1. Home
  2. MDDE
  3. MDDE 619: Trends and Issues in Instructional Design

MDDE 619: Trends and Issues in Instructional Design Report a Broken Link

Unit 1 Readings

Week 1
Foundations: Definitions and History of Instructional Design and Instructional Technology

Reiser, R. A. (2018). What field did you say you were in? Defining and naming our field. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 1-7). Pearson. 

Reiser, R. A. (2018). A history of instructional design and technology. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 8-22). Pearson. 

Branch, R. M. (2018). Characteristics of foundational instructional design models. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 23-30). Pearson. 
Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (2007). Definition. In Educational technology: A definition with commentary (pp. 2-14). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Week 2
Foundations: Definitions and History of Universal Design for Learning
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2020). The UDL Guidelines.  
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2020). UDL in Higher Education. 
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2020). About Universal Design for Learning. 
Educause. (2020). ECAR Study of the Technology Needs of Students with Disabilities, 2020. 

Lewis, J. & Sullivan, S. (2018). Diversity and accessibility. In R.A. Reiser & J.V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 309-315). Pearson. 
W3C. (2020). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. 
Week 3
Foundations: Considering the Issues
Elias, T. (2010). Universal instructional design principles for Moodle. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(2), 110-124. 
Elias, T. (2011). Universal instructional design principles for mobile learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(2), 143-156.   
Hlynka, D. & Jacobsen, M. (2009). What is educational technology, anyway? A commentary on the new AECT definition of the field. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 35(2). https://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/26395/19577
International Board of Standards for Training Performance and Instruction (2012). Instructional designer competencies. International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction (IBSTPI).
Lakhana, A. (2014). What is educational technology? An inquiry into the meaning, use, and reciprocity of technology. Canadian Journal of Learning & Technology, 40(3), 1-41. https://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/26280
Tennyson, R. D. (2001). Defining core competencies of an instructional technologist. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(4), 355-361. https://0-www-sciencedirect-com.aupac.lib.athabascau.ca/science/article/pii/S0747563201000140
Parchoma, G., Koole, M., Morrison, D., Nelson, D., & Dreaver-Charles, K. (2020). Designing for learning in the Yellow House: A comparison of instructional and learning design origins and practices. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(5), 997–1012.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1704693

Unit 2 Readings

Week 4
Educational Psychology and Instructional Design

Driscoll, M. P. (2018). Psychological foundations of instructional design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 52-60). Pearson. 

Hoadley, C. & van Haneghan, J.P. (2018). The learning sciences: Where they came from and what it means for instructional designers. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. –68-77). Pearson Education. 

Smaldino, S.E., Donaldson, J.A., & Herring, M. (2018). Professional ethics: Rules applied to practice. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and Ttechnology (4th ed., pp. –303-308). Pearson. 
Week 5
The Daily Practice of Instructional Design
Dicks, D. and Ives, C., (2008). Instructional designers at work: A study of how designers design. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 34(2), 91-108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21432/T28W26
Gibbons, A. S. (2003). What and how do designers design: A theory of design structure. TechTrends, 47(5), 22-27. 
Kenny, R. F., Zhang Z., Schwier, R. A., & Campbell, K. (2005). A review of what instructional designers do: Questions answered and questions not asked. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(1), 9 - 26.  
Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (2018). AECT Code of Professional Ethics.  
Week 6 (No Readings)

Unit 3 Readings

Week 7
Designing for Direct Instruction

Allen, M.W., & Merrill, M.D. (2018). SAM and Pebble-in-the-pond: Two alternatives to the ADDIE Model. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 31-41). Pearson. 

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Using rich media wisely. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 259-268). Pearson. 
Eppley, K., & Dudley-Marling, C. (2019). Does direct instruction work?: A critical assessment of direct instruction research and its theoretical perspective. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 16(1), 35–54.   
McMullen, F. & Madelaine, A. (2014). Why is there so much resistance to Direct Instruction? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 19(2,) 137-151, DOI: 10.1080/19404158.2014.962065

https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2014.962065
Layers of Necessity Model
Tessmer, M., & Wedman, J. F. (1990). A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. Educational Technology: Research and Development, 38(2), 77-85
Week 8
Constructivist Models of Design

Wilson, B.G. (2018). Constructivism for active, authentic learning. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. –61-67). Pearson. 
Cennamo, K. (2009). Design as knowledge construction: Constructing knowledge of design. In J.W. Willis (Ed.), Constructivist instructional design (C-ID): Foundations, models and examples (pp. 357-378). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 17-27.
Willis, J.W. (2009). Basic principles of a recursive, reflective instructional design model: R2D2. In J.W. Willis (Ed.), Constructivist instructional design (C-ID): Foundations, models and examples (pp. 283-312). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Comparing Objectivist and Constructivist Models of Design
Cronjé, J. (2006). Paradigms regained: Toward integrating objectivism and constructivism in instructional design and the learning sciences. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 54(4), 387–416.
Week 9
Critical Concepts in Instructional Design (Analytics, Evaluation, Motivation and Reflection)

Dietz, B., Hurn, J.E., Mays, T.A. & Woods, D. (2018). An introduction to learning analytics. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 104-111). Pearson. 

Johnson, R.B. & Bendolph, A. (2018) Evaluation in instructional design: A comparison of the major evaluation models. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 87-96). Pearson. 

Keller, J. M. & Deimann, M. (2018). Motivation, volition and performance. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 78-86). Pearson. 
Tracey, M.W., Hutchinson, A., Quinn Grzebyk, T. (2014). Instructional designers as reflective practitioners: Developing professional identity through reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development 62(3), pp.315-334. DOI 10.1007/s11423-014-9334-9

Unit 4 Readings

Week 10
Instructional Design for Emerging Technologies

Dempsey, J.V. & van Eck, R.N. (20182). E-learning and instructional design. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th 3rd ed., pp. 229-236). Pearson. 

Dennen, V.P. (2018). Social media and instructional design. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 237-243). Pearson. 
Dron, J. & Anderson, T. (2014). On the nature and value of social software for learning. In Teaching Crowds: Learning and Social Media (pp. 1-34). Athabasca University Press.
Dron, J. & Anderson, T. (2014). Issues and challenges in educational uses of social software. In Teaching Crowds: Learning and Social Media (pp. 275-298).

van Eck, R.N., Shute, V.J. & Rieber, L. (2018). Game design research and practice for instructional designers. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 277-285). Pearson. 
Week 11
Instructional Design for Emerging Technologies (continued)

Quinn, C. (2018). Mobile learning. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 244-249). Pearson. 

Bonk, C., Lee, M.M., Reeves, T.C. & Reynolds, T.H. (2018). The emergence and design of Massive Open Online Courses. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 250-258). Pearson. 
Social Media Lab. (2020). The state of social media in Canada: A new survey report from the Ryerson Social Media Lab. 

Wiley, D. (2018). The evolving economics of educational materials and open educational resources: Toward closer alignment with the core values of education. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 316-322). Pearson. 
Week 12
The Future Practice of instructional Design
Blaschke, L. M., & Brindley, J. (2011). Establishing a foundation for reflective practice: A case study of learning journal use. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.

Boling, E. & Smith, K.M. (2018). Changing conceptions of design. In R. A. Reiser and J. V. Dempsey (Eds.) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th ed., pp. 323-330). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. 
Campbell, K., Schwier, R. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2005). Agency of the instructional designer: Moral coherence and transformative social practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(2), 242-262.  https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1337
Carliner, S., Farhan, L., & Cucinelli, G. (2020 in press). What relationships exist between learning experience design and instructional design? British Journal of Educational Technology.
Chen, Y., & Carliner, S. (2020). A Special SME: An Integrative Literature Review of the Relationship between Instructional Designers and Faculty in the Design of Online Courses for Higher Education. Performance Improvement Quarterly.
Hardré, P. (2013). What is “real-world” ID anyway? TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 57(1), 31–37. 
Houx, L. (2020, July 10). Guest post: Instructional design on lockdown. The Learning Scientists blog 
Rao, K., Edelen-Smith, P., & Wailehua, C.-U. (2015). Universal design for online courses: Applying principles to pedagogy. Open Learning, 30(1), 35–52. 
Sharif, A., & Cho, S. (2015). 21st century instructional designers: Bridging the perceptual gaps between identity, practice, impact and professional development. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(3). pp. 72-85. 
Schwier, R. A., Campbell, K., & Kenny, R. F. (2006). Instructional designers' perceptions of their agency: Tales of change and community. In M. J. Keppell, Instructional design: Case studies in communities of practice. Idea Group.
Singleton, K., Evmenova, A., Kinas Jerome, M., & Clark, K. (2019). Integrating UDL strategies  into the online course development process: Instructional designers’ perspectives. Online  Learning Journal, 23(1), 206-235.  

Instructional Design in Varying Contexts (Optional but Important for the Future) 

Most of the remaining chapters in your text are worth reading. In the context of this course, you can consider them optional and read only those which are of interest. Since you keep your textbook, you may choose to return to them later. Consider them examples of the contexts in which instructional designers might effectively act as change agents or revisit them as your circumstances change to incorporate military, higher education, health care, K-12, HPT, business or other contexts for ID practice.