Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative analysis of models of instructional design

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of instructional development

Abstract

Models of instructional design help educators to design instructional patterns that presumably have proven successful in past instructional endeavors. The writers examined 40 models of instructional design from a variety of sources. The 40 models were divided into categories based on the models’ most pertinent characteristics. The purposes and uses of these models are discussed and an explanation is offered of why so many different models exist. The writers concluded that because of the varying levels of quality of models, educators must be especially careful in choosing which model to follow when designing instruction.

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

  • Adair, C. H. & Foster, J. T.A guide for simulation design. Tallahassee, Florida: Instructional Simulation Design, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • AECT.Educational technology: Definition and glossary (Vol. 1). Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communication and Technology, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C.Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, W. A., Jr., What is instructional systems development?Educational Technology, December 1975, pp.17–21.

  • Ausubel, D. P.Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banathy, B. H.Instructional systems. Belmont, Calif.: Lear Sieglar, Inc./ Fearon, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barson,J. Instructional systems development: A demonstration and evaluation project. U.S. Office of Education, Title VII-B, Project OE-3-16-025, 1965.

  • Bishop, L. J.Staff development and instructional improvement: Plans and procedures. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branson, R. K. The interservice procedures for instructional systems development.Educational Technology, March 1978, pp. 11–14.

  • Brien, R. L., & Towle, N. J. Instructional design and development: Accelerating the process.Educational Technology, February 1977, pp. 12–17.

  • Briggs, L. J.An overview of instructional systems design. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida State University, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W.Handbook of procedures for the design of instruction (2nd ed.). Draft of second edition printed by Florida State University, 1979.

  • Brooks, R. D., Whitehead, J., & Miller, F. W. Application of a three-stage systems approach model for producing career awareness materials.Audiovisual Instruction, April 1973, pp. 17–20.

  • Bruner, J. S.Toward a theory of instruction. New York: W. W. Norton, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkman, E.Individualized science instructional system (ISIS) project proposal. Unpublished manuscript, 1976–1978. (Available from Department of Educational, Research, Development, and Foundations, Education Building, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306.)

  • Carey, J., and Briggs, L. J. Teams as designers. In L. J. Briggs (Ed.),Instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, C. W.The systems approach. New York: Dell, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crittendon, J. F., & Massey, R.Florida’s vocational curriculum system: Issues in statewide curriculum development. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Ontario, March 1978.

  • Davis, J. J. Design and implementation of an individualized instruction program.Educational Technology, December 1977, pp. 36–41.

  • Davis, L. N., & McCallon, E.Planning, conducting, and evaluating work-shops. Austin, Tex.: Learning Concepts, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dederick, W. E., & Sturge, H. H. An operational instructional systems model: U. S. Naval training.Educational Technology, June 1975, pp. 28–32.

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L.The systematic design of instruction. Chicago: Scott, Foresman, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Even, M. J.A new instructional design and development process for instructors of adults. Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska, 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 146 366).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friesen, P. A.Designing instruction: A systematic or “systems” approach using programmed instruction as a model. Santa Monica, Calif.: Miller Publishing, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagne, R. M.The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M. & Briggs, L. J.Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. Psychological bases for instructional design.AV Communication Review, 1966, 24(4), 433–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasgow, Z.Learning systems research,development, testing and evaluation. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Learning Technology Congress and Exposition on Applied Learning Technology for Human Resource Development, Washington, D.C., July 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 126 854)

  • Goodson, L. A., & Roberts, R. C.Competency-based staff training for retardation services personnel: A train-the-trainer requirement. Paper presented at the meeting of the Florida Educational Research Association, Daytona Beach, Florida, January 1979, and of the American Educational Research Association, April 1979.

  • Gropper, G. L.Development of course content and instructional materials/ aids for the training of educational research, development, diffusion, and evaluation personnel. Supplementary Final Report, May 1973. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 085 349)

  • Gropper, G. L. On gaining acceptance for instructional design in a university setting.Educational Technology, December 1977, pp. 7–12.

  • Hayman, J. L., Jr. The systems approach and education.The Educational Forum, May 1974, pp. 491–501.

  • Houle, C. O.The design of education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., & Weil, M.Models of teaching. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A.The conduct of inquiry. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, R. A.Eduational system planning. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, R. E.A systems approach to teaching. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Annual Conference, Anaheim, California, March 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 124 184)

  • LaGow, R. L. The utilization of grounded theory to identify instructional development elements in adult education programs. Paper presented at the meeting of the Adult Education Research Conference, Minneapolis, April 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 145 074)

  • Laugen, R. Personal communication, February 7,1979.

  • Ledford, B. R. A panacea?International Journal of Instructional Media, 1976, 4(1), 53–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, B. N. Instructional system development (ISD)—an Air Force way of life.Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 1975 4(1), 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legere, J., Flynn, E. B., & Tracey, W. R. U.S. Army Security Agency, Training Center and School, F. Devens, Massachusetts, 1966.

  • Lowe, A. J., & Schwen, T. M. The documentation of instructional development.Educational Technology, June 1975, pp. 42–47.

  • Logan, R.Instructional systems development and learning strategies. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Detroit, August 1976.

  • Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P.Criterionreferenced instruction: Analysis, design, and implementation. Los Altos Hills, Calif.: Mager Associates, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, C. A. A system approach for delivering supplemental instruction to handicapped children.Educational Technology, December 1978, pp. 25–29.

  • Merrill, M. D. Content and instructional analysis for cognitive transfer tasks.AV Communication Review, 1973, 21(1), 109–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., & Boutwell, R. C. Instructional development: Methodology and research. In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.),Review of research in education (Vol. 1), Itasca, III.: Peacock Publishers, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnar, A. R.The future of educational technology research and development. Washington, D. C.: National Science Foundation, 1971. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 054 642)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, F., & Green, J. Comparative analysis of program development processes in six professions.Adult Education, 27(1), 1976.

  • Penta, F. B. A systems model for the development of instructional materials.Educational Technology, July 1973, pp. 12–15.

  • Piaget, J.The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, D.Cybernetic principles in the design of instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, March 1978. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 154 799)

  • Pye, D.The nature of design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. C.The construction and field-testing of a program planning model for non-formal adult education in human service agencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 1978.

  • Scanland, W.The instructional systems development function—How to get it done. Paper presented at the National Society for Performance and Instruction Annual Conference, Miami, Florida, April 1974. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 095 839)

  • Sherman, T. M. Teaching educators to use the systems approach: An instructional analysis.Educational Technology, September 1978, pp. 40–47.

  • Shoemaker, B. R., & Parks, D. L. (Eds.).An Instructional system design for vocational education. Columbus, Ohio: Division of Vocational Education, Instructional Materials Laboratory, The Ohio State University, June 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 143 888)

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A.Sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, Mass.: M. I. T. Press, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. The science of learning and the art of teaching.Harvard Educational Review, 1954, 24(232), 86–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N. L., & Murray, S. L. The status of research on models of product development and evaluation.Educational Technology, March 1975, pp. 13–17.

  • Teague, W., & Faulkner, T. L.Developing performance objectives and criterion-referenced measures for performance-based instruction in vocational education. Montgomery, Ala.: Division of Vocational Education, Alabama State Department of Education, 1978. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 154 799)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Boutwell, R. C. A quality control design for validating hierarchical sequencing of programmed instruction.NSPI Journal 1971, 4, 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tosti, D. T., & Ball, J. R. A behavioral approach to instructional design and media selection.AV Communication Review, 1969, 17, 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman, B. W. The student-centered curriculum: A concept in curriculum innovation.Educational Technology, October 1969, pp. 26–29.

  • Tuckman, B., and Edwards, K. A systems model for instructional design and management. An Introduction to the systems approach. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Army Combat Arms Training Board.Interservice procedures for instructional systems development. Ft. Benning, Georgia: Author, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, B.Applying an instructional psychology model to analysis of the reading task. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Reading Association, Anaheim, California, May 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 126 426)

  • von Bertalanffy, L.General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldron, J. S.Instructional development unit: A guide to organizing an instructional development unit in health science educational institutions. Atlanta: Office of Audiovisual Educational Development, Bureau of Health Manpower Education and the National Medical Audiovisual Center, National Library of Medicine, 1973. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 125 625).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallen, C. J. SATE: A systems approach to developing instructional programs in teacher education.Educational Technology, July 1973, pp. 27–31.

  • Waters, B. K., Edwards, B. J., & Smith, B. A. Multimedia cognitive pretraining of Air Force pilots.Educational Technology, March 1978, pp. 50–57.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Naval Training Equipment Center, 32792, Orlando, FL

    Dee H. Andrews (Psychologist)

  2. L. R. O’Neall and Associates, Ltd., 32301, Tallahassee, FL

    Ludwika A. Goodson (Instructional Designer)

Authors
  1. Dee H. Andrews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ludwika A. Goodson
    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

Andrews, D.H., Goodson, L.A. A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development 3, 2–16 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02904348

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02904348

Keywords

Search

Navigation