今天的教学设计师使用什么模型?

Jeremy Bond, K. Dirkin
{"title":"今天的教学设计师使用什么模型?","authors":"Jeremy Bond, K. Dirkin","doi":"10.51869/92JBKD","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rapid evolution of instructional design, its relative novelty, and trends impacting it serve to cloud understanding and complicate practice. This study sought insight into an area of instructional design practice in higher education by exploring a subset of survey data gathered in early 2018. In part, the survey asked instructional designers and leaders of instructional design teams, working in higher education settings, which design models and theoretical frameworks guided their work. Nearly two hundred individuals provided responses. Answers offered most often included models with long histories, relative to instructional design at large, such as ADDIE and Backward Design. Technology's impact on instructional design was also made apparent by the inclusion of tech-focused frameworks including TPACK and SAMR. Statistical testing failed to develop significant relationships between the quantity of models reported in use and other characteristics of designers, however some relationship may exist relating to education and time in the field. Altogether, this may suggest, as reported by a small number of subjects, that the design process can or even ought to be ill-defined and remain fluid to best respond to unique needs as presented by each subject matter expert or design project.","PeriodicalId":348789,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Instructional Design","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Models are Instructional Designers Using Today?\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Bond, K. Dirkin\",\"doi\":\"10.51869/92JBKD\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The rapid evolution of instructional design, its relative novelty, and trends impacting it serve to cloud understanding and complicate practice. This study sought insight into an area of instructional design practice in higher education by exploring a subset of survey data gathered in early 2018. In part, the survey asked instructional designers and leaders of instructional design teams, working in higher education settings, which design models and theoretical frameworks guided their work. Nearly two hundred individuals provided responses. Answers offered most often included models with long histories, relative to instructional design at large, such as ADDIE and Backward Design. Technology's impact on instructional design was also made apparent by the inclusion of tech-focused frameworks including TPACK and SAMR. Statistical testing failed to develop significant relationships between the quantity of models reported in use and other characteristics of designers, however some relationship may exist relating to education and time in the field. Altogether, this may suggest, as reported by a small number of subjects, that the design process can or even ought to be ill-defined and remain fluid to best respond to unique needs as presented by each subject matter expert or design project.\",\"PeriodicalId\":348789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Instructional Design\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Instructional Design\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51869/92JBKD\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Instructional Design","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51869/92JBKD","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

教学设计的快速发展,其相对的新颖性,以及影响它的趋势,使理解变得模糊,使实践变得复杂。本研究通过探索2018年初收集的调查数据子集,试图深入了解高等教育教学设计实践的一个领域。在某种程度上,调查询问了在高等教育环境中工作的教学设计师和教学设计团队的领导者,哪些设计模型和理论框架指导了他们的工作。近200人提供了回复。提供的答案通常包括与教学设计相关的历史悠久的模型,例如ADDIE和向后设计。技术对教学设计的影响也通过包括TPACK和SAMR在内的以技术为中心的框架得以明显体现。统计测试没有发现使用模型的数量与设计师的其他特征之间存在显著的关系,但可能存在与该领域的教育和时间有关的关系。总而言之,正如少数主题所报告的那样,这可能表明设计过程可以甚至应该定义不清,并保持流动性,以最好地响应每个主题专家或设计项目提出的独特需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What Models are Instructional Designers Using Today?
The rapid evolution of instructional design, its relative novelty, and trends impacting it serve to cloud understanding and complicate practice. This study sought insight into an area of instructional design practice in higher education by exploring a subset of survey data gathered in early 2018. In part, the survey asked instructional designers and leaders of instructional design teams, working in higher education settings, which design models and theoretical frameworks guided their work. Nearly two hundred individuals provided responses. Answers offered most often included models with long histories, relative to instructional design at large, such as ADDIE and Backward Design. Technology's impact on instructional design was also made apparent by the inclusion of tech-focused frameworks including TPACK and SAMR. Statistical testing failed to develop significant relationships between the quantity of models reported in use and other characteristics of designers, however some relationship may exist relating to education and time in the field. Altogether, this may suggest, as reported by a small number of subjects, that the design process can or even ought to be ill-defined and remain fluid to best respond to unique needs as presented by each subject matter expert or design project.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信