Guest Author - Gregory A. Kompes

Christensen (2008) sums up a truth about instructional design (ID): "there is no one unifying theory of instruction. Many theories have been devised over the years, with varying degrees of success in guiding practice." (p. 26). This pronouncement might be seen as negative, but not for me. I like the idea that there are no set rules, only foundational theories, assumptions, and philosophical traditions of instructional design.

An instructional designer who accepts that the theories, assumptions, and philosophies can be challenged opens up great possibilities in using instructional design in new and different ways to obtain positive results for their design project teams, course facilitators, and the learners. This idea is advanced by Sims (2006) who writes that one of the opportunities created by the growth of online learning environments is that we can "confront the traditions of face-to-face teaching and learning" (p. 0) and "assess the relevance of theories and frameworks informing the design and implementation" (p. 0) of learning.

Yet, I contend that before any system, theory, or philosophy can be deconstructed, it must first be understood. Smith and Ragan explain: "theories are the source of principles from which many of the prescriptions for design arise" (p. 18). Without understanding the theories of learning, instruction, and design that have become the accepted models underlying ID, there is no way to intelligently argue the possibility of changing the methods. The accepted theories and concepts are just that, accepted. To create new methods and models of ID, instructional designers must understand the theories that have preceded.

As with most accelerated change, it's important to not reconstruct every method and model, but to learn from those that have come before. There's no reason to reinvent the educational wheel because not all instruction, teaching, and learning philosophies and theories are without merit. Rather, by understanding the earlier methods, instructional designers can pick and choose what they believe does work, add new concepts to the mix, and blend these together with creativity.


References

Christensen, T. K. (2008). The role of theory in instructional design: Some views of an ID practitioner. Performance Improvement. (47(4)), 25–32.

Sims, R. (2006). Beyond instructional design: Making learning design a reality. Retrieved July 14, 2008, from http://www.jld.qut.edu.au/publications/vol1no2/documents/beyond%20instructional%20design.pdf

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley Jossey-Bass Education.