Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Toward a rationale and theoretical basis for educational technology

  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., & Yost, G. (1985). The geometry tutor.Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles.

  • Baker, E. L. (1984). Can educational research inform educational practice? Yes!Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 453–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonner, J. (1988). Implications of cognitive theory for instructional design: Revisited.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 36, 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, R. R., & Brown, J. S. (1979). Toward a natural language capability for computer-assisted instruction. In H. O'Neil (Ed.),Procedures for instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case, R., & Bereiter, C. (1984). From behaviorism to cognitive behaviorism to cognitive development: Steps in the evolution of instructional design.Instructional Science, 13, 141–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Gunstone, R. F. (1982). Cognitive research and the design of science instruction.Educational Psychologist, 17, 31–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media.Review of Educational Research, 53, 445–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (1987, February).Which technology for what purpose? Paper presented at an invited symposium, annual conference of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Atlanta.

  • Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1982). Goals and strategies of inquirysteachers. In R. Glaser (Ed.),Advances in instructional psychology, Volume 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). A cognitive theory of inquiry teaching. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1929).The sources of a science of education. New York: Liveright.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiVesta, F. J., & Rieber, L. P. (1987). Characteristics of cognitive instructional design: The next generation.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 35, 213–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986).Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, F. M. (1978).Strategies for improving visual learning. State College, PA: Learning Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1983). Anastasia might still be alive, but the monarchy is dead.Educational Researcher, 12(5), 13–14, 23–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1984). Can educational research inform educational practice?Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 447–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M. L., & Levie, W. H. (1978).Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosnot, C. T. (1984). Media and technology in education: A constructivist view.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32, 195–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, E. D. (1985).The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L., & Wager, W. (1988).Principles of instructional design (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1987).The mind's new science. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1976). Cognitive objectives of instruction: Theory of knowledge for solving problems and answering questions. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1980). Some examples of cognitive task analysis with instructional implications. In R. E. Snow, P-A. Federico, & W. E. Montague (Eds.),Aptitude, learning and instruction, Volume 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, R. (1970).Technology and the management of instruction. Washington DC: Association for Educational Communication and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, R. (1984). The proper study of educational technology.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32, 67–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, R. (1988). The use of computers in education: A reply to Streibel.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 36, 143–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, K. R. (1985). Two dogmas of educational research.Educational Researcher, 14(8), 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1984). The mediation of experience and educational technology.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32, 153–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (1980).Models of teaching (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landa, L. N. (1983). Descriptive and prescriptive theories of learning and instruction: An analysis of their relationships and interaction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1975). Comprehensive statement of a systematic analytical approach.AV Communication Review, 23, 446–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1987, April).Developing an instructional design theory as an expert system. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Washington DC.

  • Nunan, T. (1983).Countering educational design. New York: Nichols Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. C. (1983). After the wake: Postpositivistic educational thought.Educational Researcher, 12(5), 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design: What is it and why is it? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawre ce Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. (1986).The theoretical and conceptual bases of instructional design. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., & Anand, P. G. (1987). A computer-based strategy for personalizing verbal problems in teaching mathematics.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 35, 151–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. (1988). Adapting instruction to learner performance and background variables. In D. Jonassen (Ed.),Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1979).Interaction of media, cognition and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1985). Information technologies: What you see is not (always) what you get.Educational Psychologist, 20, 207–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1983).The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1987).Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuell, T. J. (1980). Learning theory, instructional theory, and adaptation. In R. E. Snow, P-A. Federico, & W. E. Montague (Eds.),Aptitude, learning and instruction, Volume 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning.Review of Educational Research, 56, 411–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1981).The sciences of the artificial (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sleeman, D., & Brown, J. S. (Eds.). (1982).Intelligent tutoring systems. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, K. (1988).The psychology of educational technology and instructional media. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, A. L., & Collins, A. (1980). Multiple conceptual models of a complex system. In R. E. Snow, P-A. Federico, & W. E. Montague (Eds.),Aptitude, learning and instruction, Volume 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A. (1985). Appropriate educational technology: Does “appropriateness” have implications for the theoretical framework of educational technology?Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 33, 58–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streibel, M. (1986). A critical analysis of the use of computers in education.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 34, 137–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streibel, M. (1988). A response to Robert Heinich and Suzanne Damarin.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 36, 153–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Christensen, D. L. (1988). MAIS: An intelligent learning system. In D. Jonassen (Ed.),Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., Christensen, D. L., & Park, S. (1984). The Minnesota Adaptive Instructional System: An intelligent CBI system.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 11, 2–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1987).Artificial intelligence and tutoring systems. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildman, T. M. (1981). Cognitive theory and the design of instruction.Educational Technology, 11(7), 14–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. D. (1987). Instructional design and intelligent systems: Shifts in the designer's decision-making role.Instructional Science, 16, 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. D. (1988, February).The theoretical foundations of educational technology and future directions for the field. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, New Orleans.

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1979). The cognitive movement in instruction.Educational Researcher, 8(2), 5–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1982, March).Educational implications of recent research on learning and memory. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the University of Washington, 98195, Seattle, WA

    William Winn

Authors
  1. William Winn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Winn, W. Toward a rationale and theoretical basis for educational technology. ETR&D 37, 35–46 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299044

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299044

Keywords

Search

Navigation