Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reflections on the Future of Instructional Design Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Competencies in Teaching, Learning and Educational Leadership in the Digital Age

Abstract

Instructional design aims at being a technological field of enquiry. For such a science, it is essential that it can build on a strong theoretical base. Confronted with the phenomenon of noncompliance or instructional disobedience, it is wondered what the validity and relevance is of the current theoretical base of instructional design. This is mainly because it builds on data gathered in experimental settings with interventions of short duration and with self-reporting instruments. It is argued that new research approaches largely built on the gathering of unobtrusive data in ecological settings may help to strengthen the knowledge base of instructional design. This in turn may help instructional science to become an engineering science.

This contribution is based on two keynote presentations. The first was given at the EARLI-conference in Münich, Germany in August 2013; the second was delivered at the CELDA conference in Porto, Portugal in October 2014.

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

Access this chapter

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, P. A. (1993). Beyond cold cognition. Contemporary Psychology, 38, 542–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2013). Using educational data mining methods to assess field-dependent and field-independent learners’ complex problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61, 521–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, N., & Smyth, K. (2004). Expected and actual student use of an online learning environment: A critical analysis. Electronic Journal on E-Learning, 2(1), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 287–296). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clarebout, G. (2005). The enhancement of optimal tool use in open learning environments (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarebout, G., & Elen, J. (2009a). Benefits of inserting support devices in electronic learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 804–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarebout, G., & Elen, J. (2009b). The complexity of tool use in computer-based learning environments. Instructional Science, 37(5), 475–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewolf, T., Van Dooren, W., Ev Cimen, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2014). The impact of illustrations and warnings on solving mathematical word problems realistically. Journal of Experimental Education, 82(1), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewolf, T., Van Dooren, W., Kellen, A., & Verschaffel, L. (2012). The influence of narrative and depictive elements in solving mathematical word problems realistically. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 11(1-2), 17–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Curriculum coherence and learning progressions. Second International Handbook of Science Education, 24, 783–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerjets, P., & Hesse, F. W. (2004). When are powerful learning environments effective? The role of learning activities and of students’ conceptions of educational technology. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 445–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1976). Components of a psychology of instruction: Toward a science of design. Review of Educational Research, 46, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (2000). Environments for lifelong learning. Ergonomics, architecture and educational design. In J. M. Spector & T. M. Anderson (Eds.), Integrated and holistic perspectives on learning, instruction and technology (pp. 1–18). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P., & Ellis, R. A. (2008). University students’ approaches to learning: Rethinking the place of technology. Distance Education, 29(2), 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B. A., & Land, S. M. (2000). A qualitative analysis of scaffolding use in a resource-based learning environment involving the world wide web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23, 151–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J., Collins, A., & Resnick, L. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A. F., Oshige, M., Gress, C. L. Z., & Winne, P. H. (2010). Innovative ways for using gStudy to orchestrate and research social aspects of self-regulated learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 794–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A. F., Winne, P. H., Stockley, D. B., Nesbit, J. C., & Woszczyna, C. (2001). Context moderates Students’ self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, L. (2010). Instructional effectiveness of scaffolds: roles of learner variables. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, L., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2009). The relationship between learner variables, tool-usage behavior and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 501–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational Design for Learning and Performance. The ARCS Model Approach. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 1, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowyck, J., Lehtinen, E., & Elen, J. (2004). Students’ perspectives on learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 401–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Adopting web-casts over time: The influence of perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 24(1), 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2012). Online measurement perspectives for students’ strategy-use: Tool-use within a content management system. Education Research International, 2012(2012), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2013). Regulation of tool-use within a blended course: Student differences and performance effects. Computers and Education, 60(1), 385–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Juarez Collazo, N., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2012). Content Management Systems: Enriched learning opportunities for all? Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 795–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Vandewaetere, M., Ceulemans, E., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Tool-use in a blended undergraduate course: In Search of user profiles. Computers and Education, 57(3), 2135–2144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lust, G., Vandewaetere, M., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2014). Tool-use in a content management system: A matter of timing? Learning Environments Research, 17(3), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1979). Twenty years of research on advance organizers: Assimilation theory is still the best predictor of results. Instructional Science, 8, 133–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. (1985). The fingertip effect: How information-processing technology shapes thinking. Educational Researcher, 14(7), 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, A. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). Should I ask for help? The role of motivation and attitudes in adolescents’ help seeking in math class. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 329–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwonke, R., Ertelt, A., Otieno, C., Renkl, A., Aleven, V., & Salden, R. J. C. M. (2013). Metacognitive support promotes an effective use of instructional resources in intelligent tutoring. Learning and Instruction, 23, 136–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Ayres P, (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development 53(3), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (2004). Students’ calibration of knowledge and learning processes: Implications for designing powerful software learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 466–488.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Centre for Instructional Psychology and Technology, KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Jan Elen

Authors
  1. Jan Elen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Elen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of North Texas , DENTON, Texas, USA

    J. Michael Spector

  2. Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Dirk Ifenthaler

  3. Curtin University, School of Education Curtin University, Perth, West Australia, Australia

    Demetrios G. Sampson

  4. Universidade Aberta (Portuguese Open University), Lisbon, Portugal

    Pedro Isaias

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Elen, J. (2016). Reflections on the Future of Instructional Design Research. In: Spector, J., Ifenthaler, D., Sampson, D., Isaias, P. (eds) Competencies in Teaching, Learning and Educational Leadership in the Digital Age. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30295-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30295-9_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30293-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30295-9

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation