What is Instructional Design?
Instructional design is a systematic approach to planning and producing effective instructional
materials. It is similar to lesson planning, but more elaborate and more detailed.
The Instructional Design Process
There are many models of the instructional design process. Initially, instructional design emerged from
Behaviorist psychology (Burton, Moor, & Magliaro, 1996), especially from B. F. Skinner’s concept of
the teaching machine. The correct arrangement of stimuli, behaviors, and reinforcers was believed
inevitably to cause learning. This assumption still strongly influences the practice of instructional
design (c.f. Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992).
Early models of instructional design were intended to be universal. The same approach that Skinner
used to teach pigeons to play ping-pong was thought to be appropriate to training military recruits to
handle their rifles, junior high school students to do algebra, and infants to speak their native
languages. Over time, design models have become more differentiated. Gagne, Briggs, and Wager
(1992) suggest different approaches for cognitive, affective, and psychomotor goals. A distinction
between education and training has become more prevalent (Leshin, Pollock & Reigeluth, 1992).
While behavioral outcomes are still emphasized, more attention is now given to the knowledge
structures that result from learning (Adler, 1998; Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992; Leshin, Pollock &
Reigeluth, 1992). Where earlier work emphasized matching the instructional medium to the
instructional context (Kemp & Smellie, 1994), increased emphasis is now given to matching media to
the learning styles of individuals (Park, 1996).
Although our understanding of learning has changed over time and most of us no longer believe that
discriminative stimuli and reinforcement contingencies control learning, instructional designers still
seek to select and develop the context, materials, activities, and feedback that optimize student
learning.
Most models of the instructional design process (Flagg, 1990; Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992; Heinich,
Molenda, Russell, & Smaldino, 1999; Leshin, Reigeluth, & Pollock, 1992) include design and
development stages similar to the following:










Assessing Needs.
Assessing the Audience.
Setting Goals.
Setting Objectives.
Selecting Instructional Methods.
Selecting Media.
Developing Content.
Designing Interaction.
Evaluating Progress (Formative Evaluation).
Evaluating Results (Summative Evaluation).
References
Adler, D. L.. (1998, November). Understanding: Coming to terms with the u-word of instructional
design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-south Educational Research Association,
New Orleans, LA.
Burton, J. K., Moor, D. M., & Magliaro, S. G. (1996). Behaviorism and instructional technology. In D. H.
Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York:
Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Flagg, B. N. (1990). Formative evaluation for educational technologies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th edition).
Fort Worth: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich College Publishers.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J., & Smaldino (1996). Instructional media and technologies for
learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill
Kemp, J. E. & Smellie, D. C. (1994).Planning, producing, and using instructional technologies, 7th
edition. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Leshin, C. B., Pollock, J. & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional design strategies and tactics.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Park, O. (1996). Adaptive instructional systems. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for
educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Selecting Instructional Methods
There are many valid approaches to teaching and learning. Some of these approaches are:



Cognitive approaches, including constructivism.
Social learning approaches, such as reinforcement and modeling.
Behaviorism.
Cognitive approaches focus on the development of knowledge structures (Anderson, 1995).
These approaches generally accept that knowledge can be considered to be either declarative
("knowledge that") or procedural ("knowledge how"). Declarative knowledge is represented
through some form of schema that relates pieces of information to each other. These
relationships form the basis of both meaning and memory. Procedural knowledge is
represented through "procedures," structures that resemble sets of instructions. Cognitive
approaches to teaching and learning focus on the development of schemata through
(Anderson, 1995; Wittrock, 1986):





Elaboration.
Connecting new information to experience.
Connecting new information to other information.
Using contextual information.
Visual imagery.
Some cognitivists, including those who consider themselves to be constructivists (Jonassen
& Peck, 1999), constructionists (Kafai & Resnick, 1996), or generative learning theorists
(Wittrock, 1986), are especially concerned that:




Learning is an active process.
Students are responsible for their own learning.
Students generate their own meaning.
Students cannot vicariously acquire the meaning that the instructor ascribes to
information.
These theoretical approaches may be especially appropriate for material that requires
intellectual understanding.
Social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) is concerned with behavioral outcomes, even for
cognitive objectives. This theory may form the best match with widely practiced approaches
to instructional design, such as Gagne, Briggs, and Wager's (1992). It encourages procedural
approaches to cognitive objectives. It may be the best approach for objectives involving
choice and attitude change. Its signature tools, modeling and vicarious reinforcement, are
frequently seen in advertising.
Both computer-assisted instruction and instructional design emerged from Behaviorism
(Burton, Moor, & Magliaro, 1996), especially from B. F. Skinner’s concept of the teaching
machine. The correct arrangement of stimuli, behaviors, and reinforcers was believed
inevitably to produce learning. The computer could flawlessly deliver this perfect
environment to the student. A huge body of research supports behavioral methods for
producing behavioral outcomes. The question, of course, is how often we seek purely
behavioral outcomes in a university environment.
In the end, the choice of instructional methods depends on:




The types of objectives.
Characteristics of individual learners.
Instructional conditions.
Evidence of instructional effectiveness.
References
Anderson, J. R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and its implications, 4 edition. New York: W.
H. Freeman
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Burton, J. K., Moor, D. M., & Magliaro, S. G. (1996). Behaviorism and instructional
technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications
and technology. New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A
constructivist perspective. Upper saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Kafai, Y & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, & learning
in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wittrock, M. C. (1986). Students' thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of
research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Assessing Needs
Setting Objectives
Assessing the Audience
Selecting Instructional
Setting Goals
Selecting Media
Methods
Developing Content
Designing Interaction
Evaluating Progress
Evaluating Results
Assessing Needs
The fundamental question of needs assessment is, "What is the difference between the
knowledge level that we have and the knowledge level that we want?"
Example: The Third International Mathematics and Science Study
TIMSS demonstrated a difference between the mathematics achievement that
we have in our country and the mathematics achievement that we want to have.
It suggested some specific deficits in students' understanding. It also looked at
differences in educational practices, such as those found between teaching
styles in math classrooms in the USA and Japan.
The nation is attempting to resolve these issues in the political arena by raising
standards for teachers and students.
An instructional designer would approach this question differently by asking:
What is it exactly that children aren’t learning?



Strategies?
Arithmetic facts?
Procedures?
How can we design instruction to address those specific deficiencies?
References
TIMSS: Third International Mathematics and Science Study (1995). Retrieved on October 10,
2000 from the World Wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/timss/
Assessing the Audience
Your students are your target audience. At every step of the instructional design
process, you must take into account the needs of your learners. The instructional
product must be tailored to their needs. The target audience may be very small and
specific, for example sophomore English majors at Seton Hall, or it may be broad and
encompassing, for example university undergraduates across the United States and
Canada. In either case, the instructional designer must take into account both the
similarities and the differences among the learners.
Learners enter instruction with prior knowledge and skills, a developmental level,
native abilities and disabilities, and, perhaps, preferences for particular learning
styles. Some of these characteristics are specific to the goals you have set. Others,
such as reading level or learning style, will control how the instruction will be
presented.
Learners' cultural and personal characteristics help to suggest the forms of instruction that will
be attractive and interesting. They also influence content or presentation that could be
offensive. Gender differences should be considered for the same reasons.
Consider also the size of the audience. Different media and methods of instruction
will be required for large and small audiences. What is the context of instruction?
What is the physical space like?
Typical questions about the audience include:








Prior knowledge of the subject?
Skills that support instruction, such as reading level or computer skills?
Age and developmental levels?
Abilities and disabilities?
Gender and culture?
Learning styles and preferences?
Interests?
Instructional environment and audience size?
Setting The Goals of Instruction



Goals are based on a synthesis of information obtained from the audience and needs
assessments.
Goals are general statements of what is to be learned.
Example: Students should know how to write a college term paper when they finish
their English Composition courses.
Developing Instructional Objectives
Setting Objectives
Instructional objectives restate the goals in observable, measurable terms. They are derived
through the process of task analysis, which breaks down the goal into its component parts. For
example, if the goal is that college students will select and eat vegetables in the dorm
cafeteria, component skills might include:





Identifying various vegetables.
Classifying these foods as vegetables.
Stating the value of eating vegetables.
Demonstrating the polite methods of eating some awkward vegetables.
Choosing to eat vegetables.
Task analysis is a critical step, especially if the goal is large or complex. If crucial pieces of
instruction are omitted, then the entire instructional program or product may be doomed to
failure. Some sources on performing task analyses include:



Gagne, Briggs, & Wager (1992).
Jonassen, Tessmer, & Hannum (1999).
Leshin, Pollock, & Reigeluth (1992).
Instructional Objectives




Are the backbone of instructional design.
Determine the content of instruction
Form the basis of criterion-references student assessment.
Set the criteria for summative evaluation.
Objectives may be classified (Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992) as:



Cognitive objectives, having to do with intellectual content.
Affective objectives, having to do with feelings and attitudes, especially choices.
Psychomotor objectives, having to do with physical skills.
Writing Objectives
The instructional objective is a formal and specific statement of what the student will achieve
following instruction. Well-written objectives:


Specify what the learner will do at the end of instruction
Are expected to be
1. Behavioral
2. Observable
3. Measurable
The ABCD Method of Writing Objectives
(HeInich, Molenda, Russell, & Smaldino, 1999)
The ABCD method is one method of writing instructional objectives. Using this formula, each
objective specifies:




Audience
Behavior
Conditions
Degree of success
Example of a Cognitive Objective
Audience
Fourth grade students
Behavior
Will divide 3 digit numbers by 2 digit numbers
Conditions
Without a calculator
Degree of success
With 90% accuracy
Example of an Affective Objective
Audience
College students
Behavior
Will choose at least one vegetable
Conditions
In the dorm cafeteria
Degree of success
For at least 2 out of 3 meals observed
Example of a Psychomotor Objective
Audience
Kindergarten children
Behavior
Will tie their own shoes
Conditions
Independently
Degree of success
Consistently
Some Alternative Methods of Writing Objectives
There are many published forms for writing objectives. Some sources for writing objectives
include:


Gagne, Briggs, & Wager (1992).
Leshin, Pollock, & Reigeluth (1992).
References
Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th
edition). Fort Worth: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich College Publishers.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J., & Smaldino (1996). Instructional media and
technologies for learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill
Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W. H. (1999). Task analysis methods for
instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Leshin, C. B., Pollock, J. & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional design strategies
and tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Selecting Instructional Media
Select methods, media, and materials to meet the needs of the audience and to
address the objectives. Media differ in their characteristics and, hence, in their
suitability for different purposes. For example, some media, such as computers and
live lecture, are interactive. Other media, such as audio- or videotaped presentations,
are not. Some media demonstrate visual characteristics; others demonstrate audio
characteristics; others demonstrate both Kemp & Smellie, 1994). In the rush to
accommodate learning styles, the basic characteristics of media should not be
discounted. Even an "auditory learner" would not benefit greatly from an art history
class taught entirely through audio tape.
However, many instructional designers feel that instructional products should be
adaptable to individuals' learning styles and that, therefore, a range of learning styles
should be considered when selecting media (Park, 1996). Instructional products
should also be adaptable for use by persons with disabilities. Therefore, media
choices or media duplication should accommodate users with visual impairments,
hearing impairments, learning disabilities, and motor disabilities.
Media are also variously suited to instructional contexts (Kemp & Smellie, 1994). For
example, projected media are better suited to the lecture hall than to individualized
instruction, while interactive media may be better suited to individualized instruction
than to the lecture hall.
Notice that the medium is selected AFTER the audience and the objectives. The
media should be selected to meet the needs of instruction. The instruction should not
be developed to conform to the limitations of the medium.
The choice, then, of instructional media depends on:



The types of objectives.
Characteristics of individual learners.
Instructional methods and conditions.
On the other hand, many instructional designers feel that the selection of media is not very
important.
Many instructional designers (Wilkinson, 1996) consider the medium of
instruction to be analogous to the truck that delivers vegetables to market: The
vegetables are important, not the make of the truck. As long as the medium can
deliver the material, it is adequate to the task.
References
Kemp, J. E. & Smellie, D. C. (1994).Planning, producing, and using instructional
technologies, 7th edition. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Park, O. (1996). Adaptive instructional systems. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of
research for educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan Library
Reference USA.
Wilkinson, G. L. (Ed.) (1996, July - August). An ITForum discussion of interactivity and
grocery trucks. Retrieved on October 10, 2000 from the World Wide Web:
http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/extra3/disc-ex3.html
Developing the Content of Instruction
Developing Instruction
At this point, in the instructional design process, much has already been learned about the
instructional problem and the target audience. Through these initial assessments, the
following decisions have already been reached:



The objectives.
The instructional approach.
The medium or media.
Now these elements are brought together in an instructional design.
Selecting Material
Include content to meet every objective. The most important part of selecting content is
ensuring that there is sufficient material to address every objective and every enabling
objective that has been identified. No objective should be left to be "picked up," inferred, or
otherwise magically assimilated along the way.
Exclude content that does not meet any objective. If content seems too important to leave
out but does not pertain to any identified objective, revisit the task analysis phase of the
project. Perhaps an important objective has been forgotten. Some material may serve an
elaborative function for objectives. In this case, the material does support an objective and
should be included.
Choose multiple representations of content, such as:



Text.
Sound, such as speech, music, digitized recordings of natural phenomenon, even
sound effects.
Still and moving images.
Such multiple representations of concepts are useful



For elaboration of concepts.
For aiding comprehension and memory,
For supporting various learning styles.
Wittrock (1986) places particular importance on the value of visual imagery to learning.
According to Wittrock, the vast majority of persons in our culture are visual learners, so it is
important to provide images to best serve this audience. Furthermore, his research
demonstrates that readers understand material better when relevant illustrations are provided.
For all learners, imagery provides elaboration -- another way to see, create meaning for, and
retrieve concepts.
Select material to appeal to the target audience. Make sure that the material is culturally
appropriate to the target audience. Where possible, examples should be culturally relevant.
Content should be developmentally appropriate to the audience. It should be at an appropriate
level of difficulty. It should be interesting to the audience. Never include materials that would
offend any member of the target audience.
Sequencing Material
Historically, it has been the responsibility of the instructional designer to sequence the content
of instruction. Some possibilities (Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1992; Leshin, Pollock, &
Reigeluth, 1992) for sequencing include:



From the lowest cognitive skill level required by the objectives to the highest
cognitive skill level required by the objectives.
In order of performance, from the first step to the last step of performance with
practice for each step.
In chronological order, according to historical development.


From simple to complex cases or examples in case-based learning.
From more familiar to less familiar information.
Gagne, Briggs, & Wager (1992) point out that the first step in attempting attitude change is to
establish respect for the source promoting the change.
Requiring the Learner to Collect and Organize Material: The
Constructivist Perspective
While sequencing of material has long been considered a critical aspect of the instructional
designer's job, constructivists (Jonassen & Reeves, 1996) are suggesting that students can
benefit from assuming this responsibility for themselves. Like Wittrock, they look for
meaningful learning in the connections between pieces of information. In their approach to
teaching and instructional technology, they favor methods that assist the student to collect and
organize information over methods that organize information for the student. When they look
at technology as an instructional medium, they look for tools that students can use to collect
and organize information, rather than for tutorial or drill and practice approaches that present
and organize information for the student. They discuss programming languages, multimedia
authoring tools, semantic networking tools, databases, and spreadsheets as cognitive tools.
Each of these forms of software is a tool that the student can use to develop and organize
information. Through writing a computer program to perform a task, the student develops a
detailed knowledge and understanding of the task. To design a database, the student must
reach an understanding of the topic that permits him or her to create meaningful, useful
categories in the database. With each of these tools, the development process enables the
student to make a visible structure out of the assembled information.
References
Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th
edition). Fort Worth: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich College Publishers.
Jonassen, D. H. & Reeves, T. C. (1996). Learning with technology: Computers as cognitive
tools. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and
technology. New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Leshin, C. B., Pollock, J. & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional design strategies and
tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Wittrock, M. C. (1986). Students' thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of
research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Designing User Interaction
At this stage in the design process, the following phases have been accomplished:

The objectives have been set.



The instructional approach has been decided.
The medium has or media have been selected.
Either the content has been selected and sequenced or a decision has been reached to
make these tasks part of the learning process.
Now the instructional approach is brought into play to design the learner's interaction with the
material in order to achieve the objectives. Every interaction with instructional media
includes both interaction with the medium of instruction and interaction with the
content of instruction. The first aspect, interaction with the medium, involves the
actions required to obtain information and to respond to it. To obtain information, the
user might be required to read text, listen to speech or music, interpret a graphic
image, turn pages, etc. To respond to information, the user might have to click with a
mouse, type on a keyboard, write with a pencil, speak in English or in Spanish, draw
with a crayon, and so on. Interaction with the medium should always be as clear and
straight-forward is possible. For computer-based interactions, follow established
conventions.
Instructional interaction takes place through the medium, but its point is learning the
material, not using the medium. A single instructional interaction, say “Compare and
contrast Constructivism and Constructionism,” could take place using a listserv,
paper and pencil, oral discussion, radio talk show, or some other medium. The
instructional interaction is determined by the goals and objectives and by the
instructional theory or theories that guide instruction.
How we proceed depends on the instructional methods we have selected. If we have elected a
behaviorist methodology, then we must use appropriate discriminative stimuli to elicit the
responses we want. The desired behaviors should be reinforced on a careful schedule in order
to train and maintain each behavior. Undesired responses should be extinguished or punished
as required. Records of the learning curve should be kept. The task difficulty and
reinforcement schedule should be adjusted accordingly.
Although the social learning theorist will allow more cognitive mediation of task
performance and may pay less attention to discriminative stimuli and schedules of
reinforcement than the behaviorist, s/he will provide for practice of the desired behaviors and
reinforcement of the correct response. Informative feedback will be provided. In the case of
intellectual tasks the student will begin with the least demanding cognitive tasks, such as
identifying and defining and will proceed to the more demanding cognitive tasks, such as
solving problems or generating explanations.
The constructivist must now match problems to objectives in order to ensure that the student
collects, organizes, and applies the information needed to attain the objective. Here the
objectives will most likely require the student to complete an "authentic task," such as
preparing a research proposal, developing a Web page, or suggesting a solution to an
environmental or social problem. The demands of the task may be made clear at the outset, or
the student and teacher can develop the performance standards together as the students'
understanding of the problem increases. Often, students work collaboratively in constructivist
environments.
Effective use of technology is use that requires higher level thinking (ETS, 1998).
According to a study conducted by the Educational Testing Service, educational technology
represents an improvement over other educational media only when the instructional
approach requires higher order thinking. Be sure that the user interaction that you develop
requires students to generate meaning and solve problems. Avoid the drill and practice trap!
References
Educational Testing Service (1998, updated 9/6/00). Does it compute? The relationship
between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Retrieved on
September 11, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ets.org/research/pic/dic/
preack.html
Assessing Progress: Formative Evaluation and Revision
Formative evaluation and revision occur continuously throughout the product development
process. The purpose of formative evaluation is to catch problems while they can still be
corrected. This process of continuous evaluation and revision ensures that:





The information presented in the instruction will be accurate.
The level of difficulty will be appropriate to the target audience.
The instructional product will be appealing to the target audience.
The materials will be easy to use.
The product will meet its objectives effectively.
Flagg (1990) considers needs and audience assessment to be the first phases of formative
evaluation. At the same time, Flagg suggests collecting information about the gatekeepers
who will decide whether or not to use the final product, the setting in which the product will
be used, and about the media that could be used.
During the production phase, Flagg suggests testing prototypes with both samples from the
target audience and experts on the content and the target audience. At this phase, questions
include:




Can the audience access the prototype?
Does the audience like the prototype?
Does the audience achieve the objectives of the prototype?
Is the audience convinced by the prototype?
If these questions are answered affirmatively, production can proceed on the final product. If
not, then the design and the prototype must be revised and tested again.
Following production, the product is field-tested. At this point, only minor changes are
possible, but they should be completed before the final product is distributed.
References
Flagg, B. N. (1990). Formative evaluation for educational technologies. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Assessing the Final Outcome: Summative Evaluation
Summative evaluation determines whether or not the program objectives have been met. At
this phase, evaluators administer criterion-referenced tests based on the product's instructional
objectives. If learners attain the objectives, then the instructional design was successful.
Summative evaluators are also interested in user satisfaction and in unintended outcomes.
Unintended outcomes may be either positive or negative. On the positive side, students might,
for example, improve their class attendance, develop a continuing interest in the topic, or
continue to use the materials after the assignment has ended. Negative unintended outcomes
might include classroom management problems or a dislike for the subject matter.
Instructional development ends with the summative evaluation. The product goes into use,
and lessons learned are applied to new instructional materials.