What is Instructional Design?

There is a debate about whether ID is necessary. To be honest I cannot really take part in this as I've not got a clear definition of what ID is. In this post I'm trying to develop an understanding of both the term and the debate, and then seeing if it affects us as Learning Technologists in HE. Most of the debate around this term seems to be in industry, but things may apply to us.


Starting my journey in Wikipedia I notice the claim:
"the [ID] process consists broadly of determining the current state of learner understanding, defining the end goal of instruction, and creating some media-based "intervention" to assist in the transition." The book Preparing instructional text is recommended.

Reading this article I'm thinking that the term ID covers what most teachers do.


Learning Circuit's big question for Feb 2008 is Instructional Design - If, When and How Much?

In a post related to this debate - The Death of the Instructional Designer - it seems like the ID term refers to people experienced in doing this online. They might have worked with a subject expert traditionally, but now rapid elearning development tools mean that Instruction Designers are seen as adding little value or are just cut out of the loop anyway. This post says that they should become Solutions Architects helping companies increase productivity at a higher level. Relating this to HE, the subject matter experts (SMEs) are also teachers and therefore should be doing ID at some level.

Vaughan Waller's article Is Instructional Design Dead (Again)? argues that it is the 'death' of the Instructional Designer that is causing poor quality e-learning experiences and loss of reputation for e-learning in general. This includes companies saying that all 500 training sessions they want to run should be online without discussing if this is the best method of delivery.

Is Instructional Design Dead? notes that the issue with ID is when it just focusses on developing a classroom based (or online classroom based) materials. It argues that on the job training, simulations are much better and Instructional Designers need to focus on these approaches. Potential competencies that ID practitioners would make use of are listed including project management (planning, scope, communication, budget), modern instructional design (blended, experiential, longitudinal, on-the-job) and broad format competencies (classroom, e-learning, simulations, podcasting, etc).

Instructional Designer Competencies by Manish Mohan gives another list of skills that the new ID practitioner needs to be effective. These include ability to write stories, dialogues, scenarios, narration scripts, understand basic instructional design principles (this is the foundation- write correct objectives, structure the content etc).

elearning technology: significant work needed to help instructional designers by Tony Karrer, brings together a discussion about ID models like ISD, ADDIE and HPT. It is agreed that they form a good foundation if they evolve, but people are unsure how they could change. I like the quote Russ Crumley:

The challenge we now face is not the creation of more tools, but better use of the tools we have, while applying the fundamentals of human behavior and performance, including the role of emotion, curiosity, discovery, and the desire to improve.

From all this I've got a clearer concept of how a Learning Technologist could include Instructional Design in their list of abilities - separating it from where we do other things. So you could define the role as:
-Giving advice on good practice in the use of technologies.
-Providing training in how to use specific new technologies.
-Research into the use of technologies in Teaching and Learning.
-Involvement in Instructional Design as part of an academic team.
-Technical development of more complex resources.