Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 80–94 | Cite as

Instructional technology must contribute to productivity

  • Michael Molenda
Article

Abstract

Those involved in instructional technology in higher education are urged to view instructional technology as a means of improving academic productivity. Instructional technology has been used for over forty years to analyze instructional problems and design solutions that reduce costs and improve learning outcomes. The Pew Program in Course Redesign is the most recent program that has yielded a number of case examples of how contemporary instructional technology has improved academic productivity.

Keywords

Instructional technology Productivity Efficiency Effectiveness 

References

  1. Banathy, B. (1968). Instructional systems. Palo Alto, CA: Fearon.Google Scholar
  2. Bichelmeyer, B., & Molenda, M. (2006). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Gradual growth atop Tectonic Shifts. In M. Orey, J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2006 (Vol. 31, pp. 3–32). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  3. Bosworth, B. (2005). Productivity in education and the growing gap with service industries. In M. Devlin, R. C. Larson, & J. W. Meyerson (Eds.), The internet and the university: Forum (pp. 61–74). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.Google Scholar
  4. Brinkerhoff, R. O., & Dressler, D. E. (1990). Productivity measurement: A guide for managers and evaluators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Dale, E. (1946). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: The Dryden Press.Google Scholar
  6. Daniel, J. (1999, April). Technology is the answer: What was the question? Presentation at TechEd99, Ontario, CA. Retrieved January 10, 2009, from http://www.open.ac.uk/johndanielspeeches/teched99.htm.
  7. Diamond, R. M. (1980). The Syracuse model for course and curriculum design, implementation, and evaluation: Symposium on ID models—1. Journal of Instructional Development, 4(2), 19–23.Google Scholar
  8. Ellson, D. G. (1986). Improving the productivity of teaching: 125 exhibits. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  9. Graves, W. H. (2005). Improving institutional performance through IT-enabled innovation. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(6), 79–98.Google Scholar
  10. Hanushek, E. A. (1986). The economics of schooling: Production and efficiency in public schools. Journal of Economic Literature, 24, 1141–1177.Google Scholar
  11. Hartman, J. L. (2008). Moving teaching and learning with technology from adoption to transformation. EDUCAUSE Review, 43(6), 24–25.Google Scholar
  12. Heilbroner, R., & Thurow, L. (1998). Economics explained: Everything you need to know about how the economy works and where it’s going (4th ed.). New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
  13. Heinich, R. (1967). Keynote address. In Summary report of the thirteenth lake okoboji educational media leadership conference, Lake Okoboji, Milford, Iowa.Google Scholar
  14. Heinich, R. (1984). The proper study of instructional technology. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 32(2), 67–87.Google Scholar
  15. Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, J. D. (1989). Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  16. Keller, F. S. (1968). Goodbye teacher… Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 78–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. L., & Smith, B. B. (1976). Research on the personalized system of instruction. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 13, 23–30.Google Scholar
  18. Mager, R. F. (1977, October). The ‘winds of change.’ Training and Development Journal, 12–20.Google Scholar
  19. Massy, W. F., & Zemsky, R. (1995). Using information technology to enhance academic productivity, Educom NLII white paper. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/html/nli0004.html.
  20. McConnell, C. R., & Brue, S. L. (2002). Economics: Principles, problems, and policies (15th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill College.Google Scholar
  21. Molenda, M. (2004). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Bad economy slows technology investment. In M. Orey, M. A. Fitzgerald, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2004 (Vol. 29, pp. 3–22). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  22. Molenda, M. (2010). Origins and evolution of instructional systems design, Chapter 1. In K. H. Silber, & R. Foshay (Eds.), Handbook of training and improving workplace performance, Volume 1. instructional design and training delivery. New York: John Wiley/Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  23. Molenda, M., & Bichelmeyer, B. (2005). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Slow growth as economy recovers. In M. Orey, J. McClendon, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2005 (Vol. 30, pp. 3–28). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  24. Molenda, M., & Harris, P. (2001). Issues and trends in instructional technology. In R. M. Branch & M. A. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2001 (Vol. 26, pp. 3–15). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  25. Molenda, M., & Pershing, J. A. (2008). Improving performance. Chapter 3. In M. Molenda & A. Januszewski (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary (pp. 49–80). New York: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., & Smaldino, S. (1998). Trends in media and technology in education and training. In R. M. Branch & M. A. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 1998 (Vol. 23, pp. 3–14). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  27. Molenda, M., & Sullivan, M. (2000). Issues and trends in instructional technology. In R. M. Branch & M. A. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2000 (Vol. 25, pp. 3–13). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  28. Molenda, M., & Sullivan, M. (2002). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Hitting the plateau. In M. A. Fitzgerald, M. Orey, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2002 (Vol. 27, pp. 3–18). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  29. Molenda, M., & Sullivan, M. (2003). Issues and trends in instructional technology: Treading water. In M. A. Fitzgerald, M. Orey, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook 2003 (Vol. 28, pp. 3–20). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  30. Monk, D. H. (2003). Efficiency in education. In J. W. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan Reference.Google Scholar
  31. Nas, T. F. (1996). Cost-benefit analysis: Theory and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. National Center for Academic Transformation. (2009). Program in course redesign: Virginia Tech. Retrieved January 28, 2009, from http://www.center.rpi.edu/PCR/R1/VT/VT_Overview.htm.
  33. Postlethwait, S. N. (1968). Audio-tutorial system. Journal of Animal Science, 27, 938–940.Google Scholar
  34. Postlethwait, S. N., Novak, J., & Murray, H. (1972). The audio-tutorial approach to learning. Minneapolis: Burgess.Google Scholar
  35. Saba, F. (2002, May 3). Connecting the dots: Cost of higher education, reduced resources. Distance-Educator.com. Retrieved May 15, 2002, from http://www.distance-educator.com/saba/modules.
  36. Schwartz, A. E., & Stiefel, L. (2001). Measuring school efficiency: Lessons from economics, implications for practice. In D. H. Monk, H. J. Walberg, & M. Wang (Eds.), Improving educational productivity (pp. 115–138). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  37. Twigg, C. A. (2000). Course readiness criteria: Identifying targets of opportunity for large-scale redesign. EDUCAUSE Review, 35(3), 41–49.Google Scholar
  38. Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 38(5), 28–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indiana UniversityIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations