Introduction: We talk a lot about transfer of training, and how support or non-support from managers and peers affects how well learners can apply their newly-acquired knowledge/skills in the workplace. This article turns the spotlight back on ourselves and our field. When we students with our andragogical theories and systemic thinking and freshly-printed diplomas go bouncing out into the real world of training & development, what happens with our own transfer of training? Are we using our newly-acquired knowledge, or do we fall in (willingly or otherwise) with what our new managers and peers practice?
*INTRODUCTION*
Students in instructional design programs are exposed to theories on adult learning and instructional design, and use those theories when creating strategies for class projects. What happens when they become practitioners? Do they continue to use the learning and instructional design theories they’ve learned in class, or do they come to rely on other strategies for developing training interventions?
*ARTICLE *
Christensen, T. K. and Osguthorpe, R. T. (2004). How do instructional-design practitioners make instructional-strategy decisions? Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(3), 45–65.
* SYNOPSIS *
The researchers surveyed alumni from several graduate-level programs in instructional design to see how they made decisions about instructional strategy in actual practice. Â As students, these individuals had been educated in adult learning theory and instructional design theory. The researchers wondered if the alumni continued to use their theoretical knowledge after graduation, or if they turned to other ways of deciding on appropriate strategies for effective learning interventions. If the latter were the case, this would indicate a possible gap between the theoretical strategies taught in instructional design programs and the practical strategies which practitioners find more suitable to actual projects.
* RESEARCH QUESTIONS *
The researchers created their survey to answer four questions about instructional design strategy:
- How do instructional-design practitioners decide which instructional strategies to use?
- What role does theory play in this process?
- Where do ID practitioners learn about new instructional theories, trends, and strategies?
- What is the predominant epistemology underlying current ID practice?
* METHODS *
The researchers conducted a web-based survey with alumni of graduate-level instructional design programs at five U.S. universities. To restrict their sample to those who were making instructional strategy decisions on a regular basis as part of their current jobs, the researchers asked the invited alumni to submit the survey if their current job description involved instructional strategies related decisions. Â A total of 130 alumni responded to the survey, but 113 finished the survey.
The respondents were asked to rate how often they used each of the 12 design strategies listed in the survey (on a 5-point scale – Never, Almost Never, Sometimes, Often, and Very Often). They were then asked to list the instructional design theories and learning theories which they found useful; respondents were not given a list from which to choose, so it was up to them to decide what theories they used and how they should be categorized. Thirdly, the respondents identified which information sources they used to learn about new instructional theories, trends, and strategies. Finally, respondents were given three pairs of statements which reflected a contrast between objectivist and constructivist viewpoints on learning, and were asked to indicate where their own viewpoints fell between the two.
* FINDINGS *
Although the researchers did not necessarily intend to examine the roles played by the alumni in their organizations, the demographic data collected displayed a broad range of job titles; only 14% of the respondents held titles which included the phrase “instructional designer†or “instructional designâ€. The researchers felt this might indicate that instructional design skills are advantageous across multiple roles.
1. Instructional Strategy Decisions
The methods most regularly used by the respondents for making decisions about instructional strategy were to brainstorm with other people on the instructional design project (86%), derive strategy from prior experience (79%), and adapt strategies they have seen used successfully by other practitioners (74%). Despite the inclusion of learning theories and instructional design theories in their graduate studies, only 54% of respondents regularly drew on their knowledge of learning theories and 51% on their knowledge of instructional design theories.
2. Role of Theory
The researchers differentiated between learning theory, which explains why a certain instructional design could be effective, and instructional design theory, which offer guidelines for choosing instructional strategies and methods which would meet specific goals.
Survey participants were asked to name the learning theories and instructional design theories which they found particularly useful on their projects. For learning theories, the researchers grouped the respondents’ answers into broad categories. Only about half of the individuals surveyed responded to this set of questions.
Of the 59 individuals who named one or more instructional design theories which they used in practice, 36% mentioned Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction, 27% mentioned Merrill’s theories, 20% referred to Dick & Carey’s model, and 17% to Keller’s ARCS motivational model.
Of the 56 individuals who named one or more learning theories which they used in practice, 46% noted constructivist theories (including situated learning and cognitive apprenticeship), 30% mentioned cognitive theories (including information processing theory and schema theory), and 30% listed theories which are properly classified as instructional design theory (including Gagne and Merrill’s theories).
3. Information Sources
81% of the survey respondents reported regularly learning about new instructional theories, trends, and strategies from interactions with peers and co-workers. About 50% of them reported doing so by reading instructional design books, visiting relevant Internet websites, and reading professional publications. Perhaps surprisingly, despite the high reported level of peer interaction for learning, much lower percentages of respondents reported learning this information through professional conferences (28%) and internet forums (19%).
4. Underlying Assumptions
The researchers found that in one pair of statements, 45% of the respondents were considered biased towards constructivist principles. For another pair of statements, 45% were considered biased towards objectivist principles. For the third pair of statements, the researchers found that the responses were evenly distributed between the two sides. From this, the researchers concluded that no clear bias towards objectivism or constructivism was evident in this group of respondents.
*CONCLUSIONS*
The researchers inferred by the survey results that practitioners are most likely to make their instructional strategy decisions through collaborative efforts with co-workers and peers, rather than in isolation. The researchers felt that educational programs for instructional design should ensure that students learn skills necessary for effective group work. They also concluded that more effort should be made to support peer interaction among instructional design practitioners as a way to enhance the spread of practical knowledge.
Although the surveyed practitioners did use theory to help develop instructional strategy, the results indicated that theory was just one component of that development. The researchers concluded that graduate programs should teach theory in context, so that future practitioners understand not just the theories but the application of theories to their real-world projects.
Regarding epistemology, the researchers concluded that instructional design practitioners pick and choose what suits the current purpose, rather than adhering strictly to objectivist or constructivist thinking. The researchers concluded that graduate programs should present a variety of philosophical approaches from which future practitioners can draw as needed.
* DISCUSSION FOR IPT-N MEMBERS *
For those of you who are instructional design practitioners, how do you develop your instructional strategies? How often do you find the theories and models learned in the IPT program useful in your work projects , or do you find that those theories don’t seem to apply to your actual practice?