Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Designing for Designerly Ways of Knowing: Creating Learning Design Futures in Higher Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design Praxiology and Phenomenology

Abstract

The need to design learning exists in different professional roles and design practices vary among higher education faculty members, learning designers, and instructional designers. Designerly knowing is a unifying theme that underpins the education of designers of learning. However, teaching designerly knowing to the designers of learning is not straightforward as it not only involves challenging their existing design routines and teaching conceptions, but also the formation of their design identities. Through a personal narrative, this chapter examines the notion of designerly knowing from the author’s experiences as practitioner of instructional design, an instructional design student, and a teacher of designers of learning. It discusses examples of how higher education design educators can foster designerly knowing through the use of alternative design contexts, experiential learning of theory, technology-enhanced learning, and capstone experiences. It also suggests how higher education institutions can support faculty members to embody designerly knowing within their teaching practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agostinho, S., Lockyer, L., & Bennett, S. (2018). Identifying the characteristics of support Australian university teachers use in their design work: Implications for the learning design field. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3776

  • Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980, June 01). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of instructional development, 3(4), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02904348

  • Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, J., Broek, S., Durazzi, N., Kamphuis, B., Ranga, M., & Ryan, S. (2014). Study on innovation in higher education: final report. European Commission Directorate for education and training study on innovation in higher education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H. (2008). Autoethnography as method. Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conole, G., & Fill, K. (2005). A learning design toolkit to create pedagogically effective learning activities. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 08. jime.open.ac.uk/2005/08

  • Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donald, C., Blake, A., Girault, I., Datt, A., & Ramsay, E. (2009, August 01). Approaches to learning design: past the head and the hands to the HEART of the matter. Distance Education, 30(2), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910903023181

  • Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design issues, 22(3), 4–17. https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4

  • Driscoll, M. P. (2014). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2017, January 02). Teaching with technology in higher education: Understanding conceptual change and development in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1171300

  • Gibbons, A. S., Botturi, L., Boot, E., & Nelson, J. (2008). Design languages. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 633–645).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P., & Dalziel, J. (2006). Patterns, designs and activities: Unifying descriptions of learning structures. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(2–3), 216–242. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2006.010632

  • Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. A. H. Stevenson & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014, January 02). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404

  • Koh, J. H. L. (2013). A rubric to analyze teachers’ conceptions of meaningful learning in ICT lesson planning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(6), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.228

  • Koh, J. H. L. (2017). Designing and integrating reusable learning objects for meaningful learning: Cases from a graduate programme. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3072

  • Koh, J. H. L. (2019). Articulating teachers’ creation of technological pedagogical mathematical knowledge (TPMK) for supporting mathematical inquiry with authentic problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17, 1195–1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9914-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L. (2020). Three approaches for supporting faculty technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) creation through instructional consultation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51, 2529–2543. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tay, L. Y. (2014). TPACK-in-action: Unpacking the contextual influences of teachers’ construction of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 78, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koper, R., & Olivier, B. (2004). Representing the learning design of units of learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 7(3), 97–111. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/jeductechsoci.7.3.97

  • Korkmaz, N., & Boling, E. (2014). Development of design judgment in instructional design: Perspectives from instructors, students, and instructional designers. In B. Hokanson & A. Gibbons (Eds.), Design in educational technology: Design thinking, design process, and the design studio (pp. 161–184). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00927-8_10

  • Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified (4th ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lea, S. J., Stephenson, D., & Troy, J. (2003, August 01). Higher education students’ attitudes to student-centred learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’? Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070309293

  • MacLean, P., & Scott, B. (2011). Competencies for learning design: A review of the literature and a proposed framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01090.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mager, R. F. (1984). Preparing instructional objectives (2nd ed.). David S. Lake.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher lnowledge. Teachers’ College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/99246/

  • Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 34–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4930420508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mor, Y., & Craft, B. (2012). Learning design: Reflections upon the current landscape. Research in Learning Technology, 20. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v20i0.19196

  • Mor, Y., Ferguson, R., & Wasson, B. (2015). Editorial: Learning design, teacher inquiry into student learning and learning analytics: A call for action. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 221–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2013). Designing effective instruction. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, J. W. (2013). Developing a new framework for conceptualizing “Student-Centered Learning.” The Educational Forum, 77(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2012.761313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puentedura, R. R. (2013). SAMR: Moving from enhancement to transformation. AIS ICT management and leadership conference, Canberra, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). Instructional design theories and models (Vol. II). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (2009). Instructional design theories and models (Vol. III). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, R. A. (1987). Instructional technology: A history. In R. Gagne (Ed.), Instructional technology: Foundations (pp. 11–48). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saettler, P. (1990). The evolution of American educational technology. Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1992). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer, D. R. (1999). The design and development of high-impact interventions. In H. Stolovitch & E. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed., pp. 163–184). Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangney, S. (2014, April 03). Student-centred learning: a humanist perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(3), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.860099

  • Taylor, J. A. (2013). What is student centredness and is it enough? International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 4(2), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v4i1.168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toetenel, L., & Rienties, B. (2016, September 01). Learning design—creative design to visualise learning activities. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 31(3), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2016.1213626

  • Tripp, S. D., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990, March 01). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298246

  • Wall, S. S. (2016). Toward a moderate autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 15(1), 1609406916674966. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916674966

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Joyce Hwee Ling Koh

Authors
  1. Joyce Hwee Ling Koh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joyce Hwee Ling Koh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Western Sydney University, Bankstown, NSW, Australia

    Lynde Tan

  2. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Beaumie Kim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Koh, J.H.L. (2022). Designing for Designerly Ways of Knowing: Creating Learning Design Futures in Higher Education. In: Tan, L., Kim, B. (eds) Design Praxiology and Phenomenology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2806-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2806-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-2805-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-2806-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation