Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The instructional gestalt: A conceptual framework and design for educational research

  • Articles
  • Published:
AV communication review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The argument is advanced in this paper that the pattern of educational investigation wherein comparisons are made between so-called “ experimental” and “ conventional” instructional procedures tends to be defective on three counts: the criteria are often inappropriate or contaminated; the assumptions of homogeneity within and independence between “ experimental” and “ control” conditions are met only when these conditions are very grossly conceived; and the results reflect masking and cancellation effects, thereby revealing relatively little about what transpires in an instructional setting.

The Instructional Gestalt is proposed as a methodological framework for educational research focusing upon the interactive nature of learner, instructor, and environmental and course variables constituting the instructional setting. Data generated by explorations within this framework can lead to the formulation of hypotheses which, if subsequently supported empirically, can become principles for inclusion in a theory of classroom learning.

The nature of investigations proceeding from the Instructional Gestalt framework was clarified by presentation and discussion of an illustrative study. Since this illustration was only a representation in miniature of the larger investigation, the generalizations about teaching-learning suggested by it are of limited scope and subject to change. Nevertheless, these generalizations do indicate the kinds of hypotheses resulting from studies within the Instructional Gestalt framework.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bloom, B. S. “Thought Processes in Lectures and Discussions.”Journal of General Education 7:160–69; 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bloom, B. S., editor.Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longmans, Green, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bruner, J. S.The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carpenter, C. R., and Greenhill, L. P.An Investigation of Closed Circuit Television for Teaching University Courses. Instructional Television Research Project No. 2. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Deese, J. “Comment and Summary: Learning Theory and AV Utilization.”AV Communication Review 9: 79–87; 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edwards, A. L.Experimental Design in Psychological Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Erickson, S. C. “The Place of Thinking in an Ideal University.”American Psychologist 17: 763–71; 1962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Guilford, J. P. “Three Faces of Intellect.”American Psychologist 14: 469–79; 1959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hovland, C. I.; Lumsdaine, A. A.; and Sheffield, F. D.Experiments on Mass Communication. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lumsdaine, A. A. “Audio-Visual Research in the U. S. Air Force.”AV Communication Review 1: 76–90; 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lumsdaine, A. A. “Graphic Aids, Models, and Mockups as Tools for Individual and Classroom Instruction.”Educational and Training Media: A Symposium. (Edited by G. Finch.) Washington, D. C.: National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council, 1960. pp. 69–113.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lumsdaine, A. A. “Instruments and Media of Instruction.”Handbook of Research on Teaching. (Edited by N. L. Gage.) Chicago: American Educational Research Association, 1963. pp. 583–682.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Macomber, F. G., and Siegel, L.Final Report of the Experimental Study in Instructional Procedures. Oxford, Ohio: Miami University Press, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rogers, C. R.On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Siegel, L. “The Instructional Gestalt: A Conceptual Framework.”Teachers College Record 62: 202–13; 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Siegel, L.; Macomber, F. G.; and Adams, J. F. “The Effectiveness of Large Group Instruction at the University Level.”Harvard Educational Review 29:216–26; 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Siegel, L., and others. “Students’ Thoughts During Class: A Criterion for Educational Research.”journal of Educational Psychology 54: 45–51; 1963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instructional Research Service at Miami University, USA

    Laurence Siegel (professor of psychology and director) & Lila Corkland Siegel (research assistant professor)

Authors
  1. Laurence Siegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lila Corkland Siegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This paper summarizes the rationale underlying research on the Instructional Gestalt proceeding under a grant from the Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Portions of this rationale have been presented at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association in 1961 and 1962.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Siegel, L., Siegel, L.C. The instructional gestalt: A conceptual framework and design for educational research. AVCR 12, 16–45 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768959

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768959

Keywords

Search

Navigation