Chopped ID and Bicycle Repair: Contrasting Values in Synchronous Graduate Instructional Designs for Design Learning

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Jun 16, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v12i2.30001
Keywords:
design learning, design case method, graduate learning, Instructional Design, The instructional design case

Main Article Content

Craig D. Howard
University of Tennessee Knoxville
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2317-6896
John W. Baaki
Old Dominion University

Abstract

This article presents two similar design cases and a discussion of how like values resulted in dissimilar design moves. Both cases were gamified learning activities for graduate students in instructional design. Both interventions employed rapid prototyping and were delivered synchronously in an at-a-distance setting. This article compares the two designs, the two designs’ similar development narratives, and the two designs’ divergent features. We give special attention to the common values the designers brought to the act of designing. Contrasting crucial features in similar designs allowed us, as designers, to appreciate divergent design moves. A discussion of the two cases explains how designers arrived at different design decisions through similar rationale. The authors were both designers and instructors of the implementations; each presents their case in relation to the other. Our combined cases explore how designers might compare salient features of similar instructional interventions and appreciate design moves that one chose not to make.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Howard, C. D., & Baaki, J. W. (2021). Chopped ID and Bicycle Repair: Contrasting Values in Synchronous Graduate Instructional Designs for Design Learning. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 12(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v12i2.30001
Issue
Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021)
Section
Design Cases

Copyright © 2025 by the International Journal of Designs for Learning, a publication of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), published by Indiana University Libraries Journals. Permission to make digital or hard copies of portions of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee, provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page in print or the first screen in digital media. Except as otherwise noted, the content published by IJDL is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. A simpler version of this statement is available here.

Author Biographies

Craig D. Howard, University of Tennessee Knoxville

Craig D. Howard is an Assistant Professor in the Educational Psychology and Counseling Department at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He teaches in the MS program in Instructional Design and Technology and in the Ph.D. program in Learning, Design, and Technology. He studies instructional communications, especially surrounding the design of instruction, and how we document and disseminate design knowledge via instructional design cases.

John W. Baaki, Old Dominion University

John W. Baaki is Assistant Professor of Instructional Design & Technology at Old Dominion University. His research interests are how persona construction, reflection-in-action, and taking stock in external representations affect instructional and human performance design.

References

Boling, E. (2010). The Need for Design Cases: Disseminating Design Knowledge. International Journal of Designs for Learning, (1)1. 1- 8. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/ijdl/index.
Baaki, J. & Luo, T. (2019). Instructional designers guided by external representations in a design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(3), 513-541.
Baaki, J., Tracey, M. W., & Hutchinson, A. (2017). Give us something to react to and make it rich: designers reflecting-in-action with external representations. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(4), 667-682.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Berg.
Driscoll, M. (2018). Psychological foundations of Instructional Design. In Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (Eds.). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. (pp 52-60). Boston: Pearson.
Howard, C. D., Boling, E., Rowland, G., & Smith, K. M. (2012). Instructional design cases and why we need them. Educational Technology, 34-38.
Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise. Routledge.
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.
Smith, K. (2010). Producing the rigorous design case. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1), 9-20.
Tracey M.W., Baaki J. (2014) Design, Designers, and Reflection-in-Action. In: Hokanson B., Gibbons A. (eds) Design in Educational Technology. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer.