Search results

1 – 10 of over 12000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 1 December 2015

Anne Guptill

This chapter discusses a bottom-up design strategy to support the principles of Universal Design and Universal Design for Learning adapted for online course development…

Abstract

This chapter discusses a bottom-up design strategy to support the principles of Universal Design and Universal Design for Learning adapted for online course development. The concept of Universal Design demands a holistic, bottom-up instructional design model for online course development that integrates technology, accessibility, recent instructional and learning theories, and a participatory postmodern worldview. This study is intended for faculty, instructional designers, administrators, assistive technology staff, and Web multimedia software vendors associated with higher education. The research assists these target audiences to design and develop online courses that are accessible without special adaptation or modification. The components of Universal Design for online learning support newer emergent approaches to instructional design, various programming solutions used in the software engineering field for efficiency, Universal Design for Learning, and legal guidelines associated with accessibility.

Details

Accessible Instructional Design
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-288-7

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 November 2009

Wanjira Kinuthia

While there is significant existing literature on learner analysis in instructional design and separately in cultural issues in education, these two areas are rarely…

Abstract

Purpose

While there is significant existing literature on learner analysis in instructional design and separately in cultural issues in education, these two areas are rarely examined in tandem. This paper aims to bring these two areas together.

Design/methodology/approach

This research uses qualitative methods within the context of a case study. A dual role is played by the author as instructor‐researcher in gathering and analyzing the data.

Findings

One area of success in the course is that it served to increase the coverage of the area of instructional design in addition to expanding the literature base in this area of study that has only recently begun to receive attention.

Research limitations/implications

One limitation of the course is that while it is designed to provide a blended mix of learning opportunities, the instructional design field is quite large and it is impossible to explore all relevant topics.

Practical implications

A challenge of the course is that socio‐cultural concepts are broad and it is recognized that a single course is not enough to effectively cover all relevant issues. Careful course design is therefore important.

Originality/value

Feedback from this study can serve as a resource for decision making about existing and additional courses, and specific content that could be incorporated into similar courses.

Details

Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, vol. 3 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1750-497X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 21 May 2019

John N. Moye

This chapter presents five differentiated models of curriculum, each designed with templates created from learning theories. The discipline of distributed leadership is…

Abstract

Chapter Summary

This chapter presents five differentiated models of curriculum, each designed with templates created from learning theories. The discipline of distributed leadership is chosen to develop a cognition-based curriculum, a behavior-based curriculum, a performance-based curriculum, a values-based curriculum, and collectively arranged into a competency-based curriculum. The research literature frames the attributes of a competency-based curriculum on psychological competence.

In this chapter, curricula are developed to demonstrate the process of adapting theories of learning, instruction, and environment into design templates with which to differentiate the dimensions and components of a curriculum. In these curricula, multiple conceptual frameworks are employed to translate the content and structure of the discipline into instructional objectives, instructional engagement, instructional experience, and instructional environment to align the instructional processes with the intended learning. For these demonstrations, the discipline of organizational leadership is chosen due to the multidimensional structure of this discipline and the opportunities it presents to differentiate the curriculum and learning. Each component of the curriculum adapts an appropriate framework to align and interconnect the instructional processes into an optimized learning experience. The result is curricula that have a coherent flow horizontally across the components for each outcome as well as interconnectedness vertically between the outcomes. This approach creates coherence, alignment, and interconnectedness to the curricula and order to the learning process for the learners.

This methodology is applied to design the curriculum for five instructional modules. Module 1 focuses on dualistic thinking developed through a cognition-based curriculum. Module 2 presents a multiplistic learning experience through a behavior-based curriculum. Module 3 presents relativistic learning through a performance-based curriculum. Module 4 delivers complex learning through a values-based curriculum. Module 5 compiles these four modules into a competency-based curriculum model.

Each of these modules employs a unique set of theories to configure the components of the curricula to reflect the structure of each discipline. The use of each theory is explained and demonstrated in the design process.

Details

Learning Differentiated Curriculum Design in Higher Education
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83867-117-4

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 31 August 2004

Helmut Meisel and Ernesto Compatangelo

This paper describes an architecture for the usage of Instructional Design (ID) knowledge in intelligent instructional systems. In contrast with other architectures…

Abstract

This paper describes an architecture for the usage of Instructional Design (ID) knowledge in intelligent instructional systems. In contrast with other architectures, ontologies are used to represent ID knowledge about both what to teach and how to teach. Moreover, set‐theoretic reasoning is used for the provision of inferential services. In particular, the paper shows how set‐theoretic deductions can be applied (i) to support the modelling of ID knowledge bases, (ii) to retrieve suitable teaching methods from them, and (iii) to detect errors in a training design. The intelligent knowledge management environment CONCEPTOOL is used to demonstrate the benefits of the proposed architecture.

Details

Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 1 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1741-5659

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 June 2012

Wanjira Kinuthia

The purpose of this paper is to examine the perceived challenges of attempting to integrate topics related to social and cultural issues into the coursework in graduate…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the perceived challenges of attempting to integrate topics related to social and cultural issues into the coursework in graduate programs in Instructional Design and Technology (IDT).

Design/methodology/approach

An open‐ended online survey instrument was developed for this study for three reasons. First, the study aimed at investigating what is actually happening in IDT programs in terms of integration of social and cultural issues into coursework. Using an online questionnaire, data were collected from IDT instructors and instructional designers.

Findings

Findings of the study indicated that while there is a general agreement and interest in infusing content that addresses socio‐cultural perspectives challenges into courses, the challenges include the existence of a common framework for defining and prioritizing socio‐cultural issues, and difficulties in identifying the most important issues to address, and appropriate instructional approaches to address sensitive topics.

Research limitations/implications

There were some limitations to this study. First, the data were collected primarily through a survey instrument as indicated above. Nonetheless, the qualitative data collected were rich and informative. Second, as noted earlier, a majority of the participants indicated they are based in the USA. Thus, study findings may be more specific to IDT programs in this context. Third, participation in the study was voluntary, hence demographics were not controlled for. However, this opened up opportunities for attaining multiple perspectives from the participants.

Practical implications

A recommendation that this study brings out is that while it is impossible practically to address all potential topics, a starting point may be to identify and address the most pertinent topics, such as those which may cause misunderstanding or reinforce the wrong ideas.

Social implications

While instructional designers and instructors cannot be expected to be cultural experts in every single context or topic, there are certain content issues, such as authentic activities and design strategies that would warrant further attention. Of course this will vary by content and context and instructors and instructional designers should at least be prepared to recognize these unique issues.

Originality/value

The paper highlights some issues worth discussing: the complexity of directly incorporating socio‐cultural issues into IDT curricula; the broad elusive nature of the knowledge of socio‐cultural issues; and the difficulty in defining socio‐cultural content, including what to teach and how to teach it. These three issues address the role of coursework in professional preparation, and the structure of instructional design courses and curricula.

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 1 December 2015

Randall Boone and Kyle Higgins

Accessibility design over the past several years has focused much of its attention on the development of a universal standard or a set of guidelines for delivering a…

Abstract

Accessibility design over the past several years has focused much of its attention on the development of a universal standard or a set of guidelines for delivering a diverse array of both content and instructional processes. Universal design for learning (UDL), for example, promotes providing multiple means of (a) representation, (b) action and expression, and (c) engagement for learners who have a wide range of disabilities as well as their typical peers. And while each instructional design element that represents a means of providing the differentiation required by the principle generally has a strong evidence-based support individually, it is difficult to assess any one of them within the larger ULD “multiple means” milieu of options. It is especially difficult to do this in regard to learners associated with any particular disability category. When it comes to targeted instruction, learner characteristics matter. It follows then that when it comes to developing an instructional design, that the learning characteristics of a targeted population be first and foremost considered as the point of departure in the design and development process. This chapter considers a wide range of instructional targets within the context of specific disability groups with a focus on learning goals, instructional design supports for those goals, and underlying cognitive processes that may help clarify the goals themselves as well as the instructional supports to achieve those goals.

Details

Accessible Instructional Design
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-288-7

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 6 May 2019

Seedwell T.M. Sithole and Indra Abeysekera

This study aims to examine the instructional preferences exhibited by students in an Australian and a Zimbabwean setting and how cultural conditioning can reflect in the…

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to examine the instructional preferences exhibited by students in an Australian and a Zimbabwean setting and how cultural conditioning can reflect in the instructional design choice and the effect on the learning process.

Design/methodology/approach

Using graphical and textual presentations of an experiment with three instructional designs and 217 undergraduate students, this study empirically examines student understanding of financial accounting in the two countries. Students’ performance scores and reported mental effort ratings were used to determine the instructional preference.

Findings

The findings of this comparative study show that Australian accounting students prefer graph and text designs aligned with a low power distance, (PD) while Zimbabwean students prefer graph and text designs associated with a high PD. Deep-rooted cultural values and modes of thinking need to be considered in the learning processes.

Research limitations/implications

The sample used in this study came from first-year undergraduate students studying introductory accounting at two different universities from two different countries (Australia and Zimbabwe). The results may not be generalisable to other universities, although similar patterns were found to be consistent with students’ cultural orientations. In addition, there may be other factors that motivate students’ learning and affect their performance, and those should therefore be considered.

Practical implications

The results suggest that students learning in different cultural contexts learn better with different instructional formats, requiring educators to consider different formats of instructional material.

Originality/value

This study is the first to offer accounting educators insights on one major dimension of cultural variation, using instructional material designed according to cognitive load theory principles in a cross-cultural context.

Details

Journal of International Education in Business, vol. 14 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2046-469X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 September 2017

Cheryl Pendry Keener

Instructional design students’ training may not include game-based learning (GBL). This paper aims to review the literature on GBL to determine the role of the…

Abstract

Purpose

Instructional design students’ training may not include game-based learning (GBL). This paper aims to review the literature on GBL to determine the role of the instructional designer who is interested in GBL approaches to enhance learning especially for the novice learner.

Design/methodology/approach

The methodology for determining the instructional designers’ roles is based on the comparison of game-based and traditional instructional design and the identification of what is needed to aid instructors and designers in development and evaluation of GBL products.

Findings

The literature reveals that GBL shows learning potential. The existence of slim empirical research cannot posit GBL effectiveness in general, within specific disciplines, or with specific learner types. If GBL is to be effectively included in instructional design, the instructional designers, game designers and educational stakeholders need to collaborate to understand and combine optimal design features that meet both game and education objectives and to develop a common nomenclature so that research and its findings can be effectively communicated.

Originality/value

This review identifies specific digital game-based strategies that align with the learning goals sought in instructional design, differences between game and instructional design and steps needed for the instructional designer to bridge gaps in knowledge or practice between educators, researchers, game designers and instructional designers. These identifications may aid all GBL stakeholders in development of future GBL.

Details

On the Horizon, vol. 25 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1074-8121

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 21 May 2019

John N. Moye

The process of differentiating each of the dimensions of learning is demonstrated by the application of three possible conceptual frameworks for each dimension, which are…

Abstract

Chapter Summary

The process of differentiating each of the dimensions of learning is demonstrated by the application of three possible conceptual frameworks for each dimension, which are based on the theories of learning, instruction, and environment. Multiple existing theories apply to each dimension of the curriculum, including one framework that is a synthesis of several related theories. The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate how theories may be adapted into design templates and used to configure the components of the curriculum. The outcome of this process is to create coherent curricula through the practical application of theories of learning as design templates.

A blueprint template is presented to visualize the internal alignment, interconnectedness, and overall coherence of each curriculum. This template visually depicts the functional interactions between the curricular components as dynamic relationships. This tool reveals the design relationships within the curriculum for purposes of design and evaluation. For curriculum design purposes, this form is used to establish and maintain the alignment among the dimensions of a curriculum (horizontally in the template) as well as the interconnectedness of the components. Engagement with the learning process begins by translating the content of each learning objective into instructional objectives, which aligns the instructional components with each learning objective. The instructional objectives are configured to align the content and structure contained in the outcomes and objectives with the instructional components. In this curriculum design system, the instructional taxonomies of Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, and Krathwohl (1956) are adapted as design templates to demonstrate three strategies to configure the structure of the learning engagement dimension into three distinct purposes of developing cognition, skills, or values within each dimension (vertically in the template).

The learning experience in this curriculum demonstration differentiates three distinct instructional functions: the learning of thinking skills, the learning of performance skills, and the learning of values-based performance. A template adapted from credible theories of instruction configures the specified learning.

Three models also differentiate the learning environment dimension of a curriculum. The learning environment is structured to deliver learning through individual, cooperative, or collaborative processes. Although the environmental considerations mostly impact the activities through which learners interact with the content of the curriculum (reinforcement activities, assignments, assessments), the environmental factors influence all components of the curriculum and can be differentiated to promote and enhance learning. From the learner perspective, the learning environment is created by the dynamic interaction of all components of the curriculum to facilitate an unobstructed path to learning.

Details

Learning Differentiated Curriculum Design in Higher Education
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83867-117-4

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 21 May 2019

John N. Moye

In this chapter, each of the completed models of curriculum is presented and evaluated using criteria from the attributes of effective curricula discussed in Chapter 1…

Abstract

Chapter Summary

In this chapter, each of the completed models of curriculum is presented and evaluated using criteria from the attributes of effective curricula discussed in Chapter 1. Explanations of the design strategies that are used to demonstrate each attribute in a differentiated manner are included. The evaluation process provides an evaluation methodology to demonstrate the effectiveness of each model of a curriculum in a credible and trustworthy way.

In the previous chapters, the individual parts of the curricula were configured, aligned, and interconnected to deliver specific outcomes in each learning module. In this chapter, the components of each curriculum are assembled into one table to exhibit the order contained within each learning module within the overall curriculum. The standards for curricular attributes adopted at the beginning of the design process are the criteria for the evaluation of the completed curriculum. The strategies used to configure the components of each curriculum provide evidence of the curriculum’s characteristics, which demonstrate compliance with each criterion.

The evaluation of these attributes within a curriculum serves several purposes. First, they provide a checklist to guide the design process toward curricula that reflect these standards as developed by the profession of curriculum design in higher education. Second, they provide a measurement of the attributes of the curriculum to demonstrate the compliance of each curricular design with conventional standards. Third, these measurements can be compared with other institutional data to uncover correlations between the design assumptions and learner performance. These correlations often reveal unanticipated results, which inform the effectiveness of the instructional system.

These criteria are applied to the evaluation of the curriculum for each module to demonstrate the diverse manner in which each can be achieved in a discipline-specific manner. The compliance with these criteria is explained to be a matter of demonstration, as used in the discipline of qualitative research. These qualitative evaluations can then be compared with other operational data to understand the effectiveness of the design assumptions for each curriculum.

Details

Learning Differentiated Curriculum Design in Higher Education
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83867-117-4

1 – 10 of over 12000