ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Foroughi Abari   A.A. (1 )
Yarmohammadian   M.H. (1 )
Aslani   Gh.R. (* )






(* ) Educational Sciences Department, Educational Sciences & Psychology Faculty, Khorasgan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Esfahan, Iran
(1 ) Educational Sciences Department, Educational Sciences & Psychology Faculty, Khorasgan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Esfahan, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Educational Sciences Department, Islamic Azad University of Dezful, Azadegan Boulevard, Dezful, Iran
Phone: +98 6142420601
Fax: +986142420601
gh_aslani@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:  October  16, 2014
Accepted:  December 9, 2014
ePublished:  February 4, 2015

BRIEF TEXT


…[1-4] Instructional design can be considered as preparing specific maps on how to achieve educational goals [5]. ...[6]. Three main important theories of learning are Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. Behavioral approaches focuses on the principles of strengthening, immediate feedback and small steps for learning tasks [7]. … [8,9] Cognitivists consider learning as an internal process and they believe that actions and activities of learners during learning experience affect the formation of cognitive structures [10]. Constructivism emphasizes on personal experiences and that the learning is best achieved by doing. From this perspective, learning is achieved through participation in group and is collective activities [9, 10]. …[11,12]. In order to decide about the more effective method of learning, the situation, the learner and the purposes of learning should be considered [13].

In medical education, none of Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism learning theories is complete and each of them is mainly focused on specific type of learning [14]. Instructional design should move in a continuum of Constructivism and Behaviorism and act in an integrative manner according to the demands [15]. Many of interactions and e-learning methods are supported by behavioral approaches. In the field of e-learning, the active learning approaches are emphasized [16].

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current instructional design models based on Behavioral, Cognitive and Constructive theories and to provide efficient combined model for efficient designing of e-learning environment.

This is a combined study.

Curriculum and technology instructors participated in this study.

Instructors were chosen based on purposive sampling.

A list of 55 instructional designs from the known models of instructional design was prepared. First, each of the models selected by sampling was described through extensive study of literature, and they were extensively investigated. In the second stage of learning, the three learning theories were explained in terms of their history, their evolution or decline and their impact on instructional design during their heyday; and in the third stage, the components and subcomponents of the model were extracted and a basic model was formed based on the matching characteristics and the strengths and weakness of instructional design in accordance with each theory and based on Isaac Candle model [17]. The initial model was given to the 7 instructors of curriculum and educational technology and after their review, the final model was formed. Evaluation of the model was performed using a questionnaire containing 135 questions and reliability of the model and its formal validity of the questionnaire were confirmed by the experts. Reliability of the questionnaire was 0.91 by Cronbach`s Alpha. This questionnaire included three areas including the purpose, components and the relationship between the elements of the model. In order to validate the model, the model was investigated by 18 experts in the domain of educational technology and curriculum planning. The results showed all components and subcomponents above the average score.

The precise organization of the training course based on the predetermined purposes, the emphasis on great exercises, providing instant feedback and organizing activities and providing learning materials tailored to the learners` rate of learning, presentation of e-materials in small pieces, organizing electronic contents in linear and branching form based on the links and hyperlinks, emphasizing the obvious response of the learners, providing feedback immediately after the exercise, using a variety of reinforcements after the correct answers and evaluation of the amount of learning based on predetermined purposes, were among the application of behaviorism in designing e-learning environments. Concepts from cognitive psychology can be used in e-learning and important cases were as the followings: using advance organizers at the beginning of e-learning in order to create essential cognitive structure for learning new materials, using techniques of text bolding for drawing the attention, using concept mapping at the end of each section of contents and hyperlinking them, providing content according to learners` learning styles, informing learners of reasons for learning new materials which are inserted at the beginning of sections in e-learning content, necessary attention to the prerequisite of learning new content which is done through analyzing the subjects and determining the hierarchical structure of content, attention to the high levels of cognition including analysis, synthesis and evaluation during determining the learning objectives, and using the techniques that facilitate the transfer of learning. Principles of designing e-learning environments based on constructivism were as the followings: presenting the goals in terms of projects, choosing subjects of the research based on the real life of the learners, specifying the cooperative and collaborative tools and supporting collaborative learning, the creation and availability of various resources such as utilizing RSS and providing search engines, the possibility of developing contents by the learners, providing various learning tasks such as writing articles or proposals, emphasizing discovery learning to delegate learning responsibility to the learners, supporting metacognitive processes during instructional period through presenting essential training to familiarize with metacognitive techniques before and during the presentation of the materials and utilizing features such as using blogs, the possibility of loading pictures and texts by members and the possibility of online receiving of information by mobile phones and other means of mobile communication. In order to design the e-learning environments by combining the three theories of Behavioral, Cognitivism, and Constructivism, a combinational model including 12 components was presented including "the ultimate goal setting", "analysis (including goal and the learner analysis", "content production", "organization", teaching-learning strategies", "presentation", "learning transfer to the real world", "interaction and control", "technology components", "sources", "support", " evaluation and revision (including diagnosis evaluation at the beginning of the course, evolving evaluation during the course and final evaluation continuous phases).

In the first part, those features of instructional design models which were based on Behavioral, Cognitive and Constructive theories, which were capable of application in electronic learning, were investigated and listed. The results in this section are in accordance with other studies [13, 14, 16]. In the second part, a model containing 12 main components and 135 subcomponents was presented. The first component was to determine the ultimate goals of course. The ultimate goals have been considered as the first component of instructional design [18]. The second component was analysis. Determination of the characteristics and individual differences of learners such as learning style, computer literacy, and familiarity with ethics in e-learning has been emphasized [19-24]. The third component was producing contents based on three levels of goals setting (elementary, intermediate and advanced) that the details of each level are consistent with other studies [25-28]. The fourth component was organization. The principles of effective organization of contents and activities such as simple to complex organization, conclusion and summarization, application of advance organizers, content maps and considering the organizational and location cues in the program is in accordance with the previous studies [15, 27, 29, 30]. The fifth component was the learning-teaching strategies including review, training, immediate feedback and reinforcement (Behaviorism; elementary level), learning metacognitive skills, multiple representation of the content, using many examples and paying attention to learners’ motivation (Cognitivism; intermediate level) and exploratory learning, problem-solving and emphasizing the social interaction (Constructivism; advanced level). The components are consistent with other studies [15, 31-35]. The sixth component was presenting educational materials to the learners and the seventh component was transferring of learning to the real world. Providing a variety of tasks based on the real life of the learners, emphasizing on self-directed learning, and using a variety of examples and different computer simulations, are of the principles of learning transfer [12]. The eighth component was interaction and control (according to the elementary, intermediate and advanced goals) which was related to content, organization and learning-teaching strategies. Different types of interaction and high learners control over their learning process can be provided via using digital technology [36]. The ninth component was technology. The tenth component was the learning sources. Applying the characteristics of Web2 is desirable in this section. This component is consistent with other studies [15, 37]. The eleventh component was support. Since in e-learning environments, learners do not have the opportunity of face to face interaction, this component seems necessary for all the learners in all levels [15]. The last component was evaluation and revision. Evaluation of the whole course is done immediately after receiving educational goals and it covers all the components of the model. Evaluation of the learners is done in three phases of diagnostic evaluation, formative evaluation and summative evaluation. This component is in accordance with different models of educational design [3, 5, 15, 18].

Non-declared

Non-declared

The combinational model for designing e-learning environments based on Behavioral, Cognitive and Constructive theories has 12 components. There is a logical connection between the factors involved in e-learning such as software and hardware substructures, sources, support and factors based on effective pedagogical principles in e-learning such as setting goals, analyzing the differences in abilities and skills of the learners in time of enrollment, teaching learning strategies, methods of interaction and control, testing and evaluation of courses and learning of students which provides a detailed and comprehensive investigation of this type of learning.

The researchers appreciate the cooperation of instructors at the University of Isfahan, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabatabai University, and Islamic Azad University (Khorasgan Branch).

Non-declared

Non-declared

Non-declared


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Lam P, McNaught C, Lee J, Chan M. Disciplinary difference in students’ use of technology, experience in using eLearning strategies and perceptions towards eLearning. Comput Educ. 2014;73:111-20.
[2]Mohammadyari S, Singh H. Understanding the effect of e-learning on individual performance: The role of digital literacy. Comput Educ. 2015;82:11-25.
[3]Mojtahedzadeh R, Mohammadi A, Emami A. Instructional design, implementation, and evaluation of an elearning system, an experience in Tehran university of medical sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;11(4):348-59. [Persian]
[4]BaradaranK R, Banooghahramani S. Proposing a model for examining the factors affecting the acceptance of e-learning system from learner’s view. Sharif J Manag Indust Engin. 2009;26(1):91-101. [Persian]
[5]Zare'i Zuvaraki E. A blended approach to instructional design and learning environment: Critique of previous models and development of a new model. Educ Psychol J. 2012;8(24):27-48. [Persian]
[6]Pan CC. A symbiosis between instructional system design and project management. Can J Learn Teach. 2012;38(1):2-15.
[7]Afifi MK, Alamri SS. Effective principles in designing e-course in light of learning theories. Turk Online J Distance Educ. 2014;15(1):128-43.
[8]Kirsch I, Lynn JL, Vigorito M, Miller RR. The role of cognition in classical and operant conditioning. J Clin Psychol. 2004;60(4):369-92.
[9]Haghani F, Rezai H. Concrete application of learning theories in public health. Iran J Med Educ. 2012;11(9):1171-8. [Persian]
[10]Hubackova S. Pedagogical foundation of elearning. Proc Soc Behav Sci. 2014;131:24-8.
[11]Yadegarzaddeh GH, Parand K, Bahrami A. A consideration on the application of constructivist learning theory in higher education. Engin Cultur Monthly. 2008;3(23-24):72-83. [Persian]
[12]Khosravi N, Fardanesh H. A model for educational design based on a protect inspired by constructivist Approach. Manag Plan Educ. 1998;6(11):102-20. [Persian]
[13]Ertmer PA, Newby TJ. Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. Perfom Improv Q. 2013;26(2):43-71.
[14]Haghani F, Masoomi R. Overview of learning theories and its applications in medical education. Iran J Med Educ. 2011;10(5):1188-97. [Persian]
[15]Zangeneh H, Fardanesh H. An instructional design model based on generative theory. Horizon Med Educ Dev. 2010;4(1):19-28. [Persian]
[16]Zarif Sanaee N. The assessment and comparison of different schools of learning in designing electronic lessons. Media. 2012;2(3)2:51-60. [Persian]
[17]Nadi MA, Kaveh Anahita. Principles and theories of comparative education. Esfahan: Mohebban; 2007. [Persian]
[18]Akbulut Y. Implications of two well-known models for instructional designers in distance education: Dick-Carey versus Morrison-Ross-Kemp. TOJDE. 2007;8(2):1-7.
[19]Sarka H. Motivation in elearning motivation in language courses. Proc Soc Behav Sci. 2014;122:353-6.
[20]Nakayama M, Mutsuura K, Yamamoto H. Impact of learner's characteristics and learning behavior on learning performance during a fully online course. Electron J e-Learn. 2014;12(4):394-408
[21]Tsoi MF, Goh NK. Addressing cognitive processes in e-learning: TSOI Hybrid Learning Model. US-China Educ Rev. 2008;5(7):29-35.
[22]Akdemir O, Koszalka TA. Investigating the relationships among instructional strategies and learning styles in online environments. Computers Educ. 2008;50(4):1451-61.
[23]Hsu PS, Chang TJ, Wu MH. A new diagnostic mechanism of instruction: A dynamic, real-time and non-interference quantitative measurement technique for adaptive e-learning. Int J of Distance Educ Tech. 2009;7(3):85-96.
[24]Anitha C, Harsha TS. Ethical perspectives in open and distance education system. Turkish Online J Distance Educ. 2013;14(1):193-201.
[25]Swann W. The impact of applied cognitive learning theory on engagement with elearning courseware. J Learn Design. 2013;6(1):74.
[26]Zare`iZ E, Aghigh K, Rastgar Kazem. Electronic measurement and evaluation: a case study on an e-learning course in industrial engineering. Educ Measurement J. 2010;1(1):95-119. [Persian]
[27]Safavi AA, Bavaghar majid, Ghaffari H. E-content criteria and standards from e-learning perspective. Q J Res Plan High Educ. 2007;13(1):27-52. [Persian]
[28]Hmelo‐Silver CE, Barrows HS. Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cogn Instruct. 2008;26(1):48-94.
[29]Kelly GJ, Mayer RE. Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Sci Educ. 2002;86(4):548-71.
[30]DiMartino J, Castaneda A. Assessing applied skills. Educ Leadersh. 2007;64(7):38-42.
[31]Caniels MC, Smeets-Verstraeten AH. The integration of instruction strategies into an e-learning environment. Eur J Vocation Train. 2009;47(2):4-27.
[32]Kalyuga S. Instructional designs for the development of transferable knowledge and skills: A cognitive load perspective. Comput Human Behav. 2009;25(2):332-38.
[33]Zhang D, Zhao JL, Zhou L, Nunamaker JF. Can e-learning replace classroom learning?. Commun EACM. 2004;47(5):75-9.
[34]Wilson JR, Schwier RA. Authenticity in the process of learning about Instructional Design. Canadian J Learn Tech. 2009;35(2). Available From: http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/520/253.
[35]Azevedo R. Computer environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educ Psychol. 2005;40(4):193-7.
[36]Vajoczki S, Watt S, Fenton N, Tarkowski J, Voros G, Vine MM. Lecture capture: An effective tool for uni¬versal instructional design?. Can J High Educ. 2014;44(2):1-29.
[37]Yazdani Kashani Z, Tamannayifar MR. Importance and status of web 2 tools in virtual education; implementing an interactive approach at virtual Universities of Iran. Bimonthly Educ Strateg Med Sci. 2013;6(2):119-28. [Persian]