Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Analysis of Instructional Design and Technology Departments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Educational Media and Technology Yearbook

Part of the book series: Educational Media and Technology Yearbook ((EMTY,volume 41))

Abstract

Many, if not most scholars, argue their fields are evolving rapidly to stay relevant in the twenty-first century. For example, the discipline of humanities is experiencing a dramatic increase in digital programs (Kirschenbaum, 2012), mathematics teaching has shifted to making the math relevant by emphasizing statistics and computational thinking (The National Academies, 2010; Sengupta, Kinnebrew, Basu, Biswas, & Clark, 2013), and art now emphasizes digital art, photography, film, and animation (Black & Browning, 2011). Similarly, the field of instructional design and technology (IDT) has experienced vital evolution during the past 30 years since the high point of Gagne, systems design, and computer-assisted learning. During this time, we have seen the rise of the learning sciences, the expansion of IDT into many other fields, and the explosion of the Internet and online learning. This evolution has also brought unique challenges to the field. Wilson (in Merrill & Wilson, 2006) stated, “In the midst of ongoing change, it can be difficult to gauge where we are now and where we are headed as a professional community” (p. 341).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bichelmeyer, B. A. (2004). The ADDIE model—a metaphor for the lack of clarity in the field of IDT. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology IDT Futures Group, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://www.unco.edu/CETL/sir/clt/documents/IDTf_Bic.pdf.

  • Black, J., & Browning, K. (2011). Creativity in digital art education teaching practices. Art Education, 64(5), 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozkaya, M., Erdem Aydin, I., & Genc Kumtepe, E. (2012). Research trends and issues in educational technology: A content analysis of TOJET (2008-2011). The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(2), 264–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2006). Where do educational technologists really publish? An examination of successful emerging scholars’ publication outlets. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M. P. (2004). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drysdale, J. S., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Halverson, L. R. (2013). An analysis of research trends in dissertations and theses studying blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, D. (1990). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(2), 298–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gall, J. E., Ku, H.-Y., Gurney, K., Tseng, H.-W., Yeh, H.-T., & Chen, Q. (2008). Citations of ETR&D and related journals, 1990-2004. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 343–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hokanson, B., Miller, C., & Hooper, S. (2008). Role-based design: A contemporary perspective for innovation in instructional design. TechTrends, 52(6), 36–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, Y.-C., Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, C.-C., Hwang, G.-J., Chu, H.-C., Wang, C., & Chen, N.-S. (2012). Research trends in technology-based learning from 2000 to 2009: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 354–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschenbaum, M. (2012). What is digital humanities, and what’s it doing in English departments? In M. K. Gold (Ed.), Debates in the digital humanities. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ku, H.-Y. (2009). Twenty years of productivity in ETR&D by institutions and authors. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(6), 801–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9138-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku, H.-Y., Plantz-Masters, S., Hosler, K., Diteeyont, W., Akarasriworn, C., & Lin, T.-Y. (2011). An analysis of educational technology-related doctoral programs in the United States. In M. Orey, S. A. Jones, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 36, pp. 99–112). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kucuk, S., Aydemir, M., Yildirim, G., Arpacik, O., & Goktas, Y. (2013). Educational technology research trends in Turkey from 1990 to 2011. Computers & Education, 68, 42–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., Driscoll, M. P., & Nelson, D. W. (2007). Trends in research: A content analysis of major journals. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 31–41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, P. R. (2012). Which conferences do you attend? A look at the conference attendance of educational technology professionals. Educational Technology, 52(6), 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, P., & Wilson, B. G. (2009). Labels DO matter! A critique of AECT’s redefinition of the field. TechTrends, 54(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-009-0362-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, S., Diaz, G., Sancristobal, E., Gil, R., Castro, M., & Peire, J. (2011). New technology trends in education: Seven years of forecasts and convergence. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1893–1906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masood, M. (2004). A ten-year analysis: Trends in traditional educational technology literature. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 1(2), 73–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., & Wilson, B. (2006). The future of instructional design (point/counterpoint). In R. A. Rieser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neto, J. D. D. O., & Santos, E. M. D. (2010). Analysis of the methods and research topics in a sample of the Brazilian distance education publications, 1992 to 2007. American Journal of Distance Education, 24(3), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2010.497325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orey, M., & Branch, R. M. (2015). Preface. In M. Orey & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 39, pp. v–xiii). New York, NY: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14188-6

    Google Scholar 

  • Orey, M., Jones, S. A., & Branch, R. M. (2010). Preface. In M. Orey, S. A. Jones, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 35, 35th ed., pp. v–xiv). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Orey, M., Jones, S. A., & Branch, R. M. (2015). Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 39). New York, NY: Springer International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozcinar, Z. (2009). The topic of instructional design in research journals: A citation analysis for the years 1980-2008. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(4), 559–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persichitte, K. A. (2007). Implications for academic programs. In A. Januszewski & M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition of the field (pp. 327–338). New York, NY: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2009). Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, R. A. (2012). What field did you say you were in? In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, L. (1998). The proper way to become an instructional technologist. Retrieved from http://lrieber.coe.uga.edu/pdean/.

  • Ritzhaupt, A. D., Sessums, C. D., & Johnson, M. C. (2012). Where should educational technologists publish their research? An examination of peer-reviewed journals within the field of educational technology and factors influencing publication choice. Educational Technology, 52(6), 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritzhaupt, A. D., Stewart, M., Smith, P., & Barron, A. E. (2010). An investigation of distance education in North American literature using co-word analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 37–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J. S., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18, 351–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, M. (2015). The changing nature of educational technology programs. Educational Technology, 55(2), 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (2014). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spring, K. J. & Graham, C. R. (2015). Blended learning citation patterns and publication and research networks across seven worldwide regions. Unpublished manuscript submitted for publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M. (1990). Environment analysis: A neglected stage of instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The National Academies. (2010). Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12840/report-of-a-workshop-on-the-scope-and-nature-of-computational-thinking

    Google Scholar 

  • USU ITLS Faculty. (2009). An identity shift at Utah State University: What’s in a name? Educational Technology, 49(4), 38–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, R. E. (2011). About this article and new series. Educational Technology, 51(4), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, R. E., & Borup, J. (2014). An analysis of a decade of research in 10 instructional design and technology journals. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 545–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zawacki-Richter, O., Bäcker, E. M., & Vogt, S. (2009). Review of distance education research (2000 to 2008): Analysis of research areas, methods, and authorship patterns. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(6), 21–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Brenda Bannan, who provided helpful feedback on a draft of this paper and on the methodologies used in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IPT Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

    Richard E. West, Rebecca A. Thomas & Robert Bodily

  2. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA

    Casey Wright

  3. George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

    Jered Borup

Authors
  1. Richard E. West
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca A. Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert Bodily
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Casey Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jered Borup
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard E. West .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA

    Robert Maribe Branch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

West, R.E., Thomas, R.A., Bodily, R., Wright, C., Borup, J. (2018). An Analysis of Instructional Design and Technology Departments. In: Branch, R. (eds) Educational Media and Technology Yearbook. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, vol 41. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67301-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67301-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67300-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67301-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation