Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preservice teacher use of learning and instructional design principles

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although many instructional technologists have suggested that teachers should be trained in using instructional design models, few studies have been conducted to determine if teachers can be successful in acquiring and applying these models. The purpose of this study was to examine preservice teacher success in acquiring and applying principles of learning and instructional design. Preservice teachers enrolled in a professional teacher preparation program were taught the essentials of learning and competency-based instruction and were required to plan a lesson using these concepts. Results indicate that most of the preservice teachers were successful in acquiring and using the principles of learning and instructional design.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blumenfeld, P., Young, D., & Pokay, P. (1991, April).Using educational psychology as a vehicle for teaching instructional planning: Promises and problems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.

  • Branson, R. K. (1987). Why the schools can't improve: The upper limit hypothesis.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(4), 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cain, B. N. (1989). With world making, planning models matter.English Education, 21, 5–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1979). Research on teacher planning: A progress report.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 11(2), 175–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Reiser, R. A. (1989).Planning effective instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1988).Essentials of learning for instruction (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, N., Reiser, R. A., & Bebeau, M. (1976, March).Teaching teachers to develop competency-based instructional programs. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Anaheim, CA.

  • Higgins, N., & Sullivan, H. (1982). Preparing special education teachers for objectives-based instruction.Teacher Education and Special Education, 5(4), 51–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, S. T. (1981). How teachers design their materials: Implications for instructional design.Instructional Science, 10, 363–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, S. T. (1989). Technology, teachers, and the search for school reform.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(4), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, J. B. (1965). Myths about instruction.Educational Leadership, 22(8), 609–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. L. (1990). Talk about teaching: Instructional systems design within teacher education.Educational Technolgy, 30(7), 32–33, 56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neale, D. C., Pace, A. J., & Case, A. B. (1983, April).The influence of training, experience, and organizational environment on teachers' use of the systematic planning model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.

  • Reiser, R. A. (1986). Some questions facing academic programs in instructional technology and some means for answering them.Journal of Instructional Development, 8(3), 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, R. A., & Higgins, N. C. (1975, April).Competency based instruction. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Rosales-Dordelly, C., & Short, E. (1985).Curriculum professors' specialized knowledge. State College, PA: Nittany Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffman, S. S., & Gansneder, B. M. (1987). Graduate programs in instructional technology: Their characteristics and involvement in public education.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 22–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrock, S. A., & Byrd, D. M. (1987). An instructional development look at staff development in the public schools.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(4), 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snelbecker, G. E. (1987). Instructional design skills for classroom teachers.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(4), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H., & Higgins, N. (1983).Teaching for competence. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. (1970).How teachers plan their courses. London: National Foundation for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, R. W. (1949).Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yinger, R. J. (1980). A study of teacher planning.Elementary School Journal, 80, 107–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahorik, J. A. (1975). Teachers' planning models.Educational Leadership, 33(3), 134–139.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Division of Psychology in Education, Arizona State University, Tempe

    James D. Klein

Authors
  1. James D. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The course described in this paper is modeled in part after a course designed by faculty at Florida State University. The author wishes to thank Marcy Driscoll for sharing these course materials. The author also wishes to recognize John Erchul, Ann Igoe, Jayne Klein, and Doris Pridemore for their comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klein, J.D. Preservice teacher use of learning and instructional design principles. ETR&D 39, 83–89 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296441

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296441

Keywords

Search

Navigation