Technology-Based Instructional Design: Evolution and Major Trends

  • Gilbert PaquetteEmail author


This chapter surveys ICT-based tools and methods that support instructional designers in planning the delivery of learning systems. This field has evolved since the 1970 through several paradigms: authoring tools, expert systems and intelligent tutoring systems, automated and guided instructional design, knowledge-based design methods, eLearning standards and social/cognitive Web environments. Examples will be given to illustrate each paradigm and the major trends will be uncovered. ICT has evolved rapidly, enabling new approaches to emerge, helping more people to design learning environments and building learning design repositories. More and more people are learning on the Web, using learning portals, information pages and interacting with other people, but still with insufficient educational support. New challenges make this field an exciting and blooming research area that has a bright future.


Instructional design Instructional engineering Knowledge-based design Educational modeling eLearning standards Web-based learning environments 


  1. Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). A cognitive theory of inquiry teaching. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories in action: lessons illustrating selected theories and models (pp. 247–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Crowder, N. (1959). Automatic tutoring by means of intrinsic programming. In E. H. Galanter (Ed.), Automatic teaching: The state of the Art. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  3. Dalziel, J. R. (2005). LAMS: Learning Activity Management System 2.0. Retrieved from
  4. Dewey, J. (1900). Psychology and social practice. Psychological Review, 1900(7), 105–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dick, W. (1987). A history of instructional design and its impact on educational psychology. In J. Glover & R. Roning (Eds.), Historical foundations of educational psychology (pp. 183–202). New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
  6. Dolog, P., Henze, N., Nejdl, W., & Sintek, M. (2003). Towards the adaptive semantic web. Lecture notes in computer science. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Duval, E., & Robson, R. (2001). Guest editorial on metadata. Interactive Learning Environments, 9(3), 201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elen, J. (1998). Automating I.D.: The impact of theoretical knowledge bases and referent systems. Instructional Science, 26(3/4), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. *Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  10. Gettman, D., McNelly, T., & Muraida, D. (1999). The guided approach to instructional design advising (GAIDA): A case-based approach to developing instructional design expertise. In J. V. D. Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and training (pp. 175–181). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffiths, D., Blat, J., Garcia, R., Votgen, H., & Kwong, K. L. (2005). Learning design tools. In R. Koper & C. Tattersall (Eds.), Learning design—a handbook on modeling and delivering networked education and training (pp. 109–136). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. IMS-LD. (2003). IMS Learning Design—Information Model, Best Practice and Implementation Guide, Binding document, Schemas. Retrieved October 3, 2003, from
  13. Koper R. (2001) Modeling Units of Study from a Pedagogical Perspective, the Pedagogical Meta-Model Behind EML. Technical Report, Educational Technology Expertise Center. Heerlen: Open University of Netherlands.Google Scholar
  14. *Koper R., & Tattersall, C. (Eds.) (2004). Learning design: A handbook of modelling and Implementing Network-based Education & Training. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Landa, L. (1976). Instructional regulation and control: Cybernetics, algorithmization, and heuristics in education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.Google Scholar
  16. Liao, M. C., Lo, S., Oyuki, M., & Wing Li, K. W. (2003). Authoring tool for ultiple Instructional strategies: Advance organizer, concept mapping and collaborative learning. World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  17. Locatis, C., & Park, O. (1992). Some uneasy inquiries into ID expert systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(3), 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. *Merrill, M. D. (1994) Principles of instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Merrill, M. D. (1998). ID Expert: A second generation instructional development system. Instructional Science, 26, 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merrill, M. D., Schneider, E. W., & Fletecher, K. A. (1980). TICCIT. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Education Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  21. *Paquette, G. (2004) Instructional engineering for network-based learning. New York, NY: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  22. Paquette, G. (2010a) Ontology-based educational modelling—Making IMS-LD visual. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 7(3–4), 263–296.Google Scholar
  23. *Paquette, G. (2010b) Visual knowledge modeling for semantic Web technology. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  24. Paquette, G., & Magnan, F. (2008). An executable model for virtual campus environments. In H. H. Adelsberger, Kinshuk, J. M. Pawlowski, & D. Sampson (Eds.), International handbook on information technologies for education and training (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Paquette, G., Aubin, C., & Crevier, F. (1994). An intelligent support system for course design. Educational Technology, 34(9), 50–57.Google Scholar
  26. Paquette, G., Rosca, I., Mihaila, S., & Masmoudi, A. (2006). TELOS, a service-oriented framework to support learning and knowledge management. In S. Pierre (Ed.), E-Learning networked environments and architectures: A knowledge processing perspective (pp. 79–107). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Paquette G., Marino, O., De la Teja, I., Lundgren-Cayrol, K., Léonard, M., & Contamines, J. (2005). Implementation and deployment of the IMS Learning Design Specification. Canadian Journal of Learning Technologies (CJLT),
  28. Paquette, G., & Marino, O. (2011) A Multi-actor ontology-based assistance model – A contribution to the adaptive semantic web. In S. Graf, F. Lin, Kinshuk, & R. McGreal (Eds.). Intelligent and Adaptive Learning Systems: Technology-Enchanced Support for Learners and Teachers, IGI Global, pp. 213–228.Google Scholar
  29. *Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Scandura, J. M. (1973). Strutural learning I: Theory and research. London: Gordon & Breach Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Schultz, R. E. (1975). Lesson Moniform – An authoring Aid for the Plato IV CAI System. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.go:80/PDFS/ED127.926.pdf
  32. SCORM, ADL Technical Team. (2004). Online paper. Retrieved from
  33. Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 24(2), 86–97.Google Scholar
  34. *Spector J. M., Polson M. C., & Muraida D. J. (Eds.) (1993). Automating instructional design, Concepts and issues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  35. W3C (2004). Ontology Web Language (OWL) overview document. Retrieved from 20040210/
  36. Wenger, E. (1987). Artificial intelligence and tutoring systems: Computational and cognitive approaches to the communication of knowledge. San Francisco, CA: Morgan-Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  37. Winkels, R. (1992). Explorations in intelligent tutoring and help. Amsterdam: Ios Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CICE Research Chair, LICEF Research CenterTélé-université du QuébecWest MontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations