Abstract
Predictions that technology will soon bring about a revolution in teaching are now common. Some see this occurring as an inevitable result of the information storage and processing capabilities that new technologies possess; others believe that changes in values and technology application strategies will be more significant factors. This article argues that technologies affect education greatly by shaping attitudes about the nature of teaching and learning, and presents a simple model to illustrate this process. Also, it suggests that, to be effective advocates of the new technology, instructional developers must address the ideological dimensions of learning system design and make deliberate decisions regarding the educational values these designs are to embody.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamson, S. (1989). Myths and shibboleths in medical education.Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 1(1), pp. 4–9.
Dale, E. (1969).Audiovisual methods in teaching. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 107.
Davies, I. (1978). Instructional development: Fruit fly or lemming?Journal of Instructional Development, 1(2), 5–9.
Frankel, S. (1986, November 23). Finally, the revolution in teaching.The Washington Post, p. D-3.
Frischer, B. (1988). Links or stories: A compromise. In S. Ambron & K. Hooper (Eds.),Interactive multimedia (pp. 299–302). Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Gagné, R., & Briggs, L. (1974).Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, p. 211.
Hannafin, M. J. (1985). Empirical issues in the study of computer assisted interactive video.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 33, 235–247.
Kaufman, R. (1977). Needs assessment: Internal and external.Journal of Instructional Development, 1(1), 5–8.
Kinzie, M. (1988, April).Learner control, continuing motivation and achievement. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Mager, R. (1962).Preparing instructional objectives. Palo Alto, CA: Fearon.
Markle, S. (1977). Teaching conceptual networks.Journal of Instructional Development, 1(1), 13–17.
Morgan, R., & Branson, R. (1964).Programmed instruction. Palo Alto, CA: General Programmed Teaching Corporation.
Negroponte, N. (1989, February). Address presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.
Orr, E. W. (1989, February 26). Trouble with numbers. [Review ofInnumeracy: Mathematical illiteracy and its consequences].The Washington Post, Book World, p. 6.
Postman, N. (1984).Amusing ourselves to death. New York: Viking, p. 7.
Saettler, P. (1968).A history of instructional technology. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 13.
Schön, D. (1987).Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sculley, J. (1988). Foreword to S. Ambron & K. Hooper (Eds.),Interactive multimedia. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Vaughn, T. (1988).Using hypercard. Carmel, IN: Que Corporation, p. 28.
Weissman, R. (1988). From the personal computer to the scholar's workstation.Academic Computing, 3(3), 10–14, 30–41.
Winner, L. (1986).The whale and the reactor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, p. 55.
Wittich, W., & Schuller, C. (1967).Audiovisual materials. New York: Harper & Row, p. 16.
The workstation revolution. (1989, May).Scientific American (Special Advertising Section), pp. 39–53.
Wurman, R. S. (1989).Information anxiety. New York: Doubleday.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ullmer, E.J. High-tech instructional development: It's the thought that counts. ETR&D 37, 95–101 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299061
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299061