Abstract
In this chapter, I present a view of instructional design that responds to the tendency some designers have shown to take ultimate responsibility for the learning that people experience. First, I describe different ways that designers have historically assumed they were primarily responsible for students’ learning. Second, I discuss how similar issues are still a concern even with recent evolutions in the field toward human-centered design practices. Third, I present a view of instructional design, based in the philosophy of Hannah Arendt, that considers it to be a type of relationship that designers enter into with learners, rather than principally being a process for making instructional products. In presenting this, I also suggest how a reframed view provides new ways of considering designer responsibility, helping designers better understand what they are influencing when they design. This can lead to designers being better partners with learners in pursuit of the unique disclosure of all parties involved, which is a type of achievement that could not be attained without viewing learners as equal contributors to the learning relationship.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arendt, H. (1998). The human condition. The University of Chicago Press.
Baker, F. W., III, & Moukhliss, S. (2020). Concretising design thinking: A content analysis of systematic and extended literature reviews on design thinking and human-centred design. Review of Education, 8(1), 305–333. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3186
Bannon, L., Bardzell, J., & Bødker, S. (2019). Reimagining participatory design. Interactions, 26(1), 27–32.
Barnett, K., & Mattox, J. R. (2010). Measuring success and ROI in corporate training. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 14(2), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v14i2.157
Biesta, G. J. J. (2006). Beyond learning: Democratic education for a human future. Paradigm Publishers.
Biesta, G. J. J. (2013). The beautiful risk of education. Taylor & Francis.
Boling, E., & Gray, C. M. (2014). Design: The topic that should not be closed. TechTrends, 58(6), 17–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0798-6
Bowen, S., Durrant, A., Nissen, B., Bowers, J., & Wright, P. (2016). The value of designers’ creative practice within complex collaborations. Design Studies, 46, 174–198.
Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2018). Beyond teaching instructional design models: Exploring the design process to advance professional development and expertise. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9164-y
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00806.x
Buchanan, R., Cross, N., Durling, D., Nelson, H. G., Owen, C., Valtonen, A., Boling, E., Gibbons, A. S., & Visscher-Voerman, I. (2013). Design. Educational Technology, 53(5), 25–42.
Chen, S., Benedicktus, R., Kim, Y., & Shih, E. (2018). Teaching design thinking in marketing: Linking product design and marketing strategy in a product development class. Journal of Marketing Education, 40(3), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475317753678
Costanza-Chock, S. (2018). Design justice: Towards an intersectional feminist framework for design theory and practice. DRS2018: Catalyst. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.679
D’Entreves, M. P. (2019). Hannah Arendt. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/arendt/
de Vries, B., & Reinmann, G. (2018). Resonating with reflexive design: On participatory design, narrative research and crystallization. Educational Design Research, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.2.1.1184
Dick, W. (1987). A history of instructional design and its impact on educational psychology. In J. A. Glover & R. R. Ronning (Eds.), Historical foundations of educational psychology (pp. 183–202). Plenum Press.
Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Creating new thinking by design. The MIT Press.
Dunne, J. (1997). Back to the rough ground: Practical judgment and the lure of technique. University of Notre Dame Press.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143
Gibbons, A. S., Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2014). Instructional design models. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. Van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 607–615). Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_48
Glen, R., Suciu, C., Baughn, C. C., & Anson, R. (2015). Teaching design thinking in business schools. International Journal of Management Education, 13(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.05.001
Gur, B. S., & Wiley, D. A. (2007). Instructional technology and objectification. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 33(3).
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: A creative approach to educational problems of practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: Past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12023
Kimbell, L. (2011). Rethinking design thinking: Part I. Design and Culture, 3(3), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.2752/175470811X13071166525216
Lankshear, S., Kerr, M. S., Laschinger, H. K., & Wong, C. A. (2013). Professional practice leadership roles: The role of organizational power and personal influence in creating a professional practice environment for nurses. Health Care Management Review, 38(4), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0b013e31826fd517
Lourens, N. (2015). A critique of design thinking: An interrogation into the value and values of design thinking. University of Pretoria.
Machon, J. (2013). Immersive theaters: Intimacy and immediacy in contemporary performance. Palgrave Macmillan.
Matthews, M. T. (2016). Learner agency and responsibility in educational technology. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Brigham Young University.
Matthews, M. T., & Yanchar, S. C. (2018a). Instructional design as manipulation of, or cooperation with, learners? TechTrends, 62(2), 152–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0245-6
Matthews, M. T., & Yanchar, S. C. (2018b). Instructional designers’ perspectives on learners’ responsibility for learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(1), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9175-3
McDonald, J. K. (2016). Embracing the danger: Accepting the implications of innovation. Educational Technology, 56(6), 14–17.
McDonald, J. K., & Gibbons, A. S. (2009). Technology I, II, and III: Criteria for understanding and improving the practice of instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 377–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9051-8
McDonald, J. K., & Yanchar, S. C. (2020). Towards a view of originary theory in instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 633–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09734-8
McDonald, J. K., Yanchar, S. C., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (2005). Learning from programmed instruction: Examining implications for modern instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504867
Micheli, P., Wilner, S. J. S., Bhatti, S. H., Mura, M., & Beverland, M. B. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12466
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world (2nd ed.). The MIT Press.
Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781.
Pedersen, S. (2020). Staging negotiation spaces: A co-design framework. Design Studies, 68, 58–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.002
Post, D. (1972). Up the programmer: How to stop PI from boring learners and strangling results. Educational Technology, 12(8), 14–17.
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design, 4(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
Simonsen, J., & Roberson, T. (Eds.). (2013). Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge.
Sorgenfrei, C., & Smolnik, S. (2016). The effectiveness of e-learning systems: A review of the empirical literature on learner control. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 154–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12095
Stolterman, E. (2016). Some thoughts about the problematic term “design thinking.” Retrieved from http://transground.blogspot.com/2016/12/composing-some-blogposts-in-small-ebook.html
Tassinari, V., Piredda, F., & Bertolotti, E. (2017). Storytelling in design for social innovation and politics: A reading through the lenses of Hannah Arendt. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S3486–S3495. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352852
Verganti, R. (2008). Design, meanings, and radical innovation: A metamodel and a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(5), 436–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2008.00313.x
Woudhuysen, J. (2011). The craze for design thinking: Roots, a critique, and toward an alternative. Design Principles and Practices, 5(6), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.18848/1833-1874/CGP/v05i06/38216
Yanchar, S. C., & Spackman, J. S. (2012). Agency and learning: Some implications for educational technology theory and research. Educational Technology, 52(5), 3–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McDonald, J.K. (2021). Instructional Design as a Way of Acting in Relationship with Learners. In: Hokanson, B., Exter, M., Grincewicz, A., Schmidt, M., Tawfik, A.A. (eds) Learning: Design, Engagement and Definition. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85078-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85078-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-85077-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-85078-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)