001
Grund, C. K., & Tulis, M. (2020). Facilitating student autonomy in large-scale lectures with audience response systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 975–993. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09713-z
Gyabak, K. (2020). WASH by design: A design case on the collaborative curriculum project for elementary schools in Rural Papua New Guinea. In M. J. Bishop, E. Boling, J. Elen, & V. Svihla (Eds.), Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (pp. 647–659). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36119-8_29
Habermas, J., McCarthy, T., & McCarthy, T. (1984). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 1, p. 308). Beacon Press.
Howard, C. D., & Das, A. (2019). Designing competitive discussions for equity and inclusion. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v10i1.24670
Huang, K., Ge, X., & Eseryel, D. (2017). Metaconceptually-enhanced simulation-based inquiry: effects on eighth grade students’ conceptual change and science epistemic beliefs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9462-5
Lachheb, A., Abramenka-Lachheb, V., & Huber, L. (2021). Challenges and opportunities in adhering to UDL principles to design online courses. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.51869/101alvallh
Lee, H. K., & Choi, A. (2020). Enhancing early numeracy skills with a tablet-based math game intervention: a study in Tanzania. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 3567–3585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09808-y
Lin, H. (2007). The ethics of instructional technology: Issues and coping strategies experienced by professional technologists in design and training situations in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 411–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9029-y
Mao, L., Mian Akram, A., Chovanec, D., & Underwood, M. L. (2016). Embracing the spiral: Researcher reflexivity in diverse critical methodologies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916681005
Mirriahi, N., Liaqat, D., Dawson, S., & Gasevic, D. (2016). Uncovering student learning profiles with a video annotation tool: Reflective learning with and without instructional norms. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(6), 1083–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9449-2
Monteiro, M. (2019). Ruined by design: How designers destroyed the world, and what we can do to fix it. Mule Design.
Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Liu, M. Z. (2014). Designing CMS courses from a pedagogical usability perspective. In Whitworth & D. A. Benson (Eds.), Perspectives in instructional technology and distance education: Research on course management systems in higher education (pp. 143–169). Information Science Reference.
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world. MIT Press.
Ong, C. P., & Tasir, Z. (2015). Self-instructional module based on cognitive load theory: A study on information retention among trainee teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 499–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9383-8
Papanek, V. J. (1985). Design for the real world: Human ecology and social change. Academy.
Payne, Y. A., & Hamdi, H. A. (2009). “Street love”: How street life oriented US born African men frame giving back to one another and the local community. The Urban Review, 41(1), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0098-6
Rizzuto, M. (2017). Design recommendations for self-paced online faculty development courses. TechTrends, 61, 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0130-8
Sherry, A., Burniske, R. W., de Fretas, C. M. V., de Rabago, S. J. D., Johari, A., Chu, C., & Marchessou, F. (2003). Tradutore, traditore: Can the aect code of ethics “speak” across cultures? TechTrends, 47(6), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02763280
Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800103
Stefaniak, J., Shah, S., Mills, E., & Luo, T. (2020). Keeping the learner at the focal point: The use of needs assessment and persona construction to develop an instructional resource center for instructional designers. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 11(2), 142–155. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v11i2.25632
Subramony, D. P. (2004). Instructional technologists’ inattention to issues of cultural diversity among learners. Educational Technology, 19–24. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428919
Subramony, D. P. (2016). Revisiting instructional technologists’ inattention to issues of cultural diversity among learners. In R. Joseph & J. L. Moore (Eds.), Culture, learning and technology: Research and practice (pp. 19–24). Routledge.
Subramony, D. P. (2018). Not in our journals: Digital media technologies and the LGBTQI community. TechTrends, 62(4), 354–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0266-9
Thomas, M., Mitchell, M., & Joseph, R. (2002). The third dimension of ADDIE: A cultural embrace. TechTrends, 46(2), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02772075
Tracey, M. W., & Unger, K. L. (2010). Cross cultural instruction: An instructional design case. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v1i1.845
Ye, L., Recker, M., Walker, A., et al. (2015). Expanding approaches for understanding impact: integrating technology, curriculum, and open educational resources in science education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 355–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9377-6
Yeaman, A. R. (2004). Professional ethics professional ethics for technology. TechTrends, 48(2), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02762537
Young, P. A. (2008). The culture based model: Constructing a model of culture. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 107–118. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/jeductechsoci.11.2.107
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A: Coding Book
Appendix A: Coding Book
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boling, E., Lachheb, A., Abramenka-Lachheb, V., Basdogan, M., Sankaranarayanan, R., Chartrand, G. (2023). Factoring Power and Positionality into Research on Instructional Design Interventions. In: Hokanson, B., Exter, M., Schmidt, M.M., Tawfik, A.A. (eds) Toward Inclusive Learning Design. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37697-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37697-9_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-37696-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-37697-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)