Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research on instructional development

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The instructional technology field is periodically faced with discussion of the appropriate direction of its research and more specifically of the relationship between research and practice. This paper extends the discussion by examining the nature and scope of developmental research. Two categories of developmental research are explored. They vary in terms of the extent to which the conclusions resulting from the research are generalizable or contextually-specific. Type 1 research tends to be case studies of specific design, development, or evaluation projects with its findings directed toward the improvement of a product or identification of those conditions conducive to efficient product development and use. Type 2 research typically addresses the validity and/or effectiveness of an existing or newly constructed development model, process, or technique. The promise of developmental research as a vehicle for creating sound methods for linking research and practice is discussed.

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

  • Alessi, S.M. (1988). Learning interactive videodisc development: A case study.Journal of Instructional Development, 11(2), 2–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, D., & Tsai, C. (1990). Hypercard in educational research: An introduction and case study.Educational Technology, 30(2), 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, L.J. (Ed.). (1977).Instructional design: Principles and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buch, E.E. (1989). A systematically developed training program for microcomputer users in an industrial setting. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1988).Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 49(4), 750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambre, M.A. (1979). The development of formative evaluation procedures for instructional film and television: The first fifty years. (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978).Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 39(7), 3995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R.E. (1989). Current progress and future directions for research in instructional technology.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(1), 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. (1991). The Singapore project: A case study in instructional design.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4(1), 14–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. (1997). Better instructional design theory: Process improvement or reengineering? A paper presented at the 1997 annual conference of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology in Albuquerque, NM.

  • Dick, W., & Dick, W.D. (1989). Analytical and empirical comparisons of theJournal of Instructional Development andEducational Communication and Technology Journal.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(1), 81–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M.P. (1995). Paradigms for research in instructional systems. In G. Anglin (Ed.),Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (2nd Ed.) (pp. 322–329). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M.P., & Tessmer, M.. (1985). The rational set generator: A method for creating concept examples for teaching and testing.Educational Technology, 25(2), 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J.D. (1953). Professionalizing the audio-visual field.Audio-visual communication review 1(1), 6–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K.L. (1991).Survey of instructional development models (2nd. Ed.). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University, ERIC Clearinghouse on Information Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, R. (1984). The proper study of instructional technology.Educational Technology Research & Development, 32(2), 67–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J.D., & Smaldino, S.E. (1996).Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction (5th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill, an imprint of Prentice Hall. Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, N., & Sullivan, H. (1989). Perspectives onEducational Technology Research and Development.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(1), 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H. (1988). Using needs assessment data to design a graduate instructional development program.Journal of Instructional Development, 11(2), 14–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J.M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D., & Dille, A. (1993). An early endeavor to apply quality concepts to the systematic design of instruction: Successes and lessons learned.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(3), 48–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, N., & Cherow-O'Leary, R. (1990). Research and development of print materials at the Children's Television Workshop.Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(4), 34–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markle, S.M. (1967). Empirical testing of programs. In P.C. Lange (Ed.)Programmed instruction. The Sixty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (pp. 104–138). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, W.A. (1990). Selection and utilization of problem information by instructional designers. (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1988).Dissertation Abstract International-A, 50(4), 866.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Quin, K., Kinsey, T.G., & Beery, D. (1987). Effectiveness of a microcomputer-training workshop for college professionals.Computers in Human Behavior, 3(2), 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, I., & Hannafin, M.J. (1993). Empirically-based guidelines for the design of interactive multimedia.Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelz, D.C. (1967, July). Creative tensions in the research and development climate.Science, pp. 160–165.

  • Petry, B.A., & Edwards, M.L. (1984). Systematic development of an applied phonetics course.Journal of Instructional Development, 7(4), 6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pizzuto, A.E. (1983). The development and evaluation of a simulation game demonstrating diffusion communications in a corporate organization. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1982).Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 43(4), 1273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plummer, K.H., Gillis, P.D., Legree, P.J., & Sanders, M.G. (1992). The development and evaluation of a job aid to support mobile subscriber radio-telephone terminal (MSRT).Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(1), 90–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C.M. (1989). Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 67–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R.C. (1992).Designing instruction for the adult learner: Systemic training theory and practice. London/Bristol, PA: Kogan Page/Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R.C., & Nelson, W. (1996). Developmental Research. In D. Jonassen (Ed.)Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 1213–1245). New York: Macmillan Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riplinger, J.A. (1987). A survey of task analysis activities used by instructional designers. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, 1985).Dissertation Abstracts International-A, 47(3), 778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S.M., & Morrison, G.R. (1989). In search of a happy medium in instructional technology research: Issues concerning external validity, media replications, and learner control.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seels, B.B., & Richey, R.C. (1994).Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. (1993). Evaluation of executive development: A case study.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(1), 26–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J.M., Muraida, D.J., & Marlino, M.R. (1992). Cognitively based models of courseware development.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(2), 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B., & Ellis, J. (1991). An evaluation of instructional systems development in the Navy.Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(1), 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedman, J., & Tessmer, M. (1993). Instructional designers' decisions and priorities: A survey of design practice.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(2), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wayne State University in Detroit, USA

    Rita C. Richey (Professor of Instructional Technology)

Authors
  1. Rita C. Richey
    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

Richey, R.C. Research on instructional development. ETR&D 45, 91–100 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299732

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299732

Keywords

Search

Navigation