Andrew S. Gibbons

What and How Do Designers Design: A Theory of Design Structure.

ConclusionThe design-layering concept has many implications. In this paper I have explored one of them that explains the maturation in designer thinking over time. In order to move to a new perspective of design it is not necessary to leave older views behind. The new principles added as the designer becomes knowledgeable about each new layer adds to the designer’s range and to the sophistication of the designs that are possible. Further consideration of the layering concept will expand our ability to communicate designs in richer detail, achieve more sophisticated designs, and add to our understanding of the design process itself.

Design Languages, Notation Systems, and Instructional Technology: A Case Study

Notational systems, used in mature fields of study, are closely related to design languages. The future of a technological field depends on the ability to communicate ideas and changes with others in the field. Instructional technology is one field that can benefit from a notation system enabling designers to duplicate, execute, and communicate their ideas.In this paper, we look at several mature fields, including chemistry, musicology, and choreography, to discover elements where a mature design language and notation system have developed. We illustrate a number of dimensions that can help designers form their design languages and select the characteristics of their notation systems.

Instructional Design Models

Design has become increasingly important in a number of technology-related fields. Even the business world is now seen as primarily a designed venue, where better design principles often equate to increased revenue (Baldwin and Clark, Design rules, Vol. 1: The power of modularity, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2000; Clark et al., Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3:729–771, 1987; Martin, The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2009). Research on the design process has increased proportionally, and within the field of instructional design (ID) this research has tended to focus almost exclusively on the use of design models. This chapter examines the emergence of the standard design model in ID, its proliferation, its wide dissemination, and a narrowing of focus which has occurred over time. Parallel and divergent developments in design research outside the field are considered in terms of what might be learned from them. The recommendation is that instructional designers should seek more robust and searching descriptions of design with an eye to advancing how we think about it and therefore how we pursue design (Gibbons and Yanchar, Educ Technol 50(4):16–26, 2010).

Technology I, II, and III: Criteria for Understanding and Improving the Practice of Instructional Technology

In this paper we describe the criteria of Technology I, II, and III, which some instructional theorists have proposed to describe the differences between a formulaic and a reflective approach to solving educational problems. In a recent study, we applied these criteria to find evidence of a technological gravity that pulls practitioners away from reflective practices into a more reductive approach. We compared published reports of an innovative instructional theory, problem-based learning, to the goals of the theory as it was originally defined. We found three reasons for technological gravity, as well as three approaches some practitioners have used to avoid this gravity. We recommend that instructional technologists adopt our three approaches, as well as the criteria of Technology III, so they may better develop instruction of a quality consistent with the innovative instructional principles they claim, and that best characterizes the goals they have for their practice.

Design in educational technology : design thinking, design process, and the design studio

Introduction 1) Design, Designers and Reflection-in-Action 2) Eight Views of Instructional Design and What They Should Mean to Instructional Designers 3) Critical Issues in Studio Pedagogy: Beyond the Mystique and Down to Business 4) In Education We All Want to Be Nice: Lessons Learned from a Multidisciplinary Design Studio 5) Instructional Design in a Studio Environment: What Happens When Design Meets Hollywood? 6) Understanding and Examining Design in Action with Cultural Historical Activity Theory 7) Instructional Design Cases: Documenting precedent in instructional design 8) The Many Facets of Design and Research in Instructional Design 9) Reconceptualizing Instructional Message Design: Toward the Development of a New Guiding Framework 10) Development of Design Judgment in Instructional Design: Perspectives from Instructors, Students and Instructional Designers 11) Ethics as Design: Rethinking Professional Ethics as Part of the Design Domain 12) EDISYS: A Tool for Enhancing Design Inquiry Systems 13) Design-Thinking for Engineering Quality Instructional Design Processes Through Leadership Competencies and Modeling 14) Design Thinking and Higher Education Administration 15) The Half-Known World

Coming at Design from a Different Angle: Functional Design

This chapter defines a non-traditional view of the structure of instruc- tional designs that holds implications for the practice of instructional designing: what we call a theory of design layering. We discuss designing in many fields as a backdrop against which we examine this theoretical view of instructional design. We describe our design approach briefly as a set of propositions. Finally we examine the implications of the design layering approach for everyday design practice and the relation of instructional theories to instructional design.

The generative aspect of design theory

Good instructional design theory allows designers generative power in creating novel design solutions. Instead of simply copying what they have seen in other technology-enhanced learning environments, designers can utilize the operational principle of a theory to generate newer and more effective instructional designs.

Eight Views of Instructional Design and What They Should Mean to Instructional Designers

Eight different views of the design process are described with the purpose of broadening the practitioner’s concept of instructional design. Views both internal and external to instructional design are considered, so that instructional designers can see the traditions of their field in the context of design activity in other professional fields. Examples are drawn from architecture, digital design, team dynamics, organizational behavior, and design studies. Traditional instructional design theories and practices are placed within the context of this expanded panorama of design so that their value is enhanced but also so that the designer understands the source and limits of their value within the context of professional practice. Designers are encouraged to incorporate new terms into their professional language of designing. They are also asked to consider design as an act pursued at different levels of detail. Design at each level is influenced by principles that pertain to that level but which must be folded harmoniously into a completed design.

Effects of Administering Feedback Following Extended Problem Solving.

This article reports the results of research on the effects of detailed feedback on problem solving. In this study, 54 undergraduate college students were randomly assigned to one of six feedback conditions. Each student worked through two problem tasks within a computer-based electrical circuit board simulation. Feedback was given between problems and varied according to 1) the model from which it was generated and 2) the amount and nature of verbal commentary. Results indicated that highest performance was associated with feedback based on an expert model supplemented with provided textual commentary, suggesting that under some circumstances expert-model based feedback messaging may be more effective at facilitating student performance gains.

Critical Thinking in the Field of Educational Technology: Approaches, Projects, and Challenges

The authors discuss the need for critical thinking that examines the foundations of the field of educational technology. They provide an overview of two activities that can allow this kind of examination to take place. The first focuses on identifying assumptions and evaluating their implications. The second focuses on Finn’s (Audiovisual Communication Review, 1(1), 6–17, 1953) criteria for professionalism, which encompass concerns such as intellectualizing disciplinary content, applying intellectual content, and expanding intellectual theory through research. The authors then identify several key areas within the field that may be fruitfully examined via these critical thinking activities. Finally, the authors briefly discuss some challenges that accompany these forms of critical thinking.