A Role Based Model of Instructional Design Practice
The roles of design: a new method of instructional design
Brad Hokanson, Charles Miller, Simon Hooper
University of Minnesota, Penn State University
This paper addresses a number of issues in instructional design, but centrally addresses
the role and activities of the instructional designer. At it's core, this is an examination of
beliefs, of values in the field; the questions we ask concern aesthetics, innovation, the very
nature of design.
We begin with addressing the current state of instructional design, which, by many
accounts, is limited by it's approach to design issues. Most in the field function as (what we
call) instructional engineers at best and instructional manufacturers of instructional
materials. There is an inherent difference between design and production; and the driving
force in instructional development, the production of instructional materials limits
innovation, focusing on done rather than good. Design is what happens past done; more
than being a productive act, design is one of creation.
Introduction
Why ADDIE doesn’t work, isn’t motivating, and doesn’t evolve the designer, the product,
or the field
What are we doing
Precursor: The design of higher level instructional environments (Level 4 and 5)
Lower level instructional materials = development the product
Higher level learning = design the experience
We are discussing efficiency of design, not efficiency of development.
Health of the design process: sustainability, evolution, motivation, etc.
End result benefits designer, learner, instructor, profession, etc.
Design can change, however the total process isn't changing, just a different visual analsis of
th steps of design. [hoadly and cox] e.g. star model, waterfall model, spiral model; in
looking at those, it's just ADDIE with make up.
Creating the same thing in a different order; you need to change the values and philosophy,
not presenting our steps to the process but roles based on individuals based on how to think
during the design process. It's not about the process but fundamentally about how you think;
we don't want to give people a process, but we want people to think differently about their
process. Awareness, in a sense that they can understand their own process in order to change
or evolve. Product comes from the individual designer, not the process. AT this point, we're
addressing instructional designers, those that make and apply, not the research scientist or
theorist. Trying to get instructional design back to a design field, not an instructional
schience.
Gibbons, visscher hoadley&cox, parrish, Wilson, Reeves
Roles09007 • 1
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
What have I done to ensure that the next design project is better than this one?
The biggest flaw is that most people listen to the problem as the engineer and have
ideas for solutions before the description is complete.
Why has the field of instructional design failed to move forward? Forward with new ideas,
with innovative methods of teaching using technology, and forward with advanced theories
of the use of educational technology. The focus of the field, since inception, has been on
lower level learning, often building work that centers on demonstrable content
memorization as opposed to the more complex and advanced learning that is needed for
the world today. We aren’t rich, we’re simple. We aren’t authentic, we’re removed from
context. We don’t advance; we recreate the teaching and instructional methods of the past
century.
Central to this failure of instructional design is the methodology of design. Most instructional
designers, when questioned about their use of a design method, have a one word answer:
”ADDIE”. Our limited success comes when we are all using the same method.
The instructional design method commonly known as ADDIE was invented by…. wait, as it
turns out, it wasn’t. It appears to be first described in a number of sources as a descriptor
for what actually happens in instructional design, only later to be formalized through the
literature of instructional design. [Molenda, 2003] It is not an invented method for planning
and designing in instructional design, but a description of established and vernacular
practice.
In reality and in common use, the ADDIE models differs very little from codified design
models used in other fields, notably architecture. Architects commonly use the terms
schematic design, design development, construction documents, and contract
administration to contractually segment the process of design and constructing a building.
However, while the process can be divided into these phases [along with subsequent client
billings], almost no designer limits or constrains their design process to these steps.
Architecture has a rich history of design methodology looking beyond these simple steps,
both in terms of codification, and in terms of analysis and evaluation before and after this
design process [often called “pre-design” and “post-occupancy evaluation”].
Design cannot be codified in a simple recipe, called ADDIE or Ruthie or whatever.
V-V examined the design processes of instructional designers. Most followed a traditional,
rational, ADDIE based model, but their research showed that "design processes are much
more heterogeneous and diverse" than the ADDIE model suggested. (2004). VV and
Gustafson described four belief systems, schools of thought, paradigms of instructional
design and their underlying schools of thought. They are instrumental rationality,
communicative, pragmatic, and artistic rationality. They correspond (roughly) to four
'movements' of epistemology in science; modernism, critical theory, pragmatism, and
postmodernism.
VVG paradigm
values
Artist
Artistic
rationalism
Exploration,
failure
Architect
Communicative,
blended
Wholistic
approach, user
Engineer
Instrumental
rationalism
Scientific,
research
Craftsman
Pragmatism
Quality of the
product
Roles09007 • 2
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
centered
The use of a proscribed method in teaching instructional design is understandable.
Providing learners with a set of procedures to follow that is known to generate a predictable
results is, to some extent, valuable. Novices in any field often seek a specific set of tasks
that will guarantee success is common phenomenon; however, as designers mature and
address more complex problems, they generally work without a specific set of ordered
actions. As noted in Dreyfus and Dreyfus [1989?], novices in any field tend to seek rules
and follow rule based behavior, while as an individual progresses in [design] skills,
knowledge becomes less tacit, rules less explicit, and capability less defined by declared
knowledge.
"During the first stage of the acquisition of a new skill though instruction, the novice learns
to recognize various objective facts and features relevant to the skill and acquires rules for
determining actions based on those facts and features. Elements of the situation to be
treated a relevant are so clear and objectively defined for the novice that they can be
recognized without reference to the over all situation in which they occur. We call such
elements 'context-free,' and the rules that are to be applies to these facts regardless of
what else is happening 'context-free rules'. " Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1986)
Mapped to the use of the ADDIE model, this anticipates that the higher the design skill of
the instructional designer, the less use and less applicable is this model. Novice designers
will use the model with fervor, evaluated on their loyal steps in the process, as
[theoretically] consistent with design skill. Educators use the method as a way to codify the
process and produce standardizable results.
In reality, this model generates a process of design that is lockstep in execution, boring to
the designer, and frontloads the “good” parts of the design process to the front end. Later
aspects of the process are demotivating; implementation are viewed as simply getting the
job done and/or drudgery; evaluation is an afterthought if that.
One can view the ADDIE model as a recipe for instructional design. Novice cooks follow
recipes, without modification or extrapolation, getting the expected result. Completion, or
done, is desired. For the great cook, we know that it is not how religiously they follow the
recipe, but rather how they go beyond what is proscribed. Chefs, whom we need to
advance the field, if not our culinary experience, are made from imagination, based on a
process, but also not hindered by it.
Design is, of course, never done; good designers have in their psyche an impatience, a
dissatisfaction with the status quo. They seek the challenge, the unexpected result. The
goal of design education is not to produce better designs, particularly ones that replicate
previous designs. The goal must be to produce better designers. Inherent in this goal for
the profession is one of constant improvement and innovation.
How this is done is an ongoing debate in most design fields [except maybe for instructional
design]. Most design fields recognize the value of extensive work in design studios,
addressing increasingly complex design projects. Within the studio and within the design
process is embedded the use and application of current theory, ideology, and professional
Roles09007 • 3
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
behavior. [for example, the value of innovative thinking is both demonstrated and expected
in studio.
Being a designer implies having the explicit knowledge and the implicit procedures and
attitudes needed to successfully design. Design can be viewed as a system of belief, with
expected behaviors, skills, and aesthetics.
One way to organize and present the values of instructional design is to present and
emulate a series of roles as modes or exemplars for successful design practice. Being a
designer therefore becomes more important than understanding what a designer does;
being able to be creative is much more important [and difficult] than knowing what creativity
is.
Any design process has a series of different activities, with attention spent in various
different aspects of the work. A broad understanding of the project, as well as background
in the field and ability in each aspect of the work is needed. Some time must be dedicated
to the experimental aspects of the work, both on specific projects and to generally advance.
A rigorous understanding and evaluation of the field's body of knowledge must be applied.
And the project must be built with skill and continuous improvement of the design, even
after formal completion.
Each of these parts of the process could be described in a procedural tone, outlining
actions that need to be taken, artifacts that need to be produced. Each will, of course, be
inherently structured by these sub-tasks, responding to each with completion as opposed of
exploration.
The parts of the process can also be described through a series of roles or exemplars.
So, instead of a recipe for making instructional design, we present a series of models for
the behavior of instructional designers; here are a series of roles that procedurally, will lead
one through instructional design, and, more importantly, a series of exemplars, which if
followed, will improve quality and innovation within the field of instructional designers. We
seek to make better instructional designers, not by providing a low level list of actions, but
by giving the field a series of models of quality in each aspect of design work.
Roles
Role model "Men often define themselves through the skills they acquire, and the issues to
which they put them." Dreyfus & Dreyfus, (1986, 11)
The roles of design we present here are archetypes, i.e., romanticized versions of
real professions, exemplars of behavior and practice, and valid as models for
professional behavior in instructional design. As exemplars, we seek from them the
best of their practices; for example, from the artist, creativity and from the
craftsman, patience and advancement through practice.
Each of these roles are well known through our society: artist, architect, engineer,
and craftsman. Each title is often said with pride, and bestowed on another as
Roles09007 • 4
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
praise, for example: "Bill was the architect of our fund raising drive." or "Joan
engineered a difficult departmental merger." Design too, can serve as an exemplary
verb, when the full diversity of the work of design is included.
Instructional design is guided by a range of theories and ideas, beliefs and assumptions, not
the least of which is a perception of our own practice. Consequently, if we view the process
of instructional design as one of production (that is, the manufacture of instructional
materials) we will create work limited in conception and execution. Similarly, if we go
beyond mere production to engage theories of learning and perception, the scientifically
based outcomes are engineered, highly efficient, yet may lack the wholeness needed for the
development of knowledge (Wilson, 2005). To be complete, we must extend our self-image
and think beyond production or engineering. We must seek a balanced model of
professional practice, one that expands our understanding of design itself.
A number of theories and ideas guide the practice of instructional design, but we
are also guided by our perceptions of our own practice. If we view the work of
instructional design as the application of theories of cognition and learning, those
values guide our work; similarly, if we view the process as one of the development
of instructional materials, we will create work that is limited.
Ultimately, in this chapter, we hope to improve educational practice though the design and
development of technology based products and methods. Achieving such a goal requires an
understanding of the relationship between instructional design practice and product.
During the renaissance – these roles were blurred
First, lets’ examine how each of the roles fit into a linear process. [Then we’ll examine how
they work as part of a team.]Within the field of instructional design, we currently work
through roles in the process, but they are limited in many respects, and do not include the
full range of design. Much of the field seeks the scientific, rational approach to design,
where answers exist, and the best method can be found, then adopted by all, and then
developed through completion.
Engineer - Values, characteristics (historical and present), responsibilities, definitions,
philosophies, research & practice (exhibitions, published work, showcases)
Engineer – ensuring theoretical and practical soundness of the solution; utility, stability,
usability, and scalability of the medium.
The practice of instructional design currently focuses principally on two roles, one
broadly described as an instructional engineer, and the other as an instructional
manufacturer.
We use the term "instructional engineer" as the title of the third phase of
instructional design, that area most addressed in instructional design programs.
The instructional engineer focuses on the applying research derived models for
learning.
Roles09007 • 5
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
“Some object to the word ‘design,’ suggesting as it does a rather arty orientation,
and insist that what we really need is ‘instructional engineering.’” http://www.fastrakconsulting.co.uk/tactix/features/engineer.htm
Engineering is the creative application of scientific principles used to plan, build,
direct, guide, manage, or work on systems to maintain and improve our daily
lives. Engineers and scientists are often confused in the minds of the general
public. While scientists explore nature in order to discover general principles,
engineers apply established principles drawn from mathematics and science in
order to develop economical solutions to technical problems.
The role of the instructional engineer is one of instructional problem solving. Most
engineers, either in the instructional field or in the main fields of engineering such as civil,
structural, or mechanical engineering are highly trained professionals. In education, the
instructional engineer ensures a product is usable by the target audience and makes the
product achieve it's educational goals. Contemporary, research-based ideas are used to
develop instructional materials; educational theory is an important component of the work
of the instructional engineer. The principle goal of the engineer is the functional efficiency of
the work, planning and organizing the project. [These are valuable aspects of the design
process and can advance the value of the work.
Counter Role: the instructional manufacturer
The manufacturer is a developer of instructional materials. The manufacturer is often a
technician who applies a pre-defined design model or template to solve an educational
problem and delivers a product as efficiently as possible. To a large extent, the solution to
an educational problem is presented to the manufacturer whose responsibility becomes one
of developmental efficiency. Product consistency and stability are of primary importance,
leading to results that are predictable and stable.
When asked to develop educational materials for use through distance education, the
instructional manufacturer might employ traditional instructional design methods to develop
instructional materials emphasizing content presentation and application. Such materials are
commonly delivered to learners via the most efficient technologies (e.g., online quizzes,
Blackboard/WebCT templates, PowerPoint presentations, etc.). Most of these technologies
are stable and, at the core, are based on educational theories such as constructivism,
collaboration, or cognitive science, but such theories are remote from the manufacturer.
Models for the design process would focus on the functional (i.e. "form follows function").
As with the architecture in the 1960's, an aesthetic could develop based on making the c
technology work, on utility.
Contrary to the role of the manufacturer is one of the Craftsperson. We see to imbue this
phase of project development is critical to the worth of the end artifact; as part of the full
design process, viewing this phase as one which adds value to the project is important. It is
Roles09007 • 6
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
needed, for the health of the process and the participant designers, that this portion of the
work be a positive, additive, and generative portion of the work.
Craftsperson - Values, characteristics (historical and present), responsibilities, definitions,
philosophies, research & practice (exhibitions, published work, showcases)
Craftsperson – mastery of methodology in a medium, open to innovation with a capacity for
adaptation to context. Lose innovation and adaptation after the comma
lose mastery
manufacturing.
Development and refinement of design materials Execution
The instructional craftsman encompasses the work of implementation, but also still
seeks to improve the project or design. Craft work implies a high level of skill in
execution, and while not having a focus on the research or theoretical foundations
of instructional design, still has a good basis in the field.
We have not always as designed by drawing. Originally, and still to
this day, in many places and under many circumstances, designers
were and are primarily makers or crafters. They made objects
ranging from small personal and household utensils, through larger
pieces of equipment used in agriculture or other primitive industries,
to houses and civil buildings and even complete towns. All this was
largely made without significant use of drawn plans. Things were
made by either copying or adapting what had been done before. This
process is usually described as 'vernacular' when applied to
architecture and as 'blacksmith' when applied to industrial products.
The imaginer and the maker we parts of one single undifferentiated
role. (Lawson, 2004, 31)
As a verb, 'to craft' seemingly means to participate skillfully in some small-scale
process. This implies several things. First, it affirms that the results of involved
work will still surpass the results of detached work. To craft is to care. Second, it
suggests that partnerships with technology are better than autonomous
technology. For example, personal mastery of open-ended software can take
computers places that deterministic software code cannot. Third, to craft implies
working at a personal scale--acting locally in reaction to anonymous, globalized,
industrial production--hence its appeal in describing phenomena such as
microbreweries. Finally, the usage of 'craft' as a verb evades the persistent
stigma that has attached itself to the noun. (McCullough, Malcolm, (1998).
Abstracting craft: The practiced digital hand, Cambridge: MIT Press, p.21)
Design can be described as "knowing how". The steps of design process, the items
to include in creating something, are better described as "knowing that".
In modern society today, we have a view, a vision of "craftsman", one of a highly
skilled trades worker doing exceptional work, a benevolent artisan. There are
gender and other issues with the term; craftsperson may be more appropriate. Craft
Roles09007 • 7
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
in itself is a loaded term within the art community, and one which conjures up lessthan-professional standards. Artisan may be a more current appropriate term, but
one which seems to be more of the independent jewelry maker genre, or the maker
of bread that uses whole wheat flour.
Historically, a craftsman was a highly skilled guild member, required to take in an
apprentice to continue the guild. Inherent in the role of master craftsman was the
requirement of
I imagine a craftsman building a wood strip canoe, a boat by hand. The work is about the
same as before, but it does not regress to the level of mechanical reproduction by a
human. The maker, the individual is engaged with the work. [To some extent, the craftsman
is divorced from concerns of reality; in their own time, patient and still efficient. It's done
when it's done.]
• A high level of implicit knowledge developed from experience.
• A seeking of quality in both technical and aesthetic terms.
• Separation from concerns of cost, time, effort.
• Calluses.
• Values the product more than the user.
One model of craft would be Ansel Adams; continuing to improve seek perfection in the full
photographic process.
Architect - Values, characteristics (historical and present), responsibilities, definitions,
philosophies, research & practice (exhibitions, published work, showcases)
Architect – holistic, questioning assumptions, balanced approach, transformative,
Holistic understanding through exploration
The instructional architect, fueled by a balanced approach that includes aesthetics and
innovative design, would approach the problem by designing new solutions that promote
high-level learning (i.e. generation and challenge), followed by a critical examination of the
solution to improve user engagement, motivation, and interaction. By scrutinizing the design
and questioning the solution, instructional architects are unique in that they are not satisfied
by simply solving the problem. The architect is motivated by extending the boundaries of
the available media affordances to explore solutions that enhance the learner experience,
moving beyond the pedagogical and technological specifications of the instructional
problem (i.e. design beyond done).
The first phase of role based design is called the instructional architect. Developing an
understanding of the entire project is critical to the design process, i.e. having a holistic
view of the design challenge. Inherent in this understanding is an identification and
recognition of the assumptions of the design problem, and a questioning of the design
problem itself; what is the nature of the design problem? This initial phase also examines
the resources at hand and the theoretical and philosophical orientation of the project.
Roles09007 • 8
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
The architect extends the engineer’s functional and usable solution and attempts to
incorporate aesthetics at the core of the design process. By doing so, the architect explores
divergent solutions that extend and cultivate the affordances of a medium. The architect’s
approach to instructional design attempts to balance utility, usability, and aesthetics.
In any design project, at some point, the conceptualization, the planning, the broader view
have been completed, and the work must be implemented. Here too there are significant
questions, of a choice between completion and craft. Most instructional design work these
days is manufactured; ideas developed elsewhere are
Artist - Values, characteristics (historical and present), responsibilities, definitions,
philosophies, research & practice (exhibitions, published work, showcases)
Artist – self-expression, inquisitive, explorative, unafraid, transformative,
Radical conceptualization through design and failure
Artists are revered and neglected in many cultures; we view cultures as civilized
that support artists in a minimal manner; occasionally we celebrate artists usually
after they are dead.
The life of an artist is a difficult one; pursuing one's art is usually different from
pursuing money from a job.
Here we view artists as those with a mastery of a medium, with an intense focus on
their work and a concern for aesthetics. They exhibit a high level of creativity, even
to the point of working outside of society. Failure, unexpected results, and
disturbance of the status quo mark the work of the artist; advancement of the finish
product is not necessarily the goal, but rather an advancement in the understanding
and development of new ideas is.
We view the role of the artist as one providing divergent thinking at the beginning of
any project; providing aesthetic direction and inspiration throughout the project, and
acting as the "what if" person on a project team.
The artist is an instructional explorer. The artist uses instructional problems as stimuli to
experiment with media and affordances. The instructional artist may work without client or
audience, only later attempting to apply to instructional practice what has been learned
through the artistic experience. The artist embraces failure and engages in continuous selfcriticism while attempting to understand both the problem and self.
The second exemplar is that of the instructional artist, an iconoclastic divergence that
embraces experiment and failure. Here the process of instructional design examines ideas
that don’t work, paths that are not expected, and allows for a more diverse range of
conceptualization. Within the field of creativity training, there are a number of techniques
that encourage examining wrong answers or the opposites of the expected results.
Similarly, the phase of the instructional artist is fraught with failure, and one which
diversifies thought. Here is where most innovation in the field will occur, not in the later
Roles09007 • 9
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
roles of engineer or manufacturer, where 1% improvements are sought. The bet here is to
win big, with substantial increases in the value of designs.
The instructional artist, operating with a high expectation of failure, would approach the
scenario with little concern for the problem specifications and simply experiment with the
available design media and content. For example, the artist could use the graphical
capabilities of Macromedia Flash to create interactive visualizations or sonic interpretations.
Most importantly, although the initial goal may have been pure experimentation with
experience, an instructional artist might discover techniques that promote learning. (Note
that the term "might" is critical to the nature of the artist; results that are unsuccessful in
generating added learning remain valuable.)
END ROLES
As with many other things, the methods and products of instructional design represent the
values of the designer; our arguments here may be ones of belief; belief that design is a
purely rational and logical solution of problems; or belief that inherent in any design is
aesthetics; or belief that design must be inclusive, and spring from the ideas and actions of
the learners.
We have a strong feeling for the aesthetic components of design; that the designer's work
is important and individual, and one that builds experiences more than the simple content.
Roles timeline
Illustration and description of process
The Role Based Design Process can be used to organize and manage large teams
or it can be used for projects designed by small teams or individuals.
Critical to the success of the process is the integration of the four design roles in the
process; that artist, architect, engineer, and craftsperson are present throughout the
entire sequence, although each role will take a lead in the design of a project.
Embracing RBD
Role based design process can be of value for instructional designers of all levels. For the
beginner, use of a formalized design process can lead one through a challenging sequence
of procedures; as artist, architect, engineer, and craftsperson. Using Role Based Design in
lieu of ADDIE will encourage an inexperienced designer to include aesthetic components
through out the design process, to view the entire process as a whole; and to be
encouraged to innovate as opposed to replicate design models.
Experienced
Blended/blur and conscious progression of the roles (turn it on off)
Checklist has disappeared
Conscious reflection of buckets of time when needed
Beginner
Roles09007 • 10
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
Linear – clearly defined separation of roles
Focused checklist of responsibilities/characteristics
Necessary buckets of time
Intermediate
Blending of the phases and roles
Motivated checklist of responsibilities/characteristics
Less reflection on buckets of time, more for client
Evolution
Understand it, use it, and evolve it
Practice and embrace to the level of teaching RBD
Have students organize and arrange roles
Create your set of designer values – in 6 years your values should be much different then the
framework presented in this paper – otherwise, you have not embraced RBD
Tango teacher still taking classes example, Ansel Adams print example
-----Checks and balances: Artist vs. Engineer
“All design is problem-solving; not all problem-solving is design.”
Most think of design as a verb; designers think of design as a belief system.
Appendices Checklists for beginning designers and designers wanting to make a transition
in their thinking and processes
Roles09007 • 11
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
References
Dreyfus, H.L. & Dreyfus, S.E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition
and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: The Free Press.
Dym, C. L., Little, P., Engineering Design: A Project-Based Introduction, John Wiley, New
York, 1999.
Ertas, A., Jones, J. C., The Engineering Design Process, John Wiley and Sons, New York,
1996.
Hyman, B., Fundamental of Engineering Design, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1998.
Sanders, M. S., McCormick, E. J., Human Factors in Engineering and Design, McGraw-Hill,
Inc., New York, 1993.
Eisner, E., (1997). Cognition and representation, The Phi Delta Kappan, January 1997, p.
349-353.
Lawson, B. (2004). What designers know. Oxford: Architectural Press.
McCullough, Malcolm, (1998). Abstracting craft: The practiced digital hand, Cambridge:
MIT Press.
Levinson, P. (1977). Toy, mirror, and art: The metamorphosis of technological culture, Et
cetera, June, 151-167.
Lucie-Smith, E. (1981). The story of craft: The craftsman's role in society. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
Lumsdaine, E., Lumsdaine, M., Shelnutt, J. W., Creative Problem Solving and Engineering
Design, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1999.
Olson, D. R. and Bruner, J.S., (1974). Learning through Experience and Learning through
Media, Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education ,73d, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Turkle, S., (1984). The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York:
Touchstone.
Carey, James W., (1967). Harold Adams Innis and Marshall McLuhan?, Yellow Springs:
Antioch Press.
Giedion, S. (1967). Space, time and architecture. Cambridge: Harvard. (5th edition)
Shepard, C. (2003). Engineering e-learning. Retrieved 9/15/07 from
http://www.fastrak-consulting.co.uk/tactix/features/engineer.htm
Aspillagae, M. (1991). Screen design: A location of information and its effects on learning.
Journal of Computer Based Instruction, 18(3), 89-92.
Roles09007 • 12
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]
Hokanson, B. (2001). Digital image creation and analysis as a means to examine learning
and cognition. in M. Beynon, C. Nehaniv, & K. Dautenhahn, (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 4th International Conference on Cognitive Technology. Berlin: Springer.
Hokanson, B., & Hooper, S. (2000). Computers as cognitive media: Examining the potential
of computers in education, Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 537-552.
Hughes, R. (1991). The shock of the new. New York: Knopf.
Johnson, P. (1994). The theory of architecture: Concepts, themes, and practices. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Jonassen, D. H. (2006). A constructivist’s perspective on Functional Contextualism.
Educational Technology: Research and Development, 54(1), 43-47.
Kao, J. (1997). Innovation: Breakthrough thinking at 3M, Dupont, GE, Pfizer and
Rubbermaid. New York: Collins.
Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. J. (2004). Designing electronic
collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 52(3), 47-66.
Lavie, T., & Tractinsky, N. (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of
web sites. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60, 269-298.
McEwen, I. (2004). Vitruvius: Writing the body of architecture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Norman, D. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York:
Basic Books.
Parizotto-Ribeiro, R., & Hammond, N. (2004). What is aesthetics anyway? Investigating the
use of design principles. Proceedings of the NordCHI 2004 Workshop, Finland, 3740.
Parrish, P. (2005). Embracing the aesthetics of instructional design, Educational
Technology, 45(2), 16-24.
Reiser, R. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of
instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 5364.
Rowling, J. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. London: Scholastic.
Sandoval, W. & Bell, P. (2004) Design-Based Research Methods for Studying Learning in
Context: Introduction, Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 199-201.
Tractinsky, N. (2004). Toward the study of aesthetics in information technology.
Proceedings from the 25th International Conference on Information Systems, USA,
11-20.
Wilson, B. (2005). Broadening our foundation for instructional design: Four pillars of
practice, Educational Technology, 45(2), 10-15.
Roles09007 • 13
[Red is from the outline; black Helvetica draft; green copied from chapter needs rewriting]