Review Article

Exploring the synergy between instructional design models and learning theories: A systematic literature review

Hassan Abuhassna 1 * , Mohamad Azrien Bin Mohamed Adnan 2 , Fareed Awae 2
More Detail
1 School of Education, Faculty of Social Science and Humanities, University Technology Malaysia, Skudai, Johor Bharu, MALAYSIA2 Islamic Education Programme, Academy of Islamic Studies, Universiti Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(2), April 2024, ep499, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14289
Published Online: 26 February 2024, Published: 01 April 2024
OPEN ACCESS   3422 Views   4931 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

To enhance education, we conducted a comprehensive investigation into integrating instructional design models (IDMs) and learning theories in this systematic literature review. We methodically selected and analyzed 25 publications from a pool of 1,102 documents using the preferred reportinfg items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses framework to guarantee a rigorous and systematic approach to literature selection. Our results demonstrate the worldwide span of study on this topic, including contributions from prestigious academic institutions and scholarly journals. This examination explores both the benefits and drawbacks of combining IDMs with learning theories. Noteworthy positives include increased student motivation, support for innovative teaching methods, and the development of complex and diverse learning environments. However, several shortcomings were observed. most notably relating to accessibility problems, evaluation difficulties, and questions about the adaptability of such integrated techniques. Our findings have implications for a broad range of stakeholders, including educators, instructional designers, and students functioning in a variety of educational contexts. The increase of learner motivation, the creation of novel pedagogical tools, the refining of teacher training programs, and the promotion of interdisciplinary learning methods are significant areas of focus. In addition, our evaluation uncovered a number of gaps in the current literature, indicating intriguing possibilities for future research. The examination of holistic learning environments, the untapped potential of integrated systems, the incorporation of educational robots into pedagogical tactics, and the refining of schema assessment approaches are notable research fields. By providing these insights, this systematic review not only adds to the current body of knowledge, but also has the potential to shape the future trajectory of educational practices, so acting as a significant resource for boosting learning outcomes in a variety of educational environments.
Keywords: instructional design models, learning theories, systematic literature review, SLR

CITATION (APA)

Abuhassna, H., Adnan, M. A. B. M., & Awae, F. (2024). Exploring the synergy between instructional design models and learning theories: A systematic literature review. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(2), ep499. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14289

REFERENCES

  1. An, H., Sung, W. & Yoon, S. Y. (2022). Implementation of learning by design in a synchronized online environment to teach educational robotics to in-service teachers. Education Technology Research and Development, 70, 1473-1496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10134-8
  2. Baldwin, S. J., Ching, Y.-H., & Friesen, N. (2018). Online course design and development among college and university instructors: An analysis using grounded theory. Online Learning, 22(2), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1212
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
  4. Budhtranon, W., Chianchana, C., & Kamkhuntod, S. (2021). Developing a conceptual framework of instructional model for creating an innovative business project: Applying the sufficiency economy philosophy for private vocational colleges in Bangkok, Thailand. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 13(4), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2021.13.04.002
  5. Cárcamo, A., Fuentealba, C., & Garzon, D. (2019). Local instruction theories at the university level: An example in a linear algebra course. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(12), em1781. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108648
  6. Charbonneau-Gowdy, P., Pizarro, J., & Salinas, D. (2021). Finally in the spotlight: How contemporary learning theory is saving education online during COVID. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 19(6), 642-655. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.19.6.2199
  7. Cheung, L. (2016). Using an instructional design model to teach medical procedures. Medical Science Educator, 26, 175-180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-016-0228-9
  8. Curum, B., & Khedo, K. K. (2021). Cognitive load management in mobile learning systems: Principles and theories. Journal of Computers in Education, 8, 109-136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00173-6
  9. Daniel, M., Stojan, J., Wolff, M., Taqui, B., Glasgow, T., Forster, S., & Cassese, T. (2018). Applying four-component instructional design to develop a case presentation curriculum. Perspectives on Medical Education, 7, 276-280. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40037-018-0443-8
  10. de Leeuw, R., Scheele, F., Walsh, K., & Westerman, M. (2019). A 9-step theory- and evidence-based postgraduate medical digital education development model: Empirical development and validation. JMIR Medical Education, 5(2), e13004. https://doi.org/10.2196/13004
  11. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1978). The systematic design of instruction. Scott, Foresman and Company.
  12. Diningrat, S. W. M., Setyosari, P., Ulfa, S. & Widiati, U. (2020). Integrating PBI in the flipped classroom: A framework for effective instruction. World Journal on Educational Technology Current Issues, 12(2), 117-127. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v12i2.4662
  13. Ghani, M. T. A., & Daud, W. A. A. W. (2018). Adaptation of ADDIE instructional model in developing educational website for language learning. GJAT, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.7187/GJAT122018-1
  14. Guney, Z. (2019). Considerations for human-computer interaction: User interface design variables and visual learning in IDT. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 14(4), 731-741. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v11i4.4481
  15. Juan, Y.-K., & Chao, T.-W. (2015). Game-based learning for green building education. Sustainability, 7, 5592-5608. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7055592
  16. Jung, E., Lim, R., & Kim, D. (2022). A schema-based instructional design model for self-paced learning environments. Education Sciences, 12(4), 271. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040271
  17. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
  18. Kurt, S. (2017). ADDIE model. https://educationaltechnology.net/the-addie-model-instructional-design/
  19. Lieser, P., Taff, S. D., & Murphy-Hagan, A. (2018). The webinar integration tool: A framework for promoting active learning in blended environments. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2018(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.453
  20. Lo, S.-C., & Tsai, H.-H. (2022). Perceived effectiveness of developing a mobile system of formative test with handwriting revision to devise an instruction design based on cognitive apprenticeship theory. Sustainability, 14, 2272. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042272
  21. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024
  22. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
  23. Ormrod, J. E. (2016). Educational psychology: Developing learners. Pearson.
  24. Ou, C., Joyner, D. A., & Goel, A. K. (2019). Designing and developing video lessons for online learning: A seven-principle model. Online Learning, 23(2), 82-104. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1449
  25. Padzil, M. R., Karim, A. A., & Husnin, H. (2021). Employing DDR to design and develop a flipped classroom and project based learning module to applying design thinking in design and technology. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120988
  26. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427001300320
  27. Pinto, S. I., & Zvacek, S. M. (2022). Cognitive apprenticeship and T-shaped instructional design in computational fluid mechanics: Student perspectives on learning. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 50(1), 51-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419020915725
  28. Pretorius, J., Koen, M., & Schall, R. (2020). Using intentional humor in a higher-education classroom: Connecting with, and building on Lovorn and Holaway. The European Journal of Humor Research, 8(2), 146-165. https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2020.8.2.Pretorius
  29. Radović, S., Hummel, H. G. K., & Vermeulen, M. (2022). Design-based research with mARC ID model: Designing experiential learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 25, 803-822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-021-09394-7
  30. Ramani, S. (2022). A learning mindset needed from faculty in online program management and university partnership business model. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 20(2), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.2.2063
  31. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.
  32. Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional design. John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  33. Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
  34. Velaora, C., Dimos, I., Tsagiopoulou, S., & Kakarountas, A. (2022). A game-based learning approach in digital design course to enhance students’ competency. Information, 13, 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13040177
  35. Zain, F. M., & Sailin, S. N. (2020). Students’ experience with flipped learning approach in higher education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(10), 4946-4958. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081067