Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ERIC/ECTJ annual review paper

The instructional systems development (ISD) model: A review of those factors critical to its successful implementation

  • Articles
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This is the thirteenth ERIC/ECTJ Annual Review Paper, preparation of which was supported by the ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) Clearinghouse on Information Resources, Syracuse University. The material in this article was prepared pursuant to a contract with the National Institute of Education, U.S. Department of Education. Contractors undertaking such projects under government sponsorship are encouraged to express freely their judgment in professional and technical matters. Points of view or opinions do not necessarily represent the official view or opinion of the NIE.—Ed.

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

  • Anderson, R. C. (1978). Schema-directed processes in language comprehension. In A. M. Lesgold, J. W. Pellegrino, S. D. Fokkema, & R. Glaser (Eds.),Cognitive psychology and instruction, New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 3(4), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atwood, M. E., & Jeffries, R. (1980, December).Studies in plan construction II: Novice design behavior (Tech. Report SAI-80-154-DEN). Englewood, CO: Science Applications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Back, S. M., & McCombs, B. L. (1984, August).Factors related to the success or failure of self-paced instruction in Air Force technical training: A literature review (AFHRL-TP-84-24). Lowry Air Force Base, CO: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Logistics and Technical Training Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E. (1984, April).Firmly on sand: The antiintellectual base of instructional design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Banathy, B. H. (1968).Instructional systems. Belmont, CA: Lear Sieglar, Inc./Fearon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, L., Eastman, R., Gitomer, D., Glaser, R., & Lesgold, A. (1983, December).Cognitive task analyses of technical skills: Rationale and approach. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borich, G. D. (1979). A systems approach to the evaluation of training. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.),Procedures for instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braden, R. A. (1984). Instructional design: A discrepancy analysis.Educational Technology, 24(2), 33–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K. (1984, April).ISD: Is the system out of control? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Branson, R. K. (1983, July 25). Personal communication.

  • Branson, R. K. (1979). Implementation issues in instructional systems development: Three case studies. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.),Issues in instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K. (1978). The interservice procedures for instructional systems development.Educational Technology, 18(3), 11–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K., Rayner, G. T., Cox, J. L., & Furman, J. P. (1976, January).Interservice procedures for instructional systems development: Executive overview. Tallahassee, FL: Center for Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K., Rayner, G. T., & Furman, J. P. (1976, May).Interservice procedures for instructional systems development senior managers workshop: Final report. Tallahassee, FL: Center for Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, L. J. (1982). Instructional design: Present strengths and limitations, and a view of the future.Educational Technology, 22(10) 18–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1981).Handbook of procedures for the design of instruction (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. K. (1981). Behavioral technology: Foundation for the future.Educational Technology, 21(7), 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1981).Expertise in problem solving. (Reprinted with permission fromAdvances in the psychology of human intelligence, Vol. 1, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.) Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, I. K. (1983). Media and excellence: The art and science of training and development.Training and Development Journal, 38(12), 17–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, I. K. (1981). Instructional development as an art: One of the three faces of ID.Performance and Instruction, 20(7), 4–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. (1981). Instructional design models: Future trends and issues.Educational Technology, 21(7), 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1978).The systematic design of instruction. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985).The systematic design of instruction. (2nd Ed.) Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durzo, J., Diamond, R., & Doughty, P. (1979). An analysis of research needed in instructional development.Journal of Instructional Development, 2(4), 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earle, R. S. (1985). Teachers as instructional developers.Educational Technology, 25(8), 15–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagne, R. M. (1977).The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1983, June).Education and thinking: The role of knowledge (Tech. Report No. PDS-6). Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1982). Instructional psychology: Past, present, and future.American Psychologist, 37(3), 292–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge.American Psychologist, 39(2), 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1976). Cognitive objectives of instructions: Theory of knowledge for solving problems and answering questions. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and Instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K. (1982).Survey of instructional development models: ERIC information analysis product. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse in Information Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannum, W. H., & Briggs, L. J. (1982). How does instructional systems design differ from traditional instruction?Educational Technology, 22(1), 9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes-Roth, B. (1980, December).Human planning processes (R-2670-ONR). Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindvall, C. M., Tamburino, J. L., & Robinson, L. (1982, March).An exploratory investigation of the effects of teaching primary grade children to use specific problem solving strategies in solving simple arithmetic story problems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

  • Logan, R. S. (1979). A state-of-the-art assessment of instructional systems development. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.),Issues in instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malcolm, S. (1982, November).ISD systems approach to training in the public sector. Paper presented at the 24th annual conference of the Military Testing Association, San Antonio.

  • McCombs, B. L. (in press). Instructor and group process roles in computer-based training.Educational Communication and Technology Journal.

  • McCombs, B. L. (1985, April),ISD in contract research. Paper presented at the invited symposium, ISD Revisited: Alive and Thriving One Year Later. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.

  • McCombs, B.L. (1984). Processes and skills underlying continuing motivation: Toward a definition of motivational skills training interventions.Educational Psychologist, 19(4), 199–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mccombs, B. L., Back, S. M., & West, A. S. (1984, August).Factors critical to the success or failure, of self-paced instruction in Air Force technical training (AFHRL-TP-84-23). Lowry Air Force Base, CO: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Logistics and Technical Training Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L., & Dobrovolny, J. L. (1980, March).Theoretical definition of instructor roles in computer-managed instruction. (NPRDC-TN-80-10). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L., Dobrovolny, J. L., & Lockhart, K. A. (1983, June).Evaluation of the CMI instructor role training program in the Navy and Air Force. (NPRDC-SR-83-43). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L., & Lockhart, K. A. (1984, December).Personnel roles and requirements for non-conventional instruction (NCl) in Air Force technical training (AFHRL-TP-84-40). Lowry Air Force Base, CO: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Logistics and Technical Training Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. L. (1984). Internalizing instructional design.Educational Technology, 24(5), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medsker, K. L. (1981). Instructional development as a craft.Performance and Instruction, 20(7), 11–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1985, April).ISD revisited: Alive and thriving one year later. Discussant to invited symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.

  • Merrill, M. D. (1983). The component display theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, W. E. (1984, April).Systems design in military training. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Montague, W. E., Ellis, J. A., & Wulfeck, W. H. (1983, August).The instructional quality inventory (IQI): A formative evaluation tool for instructional systems development. (NPRDC-TR-83-21). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, W. E., Wulfeck, W. H., & Ellis, J. E. (1983). Quality CBI depends on quality instructional design and quality implementation.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 10(3 & 4), 90–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noel, K. L., & Hewlett, K. L. (1981). Plying your craft: Instructional development and the use of heuristics.Performance and Instruction, 20(7), 15–18, 48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. R., & Bass, V. B. (1982). The application of performance technology in the military: 1960–1980.Performance and Instruction, 21(6), 32–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Neil, H. L., Faust, G. W., & O'Neal, A. F. (1979). An author training course. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.),Issues in instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxford-Carpenter, R. L., & Schultz-Shiner, L. J. (1984). Army job training development and testing practices compared to the instructional systems development model.Training Technology Journal, 1(3), 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paris, S. G., Newman, R. S., & Jacobs, J. E. (in press). Social contexts and the functions of children's remembering. In. C. J. Brainerd & M. Presley (Eds.),The cognitive side of memory development. New York: Springer-Verlag.

  • Pharris, J. L. (1984). What is “neglected” in instructional design?Educational Technology, 24(1), 37–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, T. J. (1984). Instructional systems development (ISD) input to maintenance training device design.Training Technology Journal, 1(4), 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C.M. (1984). The evolution of instructional science: Toward a common knowledge base.Educational Technology, 24(11), 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983a). Current trends in task analysis: The integration of task analysis and instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 6(4), 24–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983b). Meaningfulness and instruction; Relating what is being learned to what a student knows.Instructional Science, 12, 197–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., & Stein, F. S. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., Van Patten, J., & Doughty, P. (1981). Science approach to instructional development.Performance and Instruction, 20(7), 19–22, 48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1976). Task analysis in instructional design: Some cases from mathematics. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1983). Toward a cognitive theory of instruction. In. S. G. Paris, G. M. Olson, & H. W. Stevenson (Eds.),Learning and motivation in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. J., Kemner-Richardson, S., Keller, R. A., Anselme, C. J., & Moul, B. L. (1984, July).Automated task analysis authoring aid (AFHRL Final Report). Lowry Air Force Base, CO: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Technical Training Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, S. G. (1981). Practicing the art of instructional development.Performance and Instruction, 20(7), 8–10, 35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandieson, R. (1984, April).The development theory of instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Scandura, J. M. (1983). Instructional strategies based on the structural learning theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shettle, H. H. (1983, October).Task analysis and personnel decision-making—a solution or part of the problem? Paper presented at the 25th annual conference of the Military Testing Association, Gulf Shores, Alabama.

  • Stiehl, R. E., & Streit, L. D. (1984). Factors assuring success of an instructional systems model.Educational Technology, 24(8), 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vineberg, R., & Joyner, J. N. (1980, January).Instructional system development (ISD) in the armed services: Methodology and application. (HumRRO-TR-80-1). Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vineberg, R., & Joyner, J. N. (1983).Task-related job reading inventory: Development and field trial of a prototype (AFHRL-TP-82-46). Lowry Air Force Base, CO: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Training Systems Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. C., & Lindvall, C. M. (1984). Individual differences and school learning environments.Review of Research in Education, 11, 161–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1982). Student interaction and learning in small groups.Review of Education Research, 52(3), 421–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wileman, R. E., & Gambill, T. G. (1983). The neglected phase of instructional design.Educational Technology, 23(11), 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajowski, M. M., Heidt, E. A., Corey, J. M., Mew, D. V., & Micheli, G. S. (1979), November).An assessment of individualized instruction in Navy technical training. Orlando, FL: Training Analysis and Evaluation Group.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Denver Research Institute, Social Systems Research and Evaluation, University of Denver, University Park, 80208-0452, Denver, CO

    Barbara L. McCombs (senior research scientist)

Authors
  1. Barbara L. McCombs
    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

McCombs, B.L. ERIC/ECTJ annual review paper. ECTJ 34, 67–81 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802578

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802578

Keywords

Search

Navigation