Inquiry into the Practices of Expert Courseware Designers: A Pragmatic Method for the Design of Effective Instructional Systems

Abstract

A multi-stage study of the practices of expert courseware designers was conducted with the final goal of identifying methods for assisting non-experts with the design of effective instructional systems. A total of 25 expert designers were involved in all stages of the inquiry. A model of the expert courseware design process was created, tested, and refined through four try-outs. The final version of the model included instructional design task descriptions and electronic worksheets. The study revealed a common expert process that included the use of rapid prototypes, an opportunistic method of applying 14 key instructional design tasks, 8 success factors related to courseware design, and design guidelines for 10 preferred instructional strategies for courseware.

Judgment and Instructional Design: How ID Practitioners Work In Practice

“…Hardré, Ge, and Thomas () revealed how the interaction of a number of factors, such as perception about learning, background experiences, individual needs, and learning strategies, may have an impact on development of ID expertise. Rowley () stated that common expert practices can help novice instructional designers improve their expertise, and that design experts are more likely to be better problem solvers because they use their background knowledge and personal experiences (Ertmer et al, ). Ertmer, Stepich, Flanagan, Kocaman‐Karoglu, Reiner, Reyes, and Ushigusa () suggested that explicit guidance or scaffolds based on these expert practices may support novice designers in their problem‐solving behaviors.…”

Engagement with Mathematics Courseware in Traditional and Online Remedial Learning Environments: Relationship to Self-Efficacy and Achievement

“…Mathematics was among the first academic subjects to foster computer-based activities, and educators have incorporated computers into mathematics curricula extensively (Rowhani & Sedig, 2005;Zucker, 2006). A common implementation of e-learning is the use of courseware-instructional software designed to transfer knowledge, skills, or conceptual understanding to students (Rowley, 2005).…”

Design Thinking in Engineering Course Design

“…One such misalignment is the approach toward empathy for users, and learners/students in particular. Many instructional design expert models and practices focus on learning about and from users, but focus mostly on users' prerequisite knowledge and learning capabilities 5,29 . This conflicts with the more holistic and empathetic focus of design thinking.…”

“…For example, developing empathy for users and engaging them in the process is a core principle in design thinking and is present throughout many examples of the observed and documented practices of instructional designers in the form of understanding the target learners [4][5][6] . Similarly, both design thinking and instructional design practices promote the use of scaled-down prototypes to test design concepts with users 4,6,28,29 .…”

“…Others have pointed out that despite the demonstrable connections between design thinking and instructional design, there are many differences in scope and implementation 3,27,30 . For example, while understanding users may be important in both design thinking and instructional design, instructional design models developed from expert practices often focus on understanding the prerequisite knowledge and learning capabilities of students 5,29 . Design thinking promotes deeper engagement with and empathy for users, including observing and interacting with users in authentic contexts to develop a deep understanding of their challenges and needs, without limiting focus to specific areas such as learning capabilities 1,7 .…”