Skip to main content
Log in

A reflexive model for teaching instructional design

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

Abstract

Although there are numerous models to practive instructional design (ID), few instructional models to teach instructional design have been documented. This article documents a five-year study of two instructors who collaborated on formally studying their teaching of a master's level instructional design course. A reflexive instructional approach was used, in which the teachers examined their teaching while students were being prompted to reflect on their learning of instructional design through a course-long ID project. In this article we summarize our views on learning, teaching, and instructional design. A design and development framework from developmental research (Richey & Nelson, 1996) was used to describe our teaching in terms of the design decisions, model implementation, and model evaluation across six deliveries of the ID course from 1994–1998.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barell, J. (1995).Teaching for thoughtfulness: Classroom strategies to enhance intellectual development (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989, January–February). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1990).Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, E., & Ogle, D. (1987). A strategy for comprehension and summarization.Journal of Reading, 30, 626–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carney, T.F. (1990).Collaborative inquiry methodology. Windsor, Ontario. University of Windsor, Division for Instructional Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clandinin, D.J. (1986).Classroom practice: Teacher images in action. Philadelphia: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C.M., & Peterson, P.L. (1986). Teachers thought processes. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In L. Idol. & B.F. Jones (Eds.),Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1916).Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work.Review of Educational Research, 53(2), pp. 159–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E.W. (1994).The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuys, D., Geddes, D., & Tischler, R. (1988). The van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. In F. Lester, Jr. (Senior Ed.),Journal of Research in Mathematics in Education, Monograph Number 3. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K.J. (1995). Technology and the transformation of the pedagogical project. Available at:http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/kgergen1/text12.html.

  • Gordon, W.J.J. (1971). Architecture—The making of metaphors.Main Currents in Modern Thought, 28(1), 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronlund, N.E., & Linn, R.L. (1994).Measurement and evaluation in teaching (7th ed.), New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, A.A., Estes, T.H., & Schwab, J.H. (1995).Instruction: A models approach (2nd ed.), Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • John-Steiner, V. (1997).Notebooks of the mind: Explorations of thinking (2nd ed.), New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (1996).Models of teaching (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Showers, B. (1992).Models of teaching (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, F.S. (1968). Goodbye, teacher…Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koen, B.V. (1984). Toward a definition of the engineering method.Engineering Education, 75(3), 150–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991).Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magliaro, S.G., & Shambaugh, R.N. (1997).Instructor's guide to mastering the possibilities: A process approach. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDiarmid, G.W., Ball, D.L., & Anderson, C.W. (1989). Why staying one chapter ahead doesn't really work: Subject-specific pedagogy. In M.C. Reynolds (Ed.),Knowledge base for the beginning teacher (pp. 193–205). New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994).Quatitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, L.C. (1990).Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, W.A., Magliaro, S.G., & Sherman, T.M. (1988). The intellectual content of instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 37(3), 81–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D.A. (1978). Notes toward a theory of complex learning. In A.M. Lesgold, J.W. Pellegrino, S. Fokkema, & R. Glaser (Eds.),Cognitive psychology and instruction. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, A., & Tann, S. (1993).Reflective teaching in the primary school: A handbook for the classroom (2nd ed.), London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R., & Nelson, W. (1996). Developmental research. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.),Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1213–1245). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (1990).Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, P.G. (1987).Design thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1993). Designing and instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 79–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G., Fixl, A., & Yung, J. (1992, December). Educating the reflective designer.Educational Technology, 36–44.

  • Rowland, G., Parra, M.L., & Basnet, K. (1994, July–August). Educating instructional designers: Different methods for different outcomes.Educational Technology, 5–11.

  • Salomon, G. (1993).Distributed cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1983).The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. NY: Basic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1987).Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shambaugh, R.N. (1999, February). Development of a coparticipatory and reflexive approach to teaching and learning instructional design. Unpublished dissertation. Available athttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-020599-094356. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shambaugh, R.N., & Magliaro, S.G. (1995).Teaching instructional design as a reflective process: A structured framework for promoting infinite play. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

  • Shambaugh, R.N., & Magliaro, S.G. (1996, February).Case studies on the development of formal design expertise. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association Conference. Boston, MA.

  • Shambaugh, R.N., & Magliaro, S.G. (1997).Mastering the possibilities: A process approach to instructional design. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shambaugh, R.N., & Magliaro, S.G. (2000). Teachers' visual representations of instructional design and teaching. In R.E. Griffin, W.J. Gibbs, & Williams (Eds.),Natural vistas: Visual literacy and the world around us (pp. 179–186). International Visual Literacy Association. OmniPress.

  • Siegel, D.H. (1984). Defining empirically based practice.Social Work, 29(4), 325–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1973). Structure of ill-structured problems.Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1993).Instructional design. New York: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M. (1990). Environmental analysis: A neglected stage of instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1988).Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L.S. (1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998).Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W.D. (1989). Toward a rationale and theoretical basis for educational technology.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 35–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, F. (1992). Posturing in qualitative inquiry. In M.D. LeCompte, W.L. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.),The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 3–52). NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (1994).Case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shambaugh, N., Magliaro, S. A reflexive model for teaching instructional design. ETR&D 49, 69–92 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504929

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504929

Keywords

Navigation