Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
69
result(s) for
"Boling, Elizabeth"
Sort by:
How do they define design failure? An investigation of design failure in instructional design practice from the practitioners’ perspective
In this paper, we report findings from a larger study that investigated design failure, as a phenomenon, in instructional design (ID) practice from the perspective of ID practitioners. Following an interpretive phenomenological study design, we interviewed 17 ID practitioners working in diverse settings, seeking their stories of design failure. Throughout the interviews and the analysis of the practitioners’ stories of design failures, we found that ID practitioners define design failure in different ways that are mostly not captured in design literature, that is: design failure as “failure during use of design,” design failure as “failure during process of design,” design failure as “an opportunity for reflection on design actions,” design failure as “an outcome or an event that needs to be avoided/prevented during the process of design,” and design failure as “an outcome or an event that could not be avoided/prevented during the process of design.” These findings and our discussions of them emphasize the generative role design failure plays in ID practice, the richness and the complexity of this phenomenon, and point to implications for IDT scholarship and ID education. In an upcoming paper, we report what ID practitioners attribute design failure to and what is the essence of design failure in ID practice.
Journal Article
Instructional design students’ design judgment development
This qualitative multi-case study explores the exercise and development of the design judgment of eight instructional design (ID) students working on design projects over one semester in graduate programs at four different institutions in the USA. Their design processes were explored through interviews and their design documents using the concepts of design judgment as reported by Nelson and Stolterman (The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2012) and reflection-in-action as reported by Schön (The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action, Basic Books, New York, 1983) to characterize the exercise and development of their design judgment across the semester. Findings reveal that these ID students make multiple design judgments concurrently and constantly. Their prior design experience, the course requirements and their design practice in class influence both the exercise and development of their design judgment. Lastly, the development of their design judgment is both perceptible and personal. In light of these findings, recommendations are made for how to support the development of ID students’ design judgment.
Journal Article
Design tools in practice: instructional designers report which tools they use and why
Minimal attention has been paid by scholars to practitioners’ views of and experiences with instructional design tools. Instructional design practitioners working in diverse setting were surveyed regarding the tools they use in their practice, and interviewed regarding how they explain their choices to use the tools that they do. A survey completed by 100 instructional designers shows that they use a wide array of both digital and analog tools, many of them not specifically focused on, or limited to, the design and development of instruction. Analysis of interview narratives with 10 instructional designers surfaced themes in two categories, rationalist and situational explanations for the use of certain tools, with appropriateness (a rational explanation) and individual preference (a situational explanation) offered most frequently. These findings, and the statements of the designers, highlight the role of instrumental judgment in instructional design practice and points to implications for the education of instructional designers.
Journal Article
Collaborative learning, peer communication, and tool use as design strategies: revising the Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix based on instructional practices of secondary design educators
K-12 educators who engage their students in designing using digital technologies face the challenge of teaching the act of designing in classroom contexts, yet books and articles on the topic of design processes and methods tend to focus on the instruction of design strategies for adult learners rather than children. One framework, the Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix (Crismond and Adams, Journal of Engineering Education 101:738–797, 2012) does address dimensions of design practices and instructional approaches specifically within K-16 educational contexts, but it has yet to be revised based on empirical evidence. Using multiple case studies, we examined this framework against teacher perceptions of how design should be taught and the observed instructional practices of those secondary educators. We argue that refinement to the IDTL Matrix is warranted and suggest expanding the framework to include design strategies that address collaborative learning, peer communication, and the integration of digital and non-digital tools and materials. Such revisions to the IDTL Matrix would contribute to providing the best possible support to teachers who seek to develop their students’ design strategies in classroom contexts.
Journal Article
Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: a problematic
The exponential growth in technological capability has resulted in increased interest on the short- and long-term effects of designed artifacts, leading to a focus in many design fields on the ethics and values that are inscribed in the designs we create. While ethical awareness is a key concern in many engineering, technology, and design disciplines—even an accreditation requirement in many fields—instructional design and technology (IDT) has not historically focused their view of practice on ethics, instead relying on a more scientistic view of practice which artificially limits the designer's interaction with the surrounding society through the artifacts and experiences they design. In this paper, we argue for a heightened view of designer responsibility and design process in an ethical framing, drawing on methods and theoretical frameworks of ethical responsibility from the broader design community. We then demonstrate the frequency of ethical concerns that emerge in a content analysis of design cases that document authentic instructional design practice. We conclude with two paths forward to improve instructional design education and research regarding the nature of practice, advocating for increased documentation of design precedent to generatively complicate our notions of the design process, and for the creation and use of critical designs to foreground ethical and value-related concerns in IDT research and practice.
Journal Article
Research methods for design knowledge: clarifying definitions, characteristics, and areas of confusion
In the field of educational technology and instructional design, research methods are emerging that aim to curate different forms of knowledge and insights beyond traditional research studies, or what Reigeluth and An (in Reigeluth and Carr-Chellman (eds) Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, 2009) refer to as “research to prove.” As a result of evolving efforts in this area, editors of research journals in the field are receiving increased submissions employing these methods but have detected some persistent confusion among authors surrounding them. This has resulted in authors submitting articles with muddled methodologies and to outlets that may not be a fit for the work an author seeks to share. It can even be unclear whether authors intentionally employed a specific design-related method prior to reporting. In this piece, we will cover four methods—instructional design cases, case studies, design-based research, and formative evaluation of designs/products—to provide clarity for both graduate students and researchers. For each of these, we will provide definitions, discuss exemplars and features of exemplars, summarize key features that should be present in such a study and its reporting, and provide guidance on front-end intentional design and planning for research studies that employ these methodologies. Additional clarity on these methods can better support scholars and emerging scholars in their roles as researchers, authors, and reviewers.
Journal Article
Challenges Implementing Qualitative Research Methods in a Study of Instructional Design Practice
Studies of instructional design (ID) practices do not always highlight the inner workings of the research method and can leave readers without a clear understanding of how the study was actually carried out, particularly if it encompassed some complexity in process. As a team of researchers with different levels of scholarly expertise and knowledge, as well as multicultural backgrounds, we recognized the challenges of research methods we were employing as we studied instructional designers’ core judgment - their tacit beliefs and values relevant to their design practice (Nelson and Stolterman 2012). This recognition motivated us to share the nuts and bolts of this recent research study, and we highlight here the practical and conceptual challenges we faced, as well as the strategies we used to overcome those challenges. We share the lessons learned from our challenges and hope the scholarly community may agree that sharing experiences can contribute to improving inquiry practices in the field.
Journal Article
Student Support and Advising in a New Online Ed.D. of Instructional Systems Technology Program: A design case
This design case describes an online Ed.D. in Instructional Systems Technology (IST) launched in 2012. We will focus on a key aspect of the design: program advising and students’ relationship with their advisors. While the design was responsive in its earliest stages to organizational constraints, legislative requirements and the known configurations for higher education, it did not include detailed attention to student/advisor relationships. Consequently, the first set of students experienced difficulties and the faculty had to make adjustments. This paper will present critical decisions made during the design of this program and the reasons for those decisions, situations in which decisions did not work as planned, and description of the subsequent revision of the design.
Journal Article