Instructional Design &Technology: A History

Jeannie Nelson

The University of Texas at Brownsville

EDTC 3310 – Introduction to Educational Technology

Janice Wilson Butler, Ed.D.

October 5, 2013

Picture from Microsoft Clip Art

Edward Thorndike (Early 1900s)Studied animal behavior and

learning

Published Educational

Psychology (1903)

Published Introduction to

Theory of Mental and Social Measurement

(1904)

Thorndike’s works outlined testing principles and applications of learning(Thorndike, 2011). These works and Thorndike’s theory of

connectivism were the precursors of behaviorism and education as a science (Ho, n.d.).

Photo from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect

John Franklin Bobbitt (1920s)

Bobbitt established curriculum as a field of education specialization & was an early advocate of using objectives in

curriculum design (Franklin, 2013).

Published The Curriculum (1918)

PublishedHow to Make a Curriculum

(1924)

Bobbitt’s work was based on principles of scientific management and was borrowed from the engineering field (Franklin, 2013).

Photo from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Franklin_Bobbitt

Ralph W. Tyler (1933-1941)

Tyler headed the “Eight Year Study”, which evaluated the curricula of 30

secondary schools and 300 colleges (Hlebowitsh, 2013).

Findings from the “Eight Year Study” led to refinement of objective writing

procedures and the formative evaluation process (Ho, n.d.).Photo from

http://ehe.osu.edu/teaching-and-learning/about/tradition/

World War II Innovations(1939-1945)

Psychologists and educators like Robert Gagné, Leslie Briggs& John Flanagan developed training materials for the United

States military (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 23).

Evaluation and testing was used to assess trainee skills and to choose

individuals most likely to benefit from specific training programs (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 23).

Photo from www.history.army.mil

Post World War II Innovations(1940s-1950s)

Psychologists involved in WWII military training continued to work on

finding solutions to instructional problems and The American Institutes

for Research were established (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 23).

Training came to be viewed as a system. Analysis, design and evaluation procedures were developed (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 23).

Photo from http://www.edvanceresearch.com/rel-research-partners.htm

B.F.Skinner (1954-1965)Skinner’s Operant Conditioning (Behaviorism) Theory led to

the concept of programmed instruction (Culatta, 2013).

Basics of operant conditioning (Culatta 2013):

• Positively reinforced behavior is repeated• Negatively reinforced behavior diminishes

Characteristics of programmed instruction (Clark, 2010b):

1. Clear objectives2. Instruction broken into small pieces3. Self-paced learning4. Active learner response to questions5. Immediate feedback

Photo from http://bfskinner.org/bfskinner/Home.html

Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956)Dr. Benjamin Bloom & Colleagues published a

Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

Bloom’s Taxonomy divides learning into three domains (Clark, 2013):

1. Cognitive2. Affective3. Psychomotor

Each domain is further divided into divisions of desired behaviors ranging

from simple to complex (Clark, 2013).

Photo from http://www.tfioh.com/Hypnosis-and-Hypnotherapy.html

Robert Mager (1962)The use of objectives became popular after Mager published Preparing Objectives for Programmed Instruction (Reiser & Dempsey,

2012, p.24).

Mager outlined criteria for objective writing (Reiser & Dempsey,p.24):

1. Description of desired behaviors2. Conditions for performance of desired behaviors3. Standards for judging performance of desired behaviors

Photo from http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2012/04/mager-mr-learning-objectives-in-this.html

Robert Glaser (1963)Glaser and others proposed criterion-referenced testing as an

alternative to norm-referenced testing (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 24).

Norm-Referenced Tests

(Huitt, n.d.)

• Rank student performance in comparison to other students in broad areas of knowledge

•Sort students into high and low categories of achievement

Criterion-Referenced Tests

(Huitt, n.d.)

• Determine whether each individual student has mastered a specific skill or concept

• Find out how much each student knows at the beginning and end of instruction

Photo from http://www.utimes.pitt.edu/?p=19743

Robert Gagné (1965)Gagné published The Conditions of Learning (1965),which outlined

five domains of learning outcomes and nine events of instruction (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p.25).

Five Domains (Dabbagh, n.d.)

1. Intellectual Skills2. Cognitive Strategy3. Verbal Information4. Attitude5. Motor Skills

Nine Events (Clark, 2012)

1. Gain attention2. Inform learner of

objective3. Stimulate recall of prior

info4. Present information5. Provide guidance6. Elicit performance7. Provide feedback8. Assess performance9. Enhance retention &

transferPhoto from http://wikigrup1final.wikispaces.com/Robert+Gagn

%C3%A9

Formative and Summative Evaluation (1967)

In response to the 1957 Soviet launch of Sputnik, the United States spent millions of dollars on instruction geared toward improving math and science education without any “learner tryouts” (Reiser &

Dempsey, 2012, p. 25).

In the mid 1960’s the instruction was shown to be ineffective (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 25).

Educators developed procedures for evaluating educational materials both during and after design. Michael Scriven (1967)

coined the term “formative evaluation” for evaluation during the design process and

“summative evaluation” for evaluation conducted after design completion (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 25).

Photo from http://amyshirateitel.com/2011/04/10/the-enigmatic-vostok-1/

Term “Instructional Design” Coined (Mid 1960s)

As models for systematic design of instruction emerged, the term “instructional design” was born (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 25).

Other terms that were used included “system development”, “systematic instruction” and “instructional system” (Reiser & Dempsey,

2012, p. 25).

Photo from http://brownemergingtech.com/eme6601/Session6.html

Proliferation of Instructional Design Models (1970s)

Many models for instructional design emerged in the 1970s (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 25). Some of these models are the

basis for current models of instructional design.

Photos from http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=instructional+design+models&go=&qs=n&form=QBIR&pq=instructional+design+models&sc=8-27&sp=-1&sk=

Instructional Design Models Adopted by Military, Business/Industry &

Academia (1970s)

The US military adopted an instructional design model in 1975 (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 26).

Business and industry adopted instructional design models to use for training improvements in the 1970’s (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 26).

Instructional improvement centers emerged in the academic arena in the 1970’s. These were designed to help faculty use media and instructional design techniques to improve instruction (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 26).

Photos from Microsoft Clip Art

Computers Used for Instruction (1980s)

The advent of personal computers led to the design of computer-based instruction. Computers were also used to automate some of the design process (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 26).

Photo from http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Old+Computer&FORM=RESTAB

Merrill, Li & Jones (1990)

As the use of computer-based instruction and computer automated design grew, professionals like Merrill, Lee and Jones recognized the need to develop new instructional design models that could accommodate the interactive capabilities of new technology (Ho, n.d.).

Photo from Microsoft Clip Art

Human Performance Technology (1990s)

Human performance technology: “a systematic approach to improving productivity and competence, uses a set of methods and procedures --and a strategy for solving problems -- for realizing opportunities related to the performance of people” (International

Society for Performance Improvement, n.d.).

The human performance improvement movement expanded the scope of the instructional technology field by focusing on on-the-job training, business results, and non-instructional interventions

(Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p.26) . Photo from http://theengagementeffect.com/our-toolset/additional-tools/human-performance-

improvement

Constructivism (1990s)Constructivism, which dates back to the 1930’s, gained

popularity in the 1990s (Clark, 2010c; Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 26).

Constructivists believe that the learner constructs his/her own knowledge through an active process of interactions with his/her environment (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 45).

Constructivist design focuses on “authentic learning tasks” that are relevant to

the context in which learned skills will be used (Rieser & Dempsey, 2012, p.26).

Photo from http://www.idi.ntnu.no/~terjery/it1301/H07/Forelesning2TeorierEng.html

Electronic Performance Support Systems (1990s)

Instructional designers began to develop electronic performance support systems (EPSS) in the early 1990s (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012,

p.27).

EPSS software is designed to improve productivity of workers on-the-job by providing ready access to learning opportunities,

training and consultation through online manuals, wizards and Help Systems

( Clark, 2010a).

Photo from http://www.l-3training.com/solutions/support

E-Learning (21st century)The 21st century brought increased use of the Internet for delivery

of instruction in business, industry, the military, elementary and

higher education (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 27).

New design challenges have emerged as online instruction has become popular (Reiser & Dempsey, 2012, p. 27).

Design features that are effective for classroom instruction

may notachieve the same results from online instruction (Ho, n.d).

Photo from http://www.tivulcan.com.br/ver-servico/e-learning

ReferencesClark, D. (2010, a). Electronic performance support system. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. Retrieved from

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/history/epss.html

Clark, D. (2010, b). B. F. Skinner. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. Retrieved from

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/history/skinner.html

Clark, D. (2010, c). Constructivism. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. Retrieved from

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/history/constructivism.html

Clark, D. (2012). Robert Gagné's nine steps of instruction. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. Retrieved from

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/learning/id/nine_step_id.html

Clark, D. (2013). Bloom's taxonomy of learning domains. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. Retrieved from

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html

Culatta, R. (2013). Operant conditioning (B.F. Skinner). Instructional Design. Retrieved from

http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/operant-conditioning.html

Dabbagh, N. (n.d.). Gagne's five learned capabilities. Retrieved from

http://classweb.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/Resources2/gagnetax.htm

Edward L. Thorndike. (2011). In New World Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved from

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Edward_L._Thorndike

References Franklin, B. M. (2013). Franklin Bobbitt (1876–1956) - Social efficiency movement, Bobbitt's contribution. Education

Encyclopedia- State University. Retrieved from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1794/Bobbitt-Franklin-1876-

1956.html

Hlebowitsh, P. (2013). Ralph W. Tyler (1902–1994) - Contribution to testing and curriculum development, advisory

role. Education Encyclopedia- State University. Retrieved from http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2517/Tyler-

Ralph-W-1902-1994.html

Ho, W. (n.d.). Instructional technology: A historical view. Retrieved from

http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxh139/IT_history.htm

Huitt, W. G. (n.d.). Measurement and evaluation: Criterion-versus norm-referenced testing. Education Psychology Interactive.

Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/measeval/crnmref.html

International Society for Performance Improvement. (n.d.). What is HPT? International Society for Performance Improvement.

Retrieved from http://www.ispi.org/content.aspx?id=54

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.