Aesthetic Principles 1
Running Head: AESTHETIC PRINCIPLES
Aesthetic Principles for Instructional Design
Patrick Parrish
The COMET® Program
In Press, Educational Technology Research & Development
Aesthetic Principles 2
Abstract
This article offers principles that contribute to developing the aesthetics of
instructional design. Rather than describing merely the surface qualities of things and
events, the concept of aesthetics as applied here pertains to heightened, integral
experience. Aesthetic experiences are those that are immersive, infused with meaning,
and felt as coherent and complete. Any transformative learning experience will have
significant aesthetic qualities, and all instructional situations can benefit from attention to
these qualities. Drawn from aesthetics theory and research and informed by current ID
and learning theories, a set of five first principles and twelve guidelines for their
application are described. The principles are not only compatible with existing ID theory
bases but can complement and support that theory by offering ways to embody it in
engaging learning experiences.
Aesthetic Principles 3
Aesthetic Principles for Instructional Design
Recent years have seen a surge of interest in reclaiming the idea that instructional
design (ID) is indeed a design discipline and more than just science or just technology
(Bolling, 2003; Gibbons, 2003; Rowland, 1999; Wilson, 2004). In the spirit of this view
of ID as design, this article offers principles intended to contribute to developing the
aesthetics of instructional design (Parrish, 2005). By broadening their concerns beyond
immediate learning outcomes and considering all the qualities of designed experiences,
instructional designers can create designs that have deep and lasting impacts for learners.
The aesthetic qualities of learning experiences, in particular, offer a potent dimension
through which to expand learning impacts.
In offering new ID principles, one must be sensitive to the potentially
overwhelming pluralism of influences and competing theories that already exist, which
can lead to frustration or to retreat into a comfortably narrow set of guidelines. For this
reason, it is imperative, when possible, to show compatibility between aesthetic
principles and existing ID theory. But aesthetic principles offer more than just
compatibility with existing theory—they complement and can support that theory by
offering ways to embody it in engaging learning experiences. The principles described in
this article extend our conception of what is entailed in designing an effective learning
experience, while also honoring other perspectives.
The article first makes a case for the value of considering the aesthetics of
learning experiences. Then it offers a set of aesthetic first principles, followed by
guidelines for their application. The term “first principles” is used to suggest that the
principles are productive for deriving a wide range of guidelines for learning activities
and can be applied in any instructional situation. The use of the term is in part an homage
to Merrill’s prescriptive first principles of instruction (2002), which he derived as
fundamental to good instruction after comparing a wide set of valued instructional
theories with traditional sources. The aesthetic principles offered here are not prescriptive
in the sense that every case of good instruction requires demonstration of each of them;
nor are they axiomatic and timeless, even if they strive for that status. They necessarily
reflect current conceptions of what makes good art and good instruction. Neither is the
list offered here in any way comprehensive or representative of the full range of aesthetic
first principles that might be found on further investigation.
Considering Learning Experience
Three traditional components of the instructional environment vie for the attention
of teachers and instructional designers—subject matter, instructional methodology, and
the learner. Instructional designers often broaden this traditional view by including the
instructor (or instructional designer) and the instructional context to describe the
complete instructional system. However, a more holistic approach would also include the
idea of “learning experience.” Learning experience describes the transaction that takes
place between individual learners and the instructional environment. In addition to the
components listed above, learning experience includes the way that the learner feels
about, engages with, responds to, influences, and draws from the instructional situation
(See Figure 1.).
Aesthetic Principles 4
Figure 1: Components of instructional environments.
Learning experience is different for each learner, depending on the connection
made to the other components of the situation and depending on what the learner brings
to the situation and draws from it for future situations. “Experience” in this sense
describes more than a passive event. It is a transaction with the environment in which
learning is an outcome (witness the saying, “experience is the best teacher”). The word
“experience” is rooted in the same Indo-European words as “experiment” and “peril.”
Meaningful experiences contain qualities suggested in each of these terms. Viewing
learning as experience broadens the concerns of instructional designers because it
necessitates consideration of the quality of that experience and not just its goals and
mechanics. For example, this viewpoint raises learner engagement in status: only when
learners consider the experience worth attending to and reflecting upon will the
transaction of experience have its full impact.
Learning experiences have many qualities, including cognitive ones of course.
But they also have emotional, social, cultural, political, and aesthetic qualities (Wilson,
2005). All these come into play in determining the immediate qualities and enduring
meaning of an experience. Aesthetic qualities include the rhythms of instructional
activities; methods for creating intellectual and emotional tension and revealing unity
within content sequences; strategies for providing memorable closure to learning
experiences; and the sensory impact of classrooms, computer interfaces, and texts. But
these immediate qualities are not attended to simply for their immediate rewards—they
are designed to lend the experience lasting resonance. An instrumental view of learning
may consider only the immediately measurable outcomes of a learning experience,
particularly its impacts on cognition, behavior, or performance. But a more inclusive
Aesthetic Principles 5
view, one that values a growing capacity and willingness to engage with and learn from
the world, considers the continuity of experiences (Dewey, 1916) and is concerned with
how the quality of an experience impacts the meaning we attribute to it. A meaningful
experience leads us to engage fruitfully not only in the immediate situation but in the
future experiences to which it points.
The Importance of Aesthetic Experience
The word “aesthetics” is often used narrowly to describe the sensual qualities of
an object or designed experience. But from a Pragmatist viewpoint, aesthetics describes a
category of experience. Aesthetic experiences are heightened, immersive, and particularly
meaningful ones (Dewey, 1934/1989). They stand out as complete in and of themselves
and as providing an immediately felt impact. Aesthetic experience is most often linked to
our engagement with works of art because art is expressly designed to stimulate it. But it
can develop when we are engaged in any activity, including experiences as diverse as
learning to hit a baseball, creating or viewing a painting, decoding the human genome
sequence, enjoying a good mystery novel, or having a meaningful conversation. Each of
these experiences is marked by focused intent to resolve an indeterminate situation and
becomes aesthetic when we are deeply invested in the effort.
Aesthetic experiences are important to us because they demonstrate the expressive
power of life (Alexander, 1998). They reveal the depth of meaning life can hold and
suggest how we can use our powers to discover and create that meaning. These rewards
are why we seek out aesthetic experiences, why we attach monetary value to them, and
why we struggle to achieve them. The opposites of aesthetic experience are boredom;
mindless routine; scattered, dispersed activity; or meaningless, imposed labor.
Unaesthetic (or, in the extreme, anesthetic) experiences like these are unlikely to deepen
our capabilities, show us meaning, or move us to engage with life. In contrast, during an
aesthetic experience, we sense (at times subconsciously) an impending consummation
through revealed meaning or fruitful outcome. Aesthetic experience is marked by
emotionally charged anticipation, deep engagement, and willingness to follow through to
completion. Because these are optimal conditions for learning, we want learners to have
aesthetic experience in the instructional situations we create.
Sources of Aesthetic Principles
Sources of principles for designing aesthetic learning experiences become
apparent when we consider the affinities between making art and designing instruction.
John Dewey asks us to reject the “museum” conception of art when he tells us that works
of art are merely “refined and intensified forms of experience” (1934/1989) and not
distinct in quality from many everyday experiences. Works of art stimulate growth by
challenging us to see the world freshly, to become open and responsive to possibilities in
the world around us—a particularly important precondition to learning. Instructional
designers are also in the business of creating “refined and intensified forms of
experience,” even if we typically avoid talking about their aesthetic qualities (Parrish,
2005). While instruction is not art in its narrow sense, the distinction is more accidental
than essential when instruction strives to stimulate heightened, reflective experiences.
Aesthetic Principles 6
Due to this affinity, ID can enhance its own aesthetic status by drawing useful guidance
from what has been learned in the realm of the arts.
The aesthetic principles offered in this paper are drawn from multiple sources.
The arts provide a rich source of strategies for achieving aesthetic experience, so they are
the first source. The principles discussed here draw heavily from Aristotle’s Poetics,
probably the most influential historical source of aesthetic principles and one that
continues to inform artists and designers to this day (Laurel, 1993; Tierno, 2002).
Secondly, although John Dewey and his Pragmatist approach to aesthetics (Dewey,
1934/1989) offer no systematic aesthetic principles, Dewey’s description of aesthetic
experience suggests several guiding principles. A third source of principles is research
into the aesthetic decisions of instructional designers and teachers made while
considering the experience of their learners (Parrish, 2004). Finally, the choice of
principles is informed by current learning and instructional theory. Most aesthetic
principles have parallels in information-processing, constructivist, and social learning
theories because aesthetic experience, in fact, underlies all efforts to find or create
meaning. However, these parallels are rarely explored in any coherent way, nor do
instructional designers seek the full potential of aesthetics as a resource for theory and
practice. In the following sections each aesthetic principle and guideline is connected to
relevant learning and ID theory. Using an aesthetic lens can expand the utility of this
theory, allowing it to reach into instructional designs through new avenues. Each
principle is discussed only briefly, and all require further research to determine the ways
in which they are and are not applied successfully in practice.
First Principles
This section offers four aesthetic first principles for creating artful instruction. A
final, fifth principle is saved for discussion in a subsequent section of the article.
Not coincidently, the four principles discussed here correspond to the common
concerns of literary criticism—plot, character, theme, and context (which encompasses
such qualities as setting, tone, and frame). Literary criticism is not the only useful source
of aesthetic principles for instructional design; but the focus literature and drama place on
human activity, human growth, and temporal structure—and the central role of narrative
in our creation of meaning (Bruner, 1990)—make it an especially rich source. However,
plot, character, theme, and setting also have formal parallels in the visual arts and music;
in fact, whether a work of art takes the form of painting, sculpture, architecture, drama,
dance, film, or music, our experience of it has narrative qualities. This narrative always
follows a pattern of inquiry in which we perceive the object or situation and over time,
through engagement with it, come to sense its meaning or unity. Overall, plot, character,
theme, and setting provide a useful framework for discussing aesthetic learning principles
because they correspond to the instructional components discussed previously—
methodology, learner, subject matter, and context.
Principle 1: Learning Experiences Have Beginnings, Middles, and Endings (i.e., plots).
Instructional design theory frequently offers principles for instructional sequences
(e.g., Gagné & Briggs, 1979; Merrill, 2002; Reigeluth, 1999). Among these are many that
propose narrative-like sequences that arise from the pattern of problem—information
seeking—solution generation—resolution that occurs in inquiry-based approaches to
Aesthetic Principles 7
instruction (e.g., Jonassen, 1999; Schank, 1990). However, there is more we can do in our
designs to attend to the unique needs and potentials of the three basic phases of aesthetic
experiences—beginning, middle, and end—as articulated by Aristotle in describing
drama and poetry (Aristotle, trans. 1984). Learners have different thoughts and feelings
when they first become engaged, when the pattern of the instruction becomes evident and
accepted (or resisted), and when learning is approaching its culmination. For example,
beginnings call for creating tension or mystery and developing trust that the tension can
be resolved, middles often call for continued renewal of the initial engagement and
reinforcement of the potential for consummation, and endings call for both an emotional
intensity that heightens the experience and a chance for reflection that connects
everything that has come before into logical and organic unity. If we pay attention to the
needs, thoughts, and feelings of learners in each of these phases—and anticipate them in
our instructional designs—we have a better chance to create an aesthetic learning
experience.
Principle 2: Learners Are the Protagonists of Their Own Learning Experiences.
In traditional education, the subject matter, or at times the instructor, is the lead
character. But from the perspective of learning experience, the protagonist is always the
learner. In works of art, we vicariously experience the events along with a protagonist
and are led to a similar revelation. But learning experience is never vicarious. Even
though learners might be motivated by the desire to understand the struggles and
achievements of others, a learner’s primary experience is his or her own struggles and
achievements in learning.
Even within the same instructional situation, learners have different learning
experiences depending on how they view their relationship to the situation. Some might
take a tragic perspective and see themselves as oppressed protagonists saddled with the
tragic flaw of ignorance (or laziness, insufficient intelligence, etc.) and struggling to
overcome their inadequacies to succeed in the course. Alternatively, some may see the
experience as comedy—as a series of embarrassing episodes in which their ignorance
places them in difficult, but reconcilable, situations. Others might see their role as heroic,
with the course taking on epic proportions as they confront one difficult labor or obstacle
after another to emerge as more admirable people. Whatever the choice of roles, learning
is always a perilous undertaking—one in which the learner voluntarily enters a situation
that challenges current beliefs and concepts. It might be important to get students to
realize the protagonist they have chosen to play and to use those choices to guide
instructional decisions that will provide the proper motivation and sense of
accomplishment. Instruction might also be used to guide learners to the more productive
orientations (i.e., comedic or heroic).
Within the literature on personal learning styles and their implications for
instructional design, the work of Martinez (2002) is among those that best approximate
the concern with learning experience discussed here. The literary analogies offered here
can be seen as expanding upon Martinez’ category of the transforming learner—the
learner who seeks significant personal change from learning—and as offering guidance
for making design decisions that might support learners of that type. Aesthetic designs
may even encourage learners of other types to adopt the transforming orientation.
Aesthetic Principles 8
Principle 3: Learning Activity, Not Subject Matter, Establishes the Theme of Instruction.
Like every work of art, every learning experience has an underlying theme. In art,
an effective theme is tangible and immediate and cannot be captured fully in a single
abstract word like “love” or “justice.” Instead, a theme is more like an “action-idea”
(Tierno, 2002), an embodiment of the cause-and-effect relationship that arises from the
fundamental premise (idea or point) of the story (Egri, 1942). For example, the premise
to Macbeth is not “ambition” or “corruption” but something more like “Ruthless ambition
leads to corruption and self-destruction.” In turn, the action-idea that arises from this
premise might be stated as, “Macbeth, driven by ambition to assume the throne, engages
in a sequence of murders that lead to his eventual downfall.” In other words, the theme,
or action-idea, is not just a statement of the premise but also a summary of how the work
embodies that premise. Works of art in which the premise is too directly stated, and in
which the embodying action-idea is secondary, do not feel genuine. They feel strained.
An instructional theme is often manifested as a generative goal (the learner is to
solve a problem, complete a project, perform a series of experiments, etc.). Goal-based
scenarios (Schank, Berman, & Macpherson, 1999) and problem-based learning (Dunlap,
2005; Savery & Duffy, 1996) are instructional design approaches that embody this
concept of theme. Both approaches assume that learning happens best when couched in a
coherent activity, just as an effective narrative is driven by a coherent action-idea.
Subject matter alone is an insufficient basis for instruction. However, subject matter
couched in an action-idea creates the potential for aesthetic experience by turning it into
tangible activity. Rather than identifying the topic “anthropology” or even the premise
that “Systematic study of culture can discern patterns that allow us to appreciate
similarities and differences between cultures” as an instructional theme, more useful
would be to identify theme with the learning activity, “After engaging in systematic study
of several exotic cultures, the learner uses this systematic method as a tool for studying
more familiar cultures.” In other words, the activity of the course is evident from the
start, not merely layered onto the topical agenda.
Hollywood producers are infamous for requiring that a proposed film project be
summed up in a one- or two-sentence “pitch.” Aristotle supports this approach as well,
telling artists that they should be able to frame the work such that even hearing a
summary of it elicits a strong emotional response (Aristotle, trans. 1984). Stating the
theme of a course doesn’t necessarily stimulate learning, but it should describe the
experience that will, thus enticing a learner to take part.
Principle 4: Context Contributes to Immersion in the Instructional Situation.
Context is a catch-all category that describes many components of an instructional
situation. Context can be given or created, so consideration of context has a dual nature—
the need to accommodate the many given contextual qualities of a situation in an
instructional design (Tessmer & Richey, 1997) and the possibility to create aspects of the
instructional context to support instructional goals. However, whether one accommodates
or creates it, context must contribute to the cohesiveness of the learning experience by
reinforcing all its components.
Because art is also about experience, cohesiveness plays a similarly critical role.
The many elements of any artwork of quality—whether color, texture, tone, tempo, site,
lighting, mood, or voice—are either purposefully controlled or creatively appropriated by
Aesthetic Principles 9
the artist to make the experience immersive. Even if they seem subordinate or accidental
to an uncritical eye, these elements are not random. No architect designs a building in a
vacuum. Drawings and scale models nearly always include the site, showing its natural
and man-made elements and illustrating the impact of a building’s setting on its final
effectiveness. To determine impacts on user experience, architectural computer models
simulate seasonal changes in lighting and the effects of the building on wind patterns.
Similarly, a writer uses the details of setting to evoke mood (the darkness of winter might
deepen a sense of isolation); to establish character (the decor in protagonist’s bedroom
can reveal character more truthfully than narration); and even to advance the plot (terrain
might complicate movement to heighten tension during a critical sequence).
The literature of instructional design has shown concern with context as given
conditions that must be accommodated (Tessmer & Richey, 1997), but additional insight
can be gained from exploring ways to create context to enhance learning. Instructional
context can include application of a frame to set off a portion of the learning experience
as a world in which students assume alternate identities (often those of experts) to enact
scenarios that allow the application of learning. Frames can be subtle, such as the shift in
language when the instructor refers to learners as practitioners to encourage adoption of
professional behaviors (Parrish, 2004), or quite elaborate, marking off educational
dramas and role-playing activities (Anderson, 2004). Framed scenarios are a form of
legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991) in which learners can practice
developing skills in non-threatening situations that approximate those of the real world
(e.g., Schank et al., 1999). The success of scenarios in instruction may depend greatly on
careful manipulation of context, including establishment of the frame, to create the
alternative world and to encourage immersion and genuine participation. Instructional
designers might learn strategies from artists for doing so.
Finally, from the perspective of an ecological theory of knowing, context
becomes perhaps the primary consideration in designing instruction (Barab & Roth,
2006). From this perspective, learning is stimulated during participation within rich
contexts, ones tailored sufficiently to provide all the affordances necessary to facilitate
meaningful participation in the instructional context yet open enough to suggest
generalities applicable to other contexts (solving the transfer problem). This challenge is
not dissimilar to the one faced by writers of fiction, who must exercise rhetorical control
in providing sufficient and consistent details to create immersive fictional worlds that
also connect to the worlds inhabited by readers.
Guidelines for Applying the First Principles
If the status of “first principles” claimed for the preceding principles is deserved,
the list of guidelines offered below could grow much longer. However, this brief initial
set provides a basis for further thought and research and indicates the breadth of possible
guidelines that might emerge.
Principle 1: Learning Experiences Have Beginnings, Middles, and Endings (i.e., Plots).
1.1: Begin by instilling tension, posing a problem, or pointing out conflicting
information.
Aesthetic Principles 10
To become engaged, a learner has to have a felt need to do so. This need is
frequently satisfied by creating a problematic situation, but it doesn’t have to be a
problem in the traditional sense. Works of art frequently begin by establishing
normalcy—a recognizable and acceptable situation or a harmonious pattern—and then
introduce conflict that violates this normalcy (Bruner, 2002). The conflict introduces the
need for reconciliation and instigates engagement to see the conflict resolved. The
conflict in narratives often involves thrusting likeable, recognizable characters into
threatening situations. In music conflict involves pitting contrasting keys against one
another. In the visual arts, it might be the use of dynamic composition (discomforting
diagonals or curiosity-generating imbalance) or the surrealist tactic of placing everyday
objects in surprising juxtapositions.
To generate tension, instructional situations might begin with conflicting ideas or
theories. For example, an instructor might pose or elicit a commonsense mental model
and then offer conflicting evidence, in effect “entrapping” the learner and stimulating
engagement through cognitive dissonance (Collins & Stevens, 1983). Instruction also
might be centered on a realistic problem, as is done in problem-based or case-based
learning (Kolodner & Guzdial, 2000; Savery & Duffy, 1996). There are myriad ways to
impose conflict in instruction, and any one of them will be better than merely beginning
with a description of subject matter. Aristotle describes this aesthetic strategy as setting
up the “complication.” Everything that follows is the “denouement,” or the working out
(or “untying”) of the complication (Aristotle, trans. 1984). The majority of an
instructional event should feel like denouement (actively working through the action-idea
or theme), but this can happen only with a rich complication to set it in motion.
1.2: Learning experiences should create anticipation of consummation.
Successful beginnings also require anticipation, and the anticipated end of the
denouement is consummation—the rewarding feeling that the experience hangs together
and demonstrates unity. In instruction, consummation involves achieving the key
objectives and ,perhaps more importantly, seeing how they fit together and toward what
coherent end they were chosen in the first place. The end should require struggle but it
must also be achievable. The end should be pointed to or hinted from the start, but not
just handed over to the learner. Maintaining anticipation throughout the denouement
requires establishing trust, which can be achieved by providing interim rewards of
consummation for small-scale tensions. Reigeluth (1999) proposes the use of an
elaboration structure to provide a holistic picture of the instructional content from the
start, potential for interim learning successes within each elaboration, and a constant
reminder of the potential for consummation to be achieved through the entire
instructional sequence.
In lesser works of art, where tensions are frequently resolved without moving the
plot forward (e.g., a cat is responsible for the eerie noise, a dangerous situation turns out
to be a dream), we quickly lose trust and disengage. Or perhaps we decide to play along
for the thrills, but without deep engagement. Similarly, interim rewards in instruction
must also be meaningful, not forced or extrinsic, and contribute to the whole of the
course or module by pointing to the potential consummation.
1.3: Create sustained suspense by enhancing the complication.
Aesthetic Principles 11
This guideline suggests an alternative approach to the problem of cognitive load
(Morrison & Anglin, 2005; van Merriënboer & Ayres, 2005). Early research in the
application of cognitive-load theory proposed reducing instructional complexity by
limiting specificity of goals, providing worked examples rather than problems, and
avoiding split attention (Sweller & Chandler, 1991). While these cognitive-load
principles are not necessarily unaesthetic, they can be counter to building tension and
anticipation. Engagement is built on more than a sustained feeling of achievement and
maintained focus at the expense of challenge. It requires continual struggle and
expectation.
The middle or “second act” of dramatic works is often considered the most
difficult (Hunter, 1993). In the second act the deeper complexity of the plot is revealed,
but the luxury of novelty has worn off. Complicating events must be new, but they can’t
violate the setting and character already established. Otherwise, trust is in danger. The
middle movements in music and films are often quiet and thoughtful, revealing depth and
providing a respite before a more boisterous ending. In instructional situations, the
second act is when the work of teaching and learning can begin to feel like work. Student
engagement needs to be reinforced continually to avoid having the learning situation
become boring and routine. Carefully introducing new tensions, surprises, and increasing
complication is one way to achieve engagement. This approach to engagement is used in
the AMIGO3 project (The PT3 Group at Vanderbilt, 2003), which applies a course
structure composed entirely of a series of challenges—inquiry-based modules that replace
the content presentation-centered structures of traditional instructional approaches.
1.4: Pattern, routine, or an established motif can sustain engagement.
Motif is a critical component of nearly every work of art. In music and narrative
arts, repetition reminds us that the piece is of a whole; motif provides a comfortable and
familiar stop along the journey. Motif also provides a yardstick to reveal how things are
changing or how they are connected: when a motif recurs in different contexts, we are
being asked to compare those contexts. Pattern performs a similar function, providing a
ground on which new forms can stand out but at the same time preventing chaos. Without
pattern, novelty would lose its novelty; chaos would dissolve the integrity of the
experience.
Middle phases of instruction might require a degree of pattern or routine to
maintain a level of comfort to mitigate the stress of necessary work—even if that pattern
involves a series of tension-generating problem cycles. This approach is used in the
AMIGO3 project (The PT3 Group at Vanderbilt, 2003), in which sequences of repeated
challenges introduce pattern without sacrificing tension. Bringing in motifs from early in
the instruction in the form of repeated examples, ideas, or theories also provides an
anchor for new learning to take place and helps to show how the instruction fits together.
The elaboration theory of instruction (Reigeluth, 1999), in which an instructional epitome
functions as a central motif that unifies the individual “episodes” of instruction, applies
this tactic. For example, in an anthropology course an epitome for the course might be a
definition of “culture” agreed upon by the class in an opening discussion, and returned to
repeatedly as the concept of culture is expanded. Elaboration theory uses a zoom-lens
analogy to recommend continued reference to higher level elaborations or the epitome
Aesthetic Principles 12
(“zooming out”) to supply an anchor for new learning and to instill a holistic
understanding of the instructional content.
1.5: Endings should integrate everything that has occurred up to that point.
We want an ending to be more than a stopping point; we want it to be the
culmination and consummation of all activity that led to it (Dewey, 1934/1989).
Consummation is what makes an experience meaningful and not merely a sequence of
disconnected events. Without consummation, the experience is not aesthetic. The ending
of a narrative needs to tie up loose ends, not introduce new ones—unless of course the
presence of loose ends drives the theme of the work and constitutes the appropriate
culmination. The ending needs to justify the effort it takes to engage from start to finish,
and it does this by unifying the work.
The ending of an instructional event shouldn’t consist simply of completing the
last section or mastering the last objective; it should include activity that subsumes
everything learned to that point. It should also provide a backward glance that brings the
entire learning experience into focus. The ending should also be an exhilarating phase,
like the final movement of a symphony. It might occur in a fluster of activity—
completing a final project or paper or preparing for a culminating exam. However it
occurs, it should mark the experience with heightened emotion that enhances engagement
and encourages follow-on reflection, even if deep involvement makes concurrent
reflection unlikely (Reed, Shallert, & Deithloff, 2002).
Dunlap (2005) discusses research on the impact of an immersive, problem-based
capstone course as the culmination to student experience within a degree program in
software development. Students saw their capstone projects not only as difficult
challenges but also as one of the most fulfilling and rich learning experiences in their
program. This research demonstrates the benefit of considering aesthetic experience not
only at the course and module level but also at the curriculum level.
Principle 2: Learners Are the Protagonists of Their Own Learning Experience.
2.1: Accept that learners, as protagonists, are fully human.
Good dramatic characters are realistic (Aristotle, trans. 1984). They have flaws,
goals, desires, basic needs, senses, and an individual brand of rational thought. If they
didn’t, we wouldn’t relate to them strongly; their drama would hold little meaning for us.
Because learners are the protagonists in their learning experiences, they should be
allowed to express their individuality without it seeming to detract from a predetermined
plan of action. By definition, learning is a form of change; but it always has the current
self as starting point. If learners can’t begin a learning experience by being themselves,
the experience is unlikely to be genuine or aesthetic. Many researchers and theorists have
pointed to the value of recognizing varying learning styles, motivations, or
“intelligences” and allowing individual learners to use their styles and motivations to
achieve their best (e.g., Gardner, 1999; Hiemstra, 1997; Martinez, 2002). Furthermore,
learners might not change beliefs without first being reminded of their current concepts
and beliefs and being shown their potential inadequacy in new situations (Collins &
Stevens, 1983; Jonassen, 1999; Schank et al., 1999).
Aristotle tells us that plot, and not character, is central to drama. He reminds us
that the collected events in the life of a single protagonist are insufficient material for
good drama if those events don’t themselves form a coherent narrative (Aristotle, trans.
Aesthetic Principles 13
1984). However, while plot is primary, plot must arise from character and not merely be
imposed on characters. By extension, in instructional settings the realities of learners
should also influence what is taught during instruction, even though direction is always
provided by an instructor or designer to ensure coherence. Learner-centered approaches
that include opportunities for establishing personal learning goals, choosing approaches
and pacing for learning activities, and sharing personal experiences are part of the
solution to supporting aesthetic learning experiences, just as they are for supporting
knowledge construction (Jonassen, 1999).
2.2: Allow dialogue to reveal character.
Inexperienced fiction writers generally exhibit the weakness of using excessive
description rather than letting dialogue and action reveal character (Ray, 1994). Similarly,
if learner-centered instruction and the need for learners to reveal themselves are valued,
dialogue can be a significant instructional tool. Most constructivist approaches call for a
high degree of conversation in learning, not only to force learners to reflect and articulate
their reasoning (Jonassen, 1999) but also to encourage collaborative knowledge
construction (Bielaczyc & Collins, 1999; Nelson, 1999). Just as dialogue is central to
revealing psychological conflict in narratives, dialogue is important in revealing learners’
beliefs, both to themselves and to others. When these articulated beliefs trigger
epistemological conflicts, either internally or among fellow learners and the instructor,
learning opportunities arise.
2.3: Foster a change or growth in sense of identity; make learning a rite of passage.
Like good instruction, successful art stimulates a change that leads to growth. It
depicts the change in a protagonist or encourages a viewer’s own change of perception,
belief, or emotional disposition. To make learning a deeply felt experience, we can
stimulate a learner’s identification as protagonist and encourage him or her to view
learning as change or growth in identity.
To a degree, this encouragement can be achieved through the language used in
talking with learners—particularly through changes in language over the course of the
instruction as learners become less like novices and more like “practitioners” or
“cognoscenti” (Parrish, 2004). Teachers and designers can include discussion of what it
means to be knowledgeable and what can be done as a consequence of becoming
knowledgeable, demonstrating and providing practice in exercising the “habits of mind”
that distinguish a community of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In addition, the ending
phase of instruction can include “rite of passage” activities—including awards, shifting
roles (for example, learner as teacher while making a final class presentation), or a
celebration of graduation. Capstone courses involving actual or realistic practitioner
projects or demonstrating academic growth through original inquiry are a way of eliciting
and “celebrating” the change in identity that is often a desired outcome of a curriculum of
study (Dunlap, 2005).
Principle 3: Learning Activity, Not Subject Matter, Establishes the Theme of Instruction.
3.1: Theme and plot arise from subject matter but should be more than subject matter.
Subject matter should be the arbiter for deciding what learning activities are
possible and useful. Aesthetic qualities should not be used simply to “spruce up”
Aesthetic Principles 14
instruction, nor should instructional theories be allowed to smother content with
methodology. Sources of aesthetic tension and consummation, and sources of
instructional methods in general, should arise from problems and issues emerging from
the subject matter and not be imposed arbitrarily.
Just as the theme of a narrative is embedded in a tangible complication, problems
at the center of inquiry-learning approaches require authenticity. If they are not directly
related to everyday concerns, professional practice, or acknowledged domain issues,
learning problems will insufficiently engage learners (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In the arts,
even when fictional narratives include fantastical settings and action, they are grounded
in authentic human challenges, emotions, and values.
3.2: The theme should be believable and connect to experience.
Just as plot, theme, and character should align in a narrative, the alignment or
unity required between subject matter and learning activity (theme) and methodology
(plot) must extend to the learner (character). Subject matter should not require an
excessive leap of faith. The subject matter might be well-trod ground for instructors, but
it is typically quite foreign to learners. Subject matter represents the culmination of a
history of research within a domain of knowledge, and it can’t simply be handed to
learners for their consumption. If learning arises from experience, learners need to engage
in experiences within a domain of knowledge like the researchers, theorists, and
practitioners who created it (Dewey, 1916).
Simply starting with subject matter is not enough. The premise of a course should
be something students can currently understand. The theme should describe how they can
get from where they are, through activities, to a higher level of knowledge and ability to
use the subject matter, not simply to recall it. But how learners achieve this end must also
be related to intentions that they themselves possess (Jonassen & Land, 2000).
Principle 4: Context Contributes to Immersion in the Instructional Situation.
4.1: Allow context to support theme and character.
The importance of context or setting is recognized by all writers of fiction.
Dramatists sometimes refer to context as “stage setup,” which includes elements such as
time, place, lighting, season, and props (Ray, 1994). The clichéd setting of a “dark and
stormy night” used in melodrama demonstrates a lack of originality, but it became cliché
because it establishes an appropriate emotional context for the drama about to unfold.
Setting often serves more practical purposes as well, as when props provide the means for
characters to carry out critical actions or demonstrate important psychological traits.
Most teachers recognize the importance of instructional contexts, and they will
often fill their classrooms with items that stimulate thought about subject matter and
create immersion in a world that supports activities for learning. Images, posters,
manipulatives, books, magazines, and tools can be prominent components of a classroom
that reveals the world of a discipline and helps students develop a deeper relationship
with it. Computer interfaces and printed materials can use thematic motifs to support
immersion as well. Seating arrangements and communication tools also provide social
context and promote desired ways of thinking about the learning situation. Schedules,
lengths of learning episodes, and times of day for meetings also color the learning
experience. Additionally, allowing learners to collaborate in building and adding items to
Aesthetic Principles 15
the context enhances their ownership and allows them to express their characters.
Tessmer and Richey (1997) outline an even broader set of contextual factors that can
support or inhibit learning according to how they are accommodated or controlled in
creating a cohesive learning environment. In addition to the qualities of the immediate
environment, these factors include learner perceptions about the instructional situation
and cultural or organizational factors such as incentives and supports.
4.2: Honor setting in instruction.
A work of art must acknowledge and honor its setting or risk irrelevance. An
architect is extremely careful in adapting any newly designed structure to fit within its
given setting. He or she knows that failing to do so can thwart the intended aesthetic (and
practical) experience, while doing so acknowledges the larger experience of which the
new structure will be only one part. A writer honors the setting of a narrative by
providing rich details to readers to help create an authentic and, therefore, inhabitable
context. For landscape painters, setting itself becomes subject matter, not just context.
Even though it is important to frame the instructional experience as unique,
instructors and designers should also honor setting or “place,” i.e., the environment
beyond the immediate instructional context. Learners are intricately connected to their
natural, social, and cultural contexts in ways that make “place” a central component of
their identity and belief systems. Integration with place is a critical component in their
ability to flourish as human beings (Gruenewald, 2003). Place can become an important
factor in instruction when activities are derived from and connected to it. Problems can
be centered on place-based concerns; learning activities can include having students go
into the local natural or social environment to engage in research and application
projects; and themes, examples, and information resources can be drawn from the local
setting. Engaging with the local setting allows learners to experience the complexity of
environments in a way that can’t happen when reading or discussing foreign or remote
environments. A strong connection to place can make learning experiences rich, multilayered, and potentially aesthetic because they are immediate.
The Instructor as Author and Character
The instructor or instructional designer plays a complex set of roles in an
instructional situation. When orchestrating the content and methodology, the designer is
similar to the author of a work of art. But if the learning experience is to be fully
aesthetic, the learner should share responsibility for authoring the experience and the
instructor’s role must take on other dimensions. This leads to a final first principle, which
is explored in this section.
Principle 5: Instructors and Instructional Designers Are Authors, Supporting Characters,
and Model Protagonists,
An instructor, and even an instructional designer, does much more than
orchestrate the other components of the learning environment. He or she is an active
contributor, just as much as any other component. The instructor or designer is also a key
character in the experience. While not typically the protagonist, the instructor sometimes
acts in a role similar to that of the Greek chorus, commenting on the dramatic
Aesthetic Principles 16
developments from a privileged standpoint. At other times the instructor functions as a
companion character who is confidant to the protagonist and who might also act as
provocateur or mirror, as Sam does during Frodo’s quest in The Lord of the Rings trilogy
(Tolkien, 1955). The instructor can also play the role of wizened guide—one who knows
the perils that lurk down each learning path and, while unable to prevent the learner from
having to take that path, can provide tools and magical objects to help along the way
(Campbell, 1968).
But instructors and designers also have important roles as experienced learners, or
model protagonists. Instructors should reveal their own personal experiences in finding
approaches to the subject matter. They should share what it is that motivates their own
practice or that led them to their chosen field of knowledge. They should share what
perplexes them still, what frustrates them and angers them about the field. They should
share regrets. Instructional designers should mine for these motivations, frustrations, and
regrets from their subject matter experts and not be lulled into recounting only
summarized expert knowledge. They should also be highly conscious of their own
difficulties in engaging the subject matter and use this consciousness in their design
decisions. Instructors and designers must bring their imaginations and empathy to the
experience as well, empathizing with learners to understand how the experience is likely
perceived from their point of view. For instructional designers, who are typically
removed from the learning experience, this use of imagination is particularly critical
(Parrish, 2006).
Finally, instructors and designers must to a degree be in love with their subject
matter and the process of learning it and be willing to reveal their feelings about it. If they
aren’t themselves excited about what they are teaching and don’t express that excitement
to their learners, how can learners be expected to become fully engaged? An audience
can tell when an artist is holding back and not baring her soul in the work of art. We
come to expect that in great works of art the artist will reveal truths that are drawn deeply
from her own life experiences. Learners should expect the same.
Conclusion
One purpose of this article has been to demonstrate that aesthetic considerations
in teaching and instructional design include much more than providing an attractive
frame or surface to instructional events. On the contrary, aesthetic principles can guide
instructional design in all of its many levels and layers (Gibbons, 2003). In fact, the
principles have as much to say about the what as the how of instruction. They show
strong connections to valued instructional theories derived from traditional sources, such
as cognitive psychology, situated and constructivist learning theories, and even
behaviorism. These relationships, summarized in Table 1, should not be unexpected,
given that both aesthetic experience and instruction are about constructing meaning.
Aesthetic experience describes a particularly heightened form of engagement
with the world, a form of inquiry that does not limit itself to scientific or technological
constraints but instead takes a holistic account of the world and ourselves. Like all forms
of inquiry, it is about creating meaning from experience that can improve or expand our
approaches to future experience. This quality suggests that aesthetic experience is bound
up in any significant, transformative learning experience and is also a potential outcome
Aesthetic Principles 17
of less ambitious learning goals. Further exploration of aesthetic principles, including
further investigation into how they are exercised within the arts and instruction in parallel
ways, can broaden our understanding of how people learn and how instructors can guide
their learning. Aesthetic approaches to instructional design do not make the difficult
problems of instruction any simpler; but they can help us embrace those problems in all
their richness rather than encouraging us to oversimplify and, perhaps, misjudge them.
References
Alexander, T. M. (1998). The art of life: Dewey's aesthetics. In L. A. Hickman (Ed.),
Reading Dewey: Interpretations for a postmodern generation (pp. 1-22).
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Anderson, C. (2004). Learning in "as-if" worlds: Cognition in drama in education. Theory
Into Practice, 43(4), 281-286.
Aristotle. (trans. 1984). Poetics. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle (Vol.
Two, pp. 2316-2340). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Barab, S. A., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Curriculum-based ecosystems: Supporting knowing
from an ecological perspective. Educational Researcher, 35(5), 3-13.
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A
reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),
Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory
(pp. 269-292). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bolling, E. (2003). Design cultures. Retrieved January 28, 2004, from the World Wide
Web:
http://www.indiana.edu/%7Eidt/shortpapers/documents/design_cultures.html
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. (2002). Making stories: Law, literature, and life. New York: Farrar, Straus,
and Giroux.
Campbell, J. (1968). The hero with a thousand faces (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). A cognitive theory of inquiry teaching. In C. M.
Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their
current status (pp. 247-278). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.
Dewey, J. (1934/1989). Art as experience (Vol. 10). Carbondale: Southern Illinois
University Press.
Dunlap, J. C. (2005). Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course
prepares students for a profession. Educational Technology Research &
Development, 53(1), 65-85.
Egri, L. (1942). The art of dramatic writing: Its basis in the creative interpretation of
human motives. New York: Touchstone.
Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1979). Principles of instructional design (Second Edition
ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York: Basic Books.
Gibbons, A. S. (2003). What and how do designers design? TechTrends, 47(5), 22-25.
Aesthetic Principles 18
Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for
place-conscious education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619654.
Hiemstra, R. (1997). Applying the individualizing instruction model with adult learners.
In C. R. Dills & A. J. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms
(pp. 555-570). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Hunter, L. (1993). Lew Hunter's screenwriting 434. New York: Perigee Books.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M.
Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of
instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Preface. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.),
Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. iii-ix). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kolodner, J. L., & Guzdial, M. (2000). Theory and practice of case-based learning aids.
In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning
environments (pp. 215-242). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Laurel, B. (1993). Computers as theatre. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. C. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martinez, M. (2002). Designing learning objects to personalize learning. In D. A. Wiley
(Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects (pp. 151-171). Bloomington, IN:
AECT.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research
& Development, 50(3), 43-59.
Morrison, G. R., & Anglin, G. J. (2005). Reseach on cognitive load theory: Application
to e-learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(3), 94-104.
Nelson, L. M. (1999). Collaborative problem solving. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),
Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory
(pp. 241-267). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Parrish, P. E. (2004). Investigating the aesthetic decisions of teachers and instructional
designers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, San Diego, CA. Available online at
http://www.comet.ucar.edu/~pparrish/.
Parrish, P. E. (2005). Embracing the aesthetics of instructional design. Educational
Technology, 45(2), 16-25.
Parrish, P. E. (2006). Design as storytelling. TechTrends, 50(4), 72-82.
Ray, R. J. (1994). The weekend novelist. New York: Dell Publishing.
Reed, J. H., Shallert, D. L., & Deithloff, L. F. (2002). Investigating the interface between
self-regulation and involvement process. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 53-57.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence
decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A
new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-453). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rowland, G. (1999). A tripartite seed. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Aesthetic Principles 19
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model
and its constructivist framework. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning
environments (pp. 135-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Publications.
Schank, R. (1990). Tell me a story: A new look at real and artificial memory. New York:
Charles Scribner & Sons.
Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. M.
Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of
instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 161-181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1991). Evidence for cognitive load theory. Cognition and
Instruction, 8(4), 351-362.
Tessmer, M., & Richey, R. C. (1997). The role of context in learning and instructional
design. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(2), 85-115.
The PT3 Group at Vanderbilt. (2003). Three amigos: Using "anchored modular inquiry"
to help prepare future teachers. Educational Technology Research &
Development, 51(1), 105-123.
Tierno, M. (2002). Aristotle's poetics for screenwriters. New York: Hyperion.
Tolkien, J. R. R. (1955). The fellowship of the ring. New York: Ballatine Books.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its
design implications for e-learning: Introduction to the special issue. Educational
Technology Research & Development, 53(3), 5-13.
Wilson, B. G. (2004). Foundations for instructional design: Reclaiming the conversation.
In J. M. Spector & D. A. Wiley & C. Ohrazda & A. Van Schaack (Eds.),
Innovations in instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill (pp.
237-252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wilson, B. G. (2005). Broadening our foundation for instructional design: Four pillars of
practice. Educational Technology, 45(2), 10-16.
Aesthetic Principles 20
Table 1
Connecting Aesthetic Principles to Learning and ID Theory
________________________________________________________________________
Principle
Related Learning and ID Theories and
Models
________________________________________________________________________
Principle 1: Learning Experiences Have
Inquiry learning
Beginnings, Middles, and Endings
Problem-based learning
Problem–centered learning
Project-based learning
Goal-based scenarios
Elaboration theory
Principle 2: Learners Are the
Protagonists of Their Own Learning
Experiences
Constructivist learning
Learning styles
Instructional role-playing
Dialogical learning
Collaborative learning
Principle 3: Learning Activity, Not
Subject Matter, Establishes the Theme of
Instruction
Constructivist learning
Situated learning
Communities of practice
Project-based learning
Activity theory
Principle 4: Context Contributes to
Immersion in the Instructional Situation
Context analysis
Ecological psychology
Learning environments
Instructional role-plays
Scenario-based learning
Place-centered learning
Legitimate peripheral participation
Principle 5: Instructors and Instructional
Designers Are Authors, Supporting
Characters, and Model Protagonists
Constructivist learning
Cognitive apprenticeship
Learning-as-journey metaphors