The Challenges of Instructional Design and Development in Biology Education in Nigeria

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-31
Author(s):  
Jacinta A. Opara ◽  
Author(s):  
Shalin Hai-Jew

The work of instructional design (ID) requires new content learning, which often requires various types of published or secondary research as well as direct elicitations from the cooperating subject matter experts (SMEs) about the topic. For instructional design projects, both design and development, a range of information is required: who the target learners are; what content knowledge is required (as knowledge, skills, and abilities); what pedagogical designs may be most effective; what technologies will be required for the build; what learning sequences, objects, assignments, and assessments are needed; what legal and technological standards need to be abided by. This work describes research strategies for instructional design, research documentation, research citations, and applying the many acquired research insights to the instructional design and development work.


1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard C. Boutwell

The Instructional Design and Development (IDD) Program at Florida State University is described and offered as a role model for other institutions. The planning and design of the IDD program include consideration of factors such as career fields of graduates and areas of competency in instructional systems. The matching of career fields and competency areas is then carried out. The IDD program itself is an example of applying systems thinking to an educational problem.


2011 ◽  
pp. 363-379
Author(s):  
Jeanette Bopry ◽  
Donald J. Cunningham

In this chapter, we describe an alternative to the cognitive and neo-behavioral views of learning that currently dominate the field of instructional design and development. Founded in the work of Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela, this view questions the fundamental notions that the environment can actually be “instructive” and that instruction can be prescribed to change learners in predictable ways. Instead we offer a proscriptive model of instructional design, one that embeds the process in the basic foundation that learners are organizationally closed, structurally determined, and coupled with their environment. Instead of threatening the field of instructional design, as some writers have expressed, we argue that this approach actually “sets it free”!


1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-50
Author(s):  
Charles E. Feasley

A review of literature suggests that systems analysis is the foundation upon which current efforts in competency-based education (CBE) are built. The author merges into a model what various writers have put forth as refinements to systematic instructional design and development and his own practical experience on what will or will not work. The model consists of four phases: 1) competency identification, 2) overall design, 3) production, and 4) evaluation. Each phase is broken into a series of steps for thinking and doing. The model provides flexibility by being subject to many different orderings of efforts due to prior accomplishments and/or lack of resources.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document