Instructional System Development: The Fourth Generation

This chapter describes the fourth generation of instructional system development (ISD4). ISD4 is uniquely suited for automation because of its dynamic and iterative system design. Employing science-wide complexity theory, ISD4 offers a solution(s) to learning problems only after the problem is defined. Additionally, the prescribed solution can be altered during the actual process of instructional development. The situational evaluation component (diagnosis) proposes solutions based upon the learning problem, risk (i.e., cost and efficiency), and instructional design competence of the author. The knowledge base of ISD4 includes contemporary updates from such fields as cognitive psychology, educational technology, and risk management. As a result, the fourth generation ISD models are showing extensive changes in most techniques of the instructional development process.

[1]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Automating Instructional Design, Development, and Delivery , 1994, NATO ASI Series.

[2]  R. Feuerstein.  Instrumental Enrichment: An Intervention Program for Cognitive Modifiability , 1980 .

[3]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  An Empirically Based Instructional Design Theory for Teaching Concepts , 1986 .

[4]  Norman Frederiksen,et al.  Implications of Cognitive Theory for Instruction in Problem Solving , 1984 .

[5]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[6]  Peter Goodyear.  Foundations for Courseware Engineering , 1994 .

[7]  Steven M. Ross,et al.  Adaptive Instructional Strategies for Teaching Rules in Mathematics , 1982 .

[8]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Automating instructional design : concepts and issues , 1993 .

[9]  Dirk-Jan Povel,et al.  Computer experience and cognitive development : a child's learning in a computer culture , 1986 .

[10]  D. Perkins,et al.  Partners in Cognition: Extending Human Intelligence with Intelligent Technologies , 1991 .

[11]  Michael J. Hannafin.  Open-Ended Learning Environments: Foundations, Assumptions, and Implications for Automated Design , 1995 .

[12]  E. Thorndike.  The psychology of learning , 1925 .

[13]  Klaus Breuer,et al.  Cognitive effects from process learning with computer-based simulations , 1990 .

[14]  B F SKINNER,et al.  Teaching Machines , 1962 .

[15]  David H. Jonassen.  Cognitive flexibility theory and its implications for designing CBI , 1992 .

[16]  John Seely Brown,et al.  An Investigation of Computer Coaching for Informal Learning Activities. , 1978 .

[17]  S. Dijkstra,et al.  Instructional Models in Computer-Based Learning Environments , 1992 .

[18]  M. Rasch,et al.  Computer-Based Instructional Strategies to Improve Creativity , 1988 .

[19]  Steven M. Ross,et al.  Increasing the Meaningfulness of Quantitative Material by Adapting Context to Student Background. , 1983 .

[20]  Diana Richards,et al.  Is strategic decision making chaotic , 1990 .

[21]  Gary R. Morrison,et al.  Adapting text presentations to media attributes: Getting more out of less in CBI , 1988 .

[22]  B. Skinner.  The science of learning and the art of teaching. , 1954 .

[23]  B. Skinner,et al.  Science and human behavior , 1953 .

[24]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  ISD EXPERT: An Automated Approach to Instructional Design , 1994 .

[25]  B F SKINNER,et al.  Teaching machines; from the experimental study of learning come devices which arrange optimal conditions for self instruction. , 1958, Science.

[26]  R. Kozma.  Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate , 1994 .

[27]  E. Thorndike.  Educational psychology, Vol 2: The psychology of learning. , 1913 .

[28]  R. Glaser,et al.  Foundations in learning research. , 1987 .

[29]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Advancements in instructional design theory: Contextual module analysis and integrated instructional strategies , 1992 .

[30]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  MAIS: An intelligent learning system , 1988 .

[31]  H Chubb,et al.  Looking at systems as process. , 1990, Family process.

[32]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Knowledge Base for Automated Instructional System Development , 1994 .

[33]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  An empirically based instructional design theory for concept teaching , 1986 .

[34]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[35]  Douglas H. Clements,et al.  The effects of Logo and CAI problem-solving environments on problem-solving abilities and mathematics achievement , 1986 .

[36]  J. Novak,et al.  Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View , 1969 .

[37]  Susan M. Zvacek.  Word Processing and the Teaching of Writing , 1988 .

[38]  R. Snow,et al.  Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement. , 1989 .

[39]  R. Clark.  Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media , 1983 .

[40]  M. David Merrill,et al.  Integrative goals for instructional design , 1990 .

[41]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  Linking cognitive learning theory to instructional prescriptions , 1988 .

[42]  Klaus Breuer,et al.  Cognitive development based on process-learning environments , 1992 .

[43]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. , 1987 .

[44]  Steve Mann.  Chaos Theory and Strategic Thought , 1992 .

[45]  Ward Mitchell Cates,et al.  A small-scale comparison of the equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of student end-of-course evaluations , 1993 .