This paper presents an analysis of educational technology research with specific emphasis on determining how the research goals pursued and methods used have evolved over the 25-year period from 1989 through 2014. For this study, the contents of the Educational Technology Research and Development journal were analyzed over two six-year periods, first from 1989 to 1994 and second from 2009 to 2014, to identify the goals and methods of the studies specifically designated in the journal as “research papers.” Results indicate trends in the goals and methods employed in educational technology research that have implications for future research directions as well as for the preparation of graduate students and early career scholars to conduct educational technology research.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25.
Baydas, O., Kucuk, S., Yilmaz, R.M., Aydemir, M., & Goktas, Y. (2015). Educational technology research trends from 2002 to 2014. Scientometrics, Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/journal/11192
Bulfin, S., Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F., & Selwyn, N. (2014). Methodological capacity within the field of “educational technology” research: An initial investigation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 403–414.
Cilesiz, S., & Spector, J. M. (2014). The philosophy of science and educational technology research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 875–884). New York: Springer.
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cuban, L. (2013). Inside the black box of classroom practice: Change without reform in American education. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
Davidson, C. N. (2012). Now you see it: How technology and brain science will transform schools and business for the 21st century. New York: Penguin Books.
Evans, M. A. (2011). A critical-realist response to the postmodern agenda in instructional design and technology: A way forward. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 799–815.
Freeman, M., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & Pierre, E. A. S. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36(1), 25–32.
Gitlin, A. (2014). Power and method: Political activism and educational research. New York: Routledge.
Hahs-Vaughn, D. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Quality of abstracts in articles submitted to a scholarly journal: A mixed methods case study of the journal Research in the Schools. Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 53–61.
Hartley, J., & Betts, L. (2009). Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(10), 2010–2018.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.
Hlynka, D., & Belland, J. C. (1991). Paradigms regained: The uses of illuminative, semiotic, and post-modern criticism as modes of inquiry in educational technology: A book of readings. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.
Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2014). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Howe, K. R. (1998). The interpretive turn and the new debate in education. Educational Researcher, 27(8), 13–20.
Hsu, Y. C., Hung, J. L., & Ching, Y. H. (2013). Trends of educational technology research: More than a decade of international research in six SSCI-indexed refereed journals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 685–705.
Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York: Routledge.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.
Jonassen, D. H. (Ed.). (1996). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan.
Kane, T. J. (2016). Connecting to practice: How we can put educational research to work. Education Next, 16(2), 80–87.
Kozma, R. (2000). Reflections on the state of educational technology research and development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 5–15.
Krathwohl, D. R. (1998). Methods of educational and social science research: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). Long Grove: Waveland Press.
Landis, J., & Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
McKenney, S. E., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. New York: Routledge.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2013). Systematic review of design-based research progress: Is a little knowledge a dangerous thing? Educational Researcher, 42(2), 97–100.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.
Mielke, K. W. (1968). Questioning the questions of ETV research. Educational Broadcasting, 2, 6–15.
Nichols, R. G., & Allen-Brown, V. (1996). Critical theory and educational technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 226–252). New York: Macmillan.
Oliver, M. (2011). Technological determinism in educational technology research: Some alternative ways of thinking about the relationship between learning and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 27(5), 373–384.
Oliver, M. (2014). Fostering relevant research on educational communications and technology. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 909–918). New York: Springer.
Phillips, D. C. (2000). The expanded social scientist’s bestiary. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Phillips, D. C. (2014). Research in the hard sciences, and in very hard “softer” domains. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 9–11.
Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2013). Educational design research. In N. L. Enschede (Ed), The Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO). Downloadable from http://international.slo.nl/publications/edr/
Reeves, T. C. (1995). Questioning the questions of instructional technology research. In M. R. Simonson & M. Anderson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 459–470). Anaheim: Research and Theory Division.
Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Reorienting educational technology research from things to problems. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), 91–93.
Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53–64.
Roblyer, M. D., & Knezek, G. A. (2003). New millennium research for educational technology: A call for a national research agenda. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(1), 60–71.
Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17–35.
Russell, T. L. (2001). The no significant difference phenomenon (5th ed.). Montgomery: International Distance Education Certification Center.
Salomon, G. (1991). Transcending the qualitative-quantitative debate: The analytic and systemic approaches to educational research. Educational Researcher, 20(6), 10–18.
Selwyn, N. (2013). Distrusting educational technology: Critical questions for changing times. New York: Routledge.
Solomon, D. L. (2000). Toward a post-modern agenda in instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 5–20.
Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.). (2014a). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.). New York: Springer.
Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (2014b). Epilogue. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 919–924). New York: Springer.
Stallard, C. K., & Cocker, J. (2014). Education technology and the failure of American schools. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–135.
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. Colorado Springs: Createspace.
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.
Treagust, D. F., Won, M., & Duit, R. (2014). Paradigms in science education research. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (2nd ed., pp. 3–17). New York: Routledge.
West, D. M. (2013). Digital schools: How technology can transform education. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
West, R. E., & Borup, J. (2014). An analysis of a decade of research in 10 instructional design and technology journals. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 545–556.
Wijekumar, K. K., Meyer, B. J., & Lei, P. (2012). Large-scale randomized controlled trial with 4th graders using intelligent tutoring of the structure strategy to improve nonfiction reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 987–1013.
Yeaman, A. R. J., Hlynka, D., Anderson, J. H., Damarin, S. K., & Muffoletto, R. (1996). Postmodern and poststructuralist theory. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 253–295). New York: Macmillan.
Zaugg, H., Amado, M., & Small, T. (2011). Educational technology research journals: Educational technology research and development, 2001–2010. Educational Technology, 51(5), 43–47.
This project received no external funding.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Reeves, T.C., Oh, E.G. The goals and methods of educational technology research over a quarter century (1989–2014). Education Tech Research Dev 65, 325–339 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9474-1
- Educational Technology
- Research Goal
- Research Section
- Educational Technology Research
- Integrative Literature Review