Volume 7, Issue 2, 2018
Table of Contents
Click on title to view article .pdf
Abstract: REALDESIGN is a regular feature that brings leaders in our field to you discussing their challenges in actual
design contexts. For the next issues, we have invited the authors of the soon-to-be-released next edition of Designing Effective Instruction (Morrison, Ross, Morrison, & Kalman, in press) to share some of their practical design experiences. In this issue we hear from Jennifer Morrison, a Ph.D. at Johns Hopkins, and an excellent designer.
Abstract: This study describes how instructional design (ID) educators can better understand and implement design studio pedagogy, by comparing the approach to the principles of model-centered instruction (MCI). I studied this issue through a focused literature review of recent cases of ID studio implementations, comparing features and activities in each case to the conceptual principles of MCI. In aggregate, this analysis provides seventeen individual options for how educators can structure the ID studio. Additionally, comparing studio practice to MCI may also help ID educators experiment with their own studio improvements in a more systematic manner.
Keywords: studio pedagogy; design studio; instructional design; model-centered instruction; case studies; literature review
Abstract: In 1990, Martin Tessmer and John Wedman introduced a new perspective to instructional design. Rather than a sequential waterfall approach, which dominated instructional design in the 1980’s and 90’s, the layers-of-necessity approach is a way of thinking about instructional design. Tessmer and Wedman viewed instructional designers as they truly are: designers who design instruction. They embraced the nature of design. Rolling back time almost 30 years, Tessmer and Wedman certainly were ahead of their time.
Keywords: Design thinking, instructional design, layers-of-necessity
Andrea Gregg, Ronda Reid, Tugce Aldemir, Amy
Garbrick, Jennifer Gray and Margaret Frederick
Abstract: User experience (UX) problems in course design can be challenging for students as the web interface mediates most online learning. Yet, UX is often underemphasized in e-learning, and instructional designers rarely receive training on UX methods. When our university transitioned from ANGEL to Canvas, we conducted a study in order to identify best practices for online course design in the new LMS. In this study we observed 19 students as they performed common course tasks while verbalizing their thought processes (i.e. thinking aloud). The learners’ reflections and actual behaviors were then analyzed thematically in order to identify perceptions of Canvas, navigation tendencies and preferences, and non-intuitive design elements that interfered with seamless navigation. In this paper, we talk briefly about the study and offer a “how to” guide for conducting usability testing to evaluate the UX of online courses. This “how to” guide is based on our work as reflective practitioners who conducted usability research and synthesized our experiences with the research literature.
Keywords: User experience (UX), think aloud observations (TAOs), learner experience, instructional design
Abstract: This editorial essay offers a brief and (hopefully) humorous look at the old issue, recommending the AECT online library as a phenomenal resource for readers.
Keywords: instructional design, HPT, human performance
Download a .pdf file of the whole issue by clicking on the cover image above.
You can order a print version of this issue from AMAZON.COM when all the articles are posted (projected date: October 31, 2018).