Skip to main content

An analysis of algorithmic processes and instructional design

Abstract

The literature on algorithmic teaching and learning has had relatively insignificant influence on the technology of instructional design. A possible explanation is the fact that the subject has rarely been treated from a designer’s point of view. In this article, a number of useful terms/concepts are offered to facilitate the process of understanding and creating algorithms. A procedure is suggested for applying these concepts in the context of an information processing model. Empirical evidence of the concepts’ utility is offered. The ensuing design prescriptions are shown to be both theoretically and empirically valid, yet easy to recognize and use.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Bower, G.H. (1975). Cognitive psychology: An introduction. In W.K. Estes, (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carpenter, P., & Just, M.A. (1977). Reading comprehension as eyes see it. In M.A. Just & P. Carpenter (Eds.),Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 109–139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gerlach, V.S., Reiser, R.A., & Brecke, F.M. (1975).Algorithms in learning, teaching, instructional design (Technical Report No. 51201). Bolling AFB, DC: USAF/OSR.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Horabin, I., & Lewis, B. (1974).Algorithms. Charleston, WV: Ivan Horabin.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production.Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kulik, J.A., Bangert, R.L., & Williams, Q.W. (1983). Effects of computer-based teaching on secondary school students.Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Landa, L.N. (1974).Algorithms in learning and instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Landa, L.N. (1976).Instructional regulation and control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Landa, L.N. (1983). The algo-heuristic theory of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.)Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Markle, S.M. (1978). Teaching conceptual networks.N.S.P.I. Journal, 17(2), 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Miller, G.A. (1956). The magic number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Miller, G.A. & Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1976).Language and perception. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level.Artificial Intelligence, 18, 87–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Paivio, A. (1971).Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Pask, G. (1975).Conversation, cognition and learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Roblyer, M.D. (1981) When is it “good courseware”? Standards for microcomputer courseware.Educational Technology, 21(10), 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scandura, J.M. (1977).Problem solving: A structural/process approach with instructional implications. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Scandura, J.M. (1980). Theoretical foundations of instruction: A systems alternative to cognitive psychology.Journal of Structural Learning, 6, 347–394.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Scandura, J.M., Durnin, J., Ehrenpreis, W., & Luger, G. (1971).Algorithmic approach to mathematics: concrete behavioral foundations. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schmid, R.F. (1977). Prior knowledge, content familiarity and the comprehension of natural prose.Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, DDJ77–17881.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schmid, R.F., & Gerlach, V.S. (1977).The application of algorithms to instructional systems (Technical Report No. 70821). Bolling AFB, DC: USAF/OSR.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schmid, R.F., & Gerlach, V.S. (1978).Principles for developing algorithmic instruction (Technical Report No. 81201). Bolling AFB, DC: USAF/OSR.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Schmid, R.F., Gerlach, V.S., & Valach, M. (1978).The relationship between algorithmic processes for instruction and computer models. (Technical Report No. 81203). Bolling AFB, DC: USAF/OSR.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Schmid, R.F., Portnoy, R.C., & Burns, K. (1976). Using algorithms to assess comprehension of classroom text materials.Journal of Educational Research, 69, 309–312.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Snow, R.E. (1976).Theory and method for research on aptitude processes. (Technical Report No. 2). Aptitude Research Project, School of Education, Stanford University.

  27. Thorndike, P.W. & Yekovich, F.R. (1980). A critique of schemata as a theory of human story memory.Poetics, 9, 23–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Winn, W. (1982). Visualization in learning and instruction: A cognitive approach.Educational Communication and Technology, 30, 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard F. Schmid.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmid, R.F., Gerlach, V.S. An analysis of algorithmic processes and instructional design. ECTJ 34, 163–174 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768423

Download citation

Keywords

  • Parallel Processing
  • Instructional Design
  • Problem Domain
  • Cost Price
  • Pask