|
|
The Field of IT
|
|
Definition of Instructional Technology To some people, the phrase instructional technology denotes a classroom setting where an instructor is transferring knowledge through instruments of technology. After all, each of the terms “instruction” and “technology” when addressed separately, has an encyclopedic definition of: instruction, according to Funk & Wagnalls (2005, p. 700), “is imparting knowledge or skills by a systematic method; giving specific orders or directions to [learners]”; and the term technology according to Funk and Wagnalls (2005) “is the applications of science and of technical advances in industry” (p. 1345). However, the phrase, as it is used to refer to a field of study, is neither limited to technological tools nor is defined as a means of knowledge transformation. Those people, who believe that instructional technology is much more than a transfer of knowledge using technology tools, note that historically there are at least three concepts that are associated with the field of instructional technology (AECT, 1972). The first concept is the idea of systems or systematic approach to designing instruction. The second concept can be described in terms of audiovisual devices that are used for the purpose of enhancing learning. The third concept goes back to individualized instruction and the later work of B.F. Skinner’s programmed instruction or teaching machines (Skinner, 1954). Systems Approach Instructional technology as a systems approach to designing instruction has been described as a self-correcting, logical process for the planning, development, and implementation of instruction (Rockell & Napoli, 2003). The systems approach is characterized by an orderly process of gathering and analyzing performance requirements, and by the ability to respond to identified training needs. It is based on the concept of a “system as a set of interrelated components working together toward a common goal” (Moallem, 2005, slides). An organization as a system or collection of systems uses the systematic process of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing and evaluating to account for all components of the system when identifying a performance problem and developing a solution. The application of a systems approach for designing instruction insures that instruction is continually developed in an effective and efficient manner to solve a problem or meet a need in an ever rapidly changing environment (Briggs, 1977). There has been increased interest in the use of empirical methods to help solve educational problems since 1600’s. The birth of programmed instructions began during World War II when the military needed structured procedures to train skilled labor. The refinement of task analysis procedures were founded through Gagne’s learning hierarchy from the 1950’s through the 1960’s. Gagne suggests that a task analysis is the process of identifying the tasks and sub-tasks that must be successfully performed in order to properly execute some functions or jobs. During the 1960’s Gagne expanded the theory of task analysis to include the idea that accomplishment of sub-tasks must be completed before trying to accomplish the main task. This new addition to the concept of task analysis resulted in a deeper understanding of task hierarchy. The methodologies associated with tasks analysis led to a movement to observe learner behaviors. Robert Mager wrote a book in 1962, Preparing Objectives for Programmed Instruction, to teach educators how to write behavioral objectives. Behavioral objectives and observation of the learners resulted in the emergence of criterion-referenced testing. Popham (1975) “criterion-referenced testing is used to ascertain an individual’s status with respect to a well defined behavioral domain” (p. 93). Glaser, the father of the concept of criterion-referenced testing/measurement (1963), addressed the development of studying a learner’s entry-level behaviors and defined instructional materials to incorporate those entry behaviors. Since the 1960’s criterion-referenced testing has become central to the systems approach for training and learning. Over time the systems approach to designing training/instruction has taken different names: Instructional Systems Design; Systematic Design of Instruction; The Guide for Curriculum Development, Delivery, and Evaluations; and a host of others. Each system title is based on a common belief: developing curriculum/instruction begins with defining clear and measurable objectives. By clearly defining the objectives and the assessment processes of a course or lesson, instructional systems design provides a consistent and repeatable educational experience. Audiovisual Devices The field of Instructional Technology began with an emphasis on audiovisual communications media. In 1920’s-1930’s, the field experienced great growth in accessibility and quality of film, radio broadcasting, and sound recording. These advancements helped transition the media movement from visual to audio-visual. In late 1950’s the audiovisual instruction movement shifted its focus from devices to behavioral learning theories and programmed instruction, altering the instructor’s attention to the learner (Seels & Richey 2004; Seels & Glasgow 1998). The new focus on learning rather than audiovisual devices continued in the mid 1970’s when the United States military adopted an instructional design model for the development of training materials to meet the needs of skilled labor. In addition, in academia these new trends evolved in adopting instructional procedures to improve the quality of instruction. The newly developed instructional products designed to promote learning included structured manuals, standardized tests along with films and other audiovisual materials (Branson, R., Rayner, G., Cox, J., Furman, J., King, F., Hannum, W.1975). Concurrent with the introduction and development of audiovisual media and materials, the notion of a science of instruction began to evolve. Although the emergence of behavioral learning theories brought about a new and more respectable rationale for the field, B.F. Skinner laid the ground-work for individualized instruction (Seels & Richey, 2004). The instructional process has traditionally involved instructors, learners and textbooks and is usually referred to as the systems point of view (Dick, Carey & Carey 2005). Systematically designed instruction is not the same as individualized instruction, although sometimes the systems approach is used for well-designed print modules, computer-based lessons, or instructor-led activities for individualized instruction. According to Dick, Carey and Carey (2005), “individualized instruction is the use by students of systematically designed learning activities and materials specifically chosen to suit their individual interests, abilities, and experiences. The instruction is usually self-paced.” (p. 364). Subsequently during the 1990’s a growing interest in constructivism, a philosophy of learning, required learners to individually solve complex problems while collaboratively working with a team. Constructivism has also introduced the idea of examining an ill defined problem from multiple perspectives. Current Definition of the Field of Instructional Technology The most comprehensive definition of the field is offered by the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT). According to the AECT (1994) revised definition, published by Seels and Richey (1994), “Instructional Technology is the theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management and evaluation of processes and resources for learning” (p. 9). The AECT definition of Instructional Technology encompasses the above-mentioned three concepts that are associated with the field of instructional technology. According to the AECT definition, the field of Instructional Technology is grounded in theory and research and is based on a systems approach to include five synergistic domains of: Design, Development, Utilization, Management and Evaluation (see Figure 1).  Figure 1: Domains of the Field. AECT (2001) |
|
