Implications of Two Well-Known Models For Instructional Designers In Distance Education:Dick-Carey Versus Morrison-Ross-Kemp

Year 2007, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 62 - 68, 01.06.2007

Yavuz Akbulut

Abstract

This paper first summarizes, and then compares and contrasts two well-known instructional design models: Dick and Carey Model (DC) and Morrison, Ross and Kemp model (MRK). The target audiences of both models are basically instructional designers. Both models have applications for different instructional design settings. They both see the instructional design as a means to problem-solving. However, there are also differences between the two models. Applications of each model for instructional design and technology are discussed, and a reference to instructional designers in distance education was made.

Keywords

Instructional Design Models; Dick and Carey Model; Morrison, Ross and Kemp Model, Distance Education

Yavuz AKBULUT, MA Anadolu University Faculty of Education Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies Eskisehir/TURKEY

Abstract

References

• Banathy, B. H. (1987). Instructional systems design. In R. M. Gagné (Ed.), Instructional technology: Foundations (pp.85-112). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Bassi, L. J., & Van Buren, M. E. (1999). Sharpening the leading edge. Training and Development, 53 (1), 23-33.
• Bostock, S. J. (1997). Designing web-based instruction for active learning. In B. Khan (Ed.), Web based instruction (pp. 225-230). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
• Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985). The systematic design of instruction (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction. New York, NY: Longman.
• Dick, W., & Reiser, R. A. (1989). Planning effective instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Dorin, H., Demmin, P. E., Gabel, D. (1990). Chemistry: The study of matter. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
• Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Janovich College Publishers.
• Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Revisioning models of instructional development. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 45 (3), 73-89.
• Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2001). Survey of instructional development models, 4th edition. Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
• Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). What is instructional design? In R.A. Reiser & J. A. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 16-25). Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
• Hawkridge, D. (2002). Distance learning and instructional design in international settings. In R.A. Reiser & J.A. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 269-278). Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
• Horton, W. (2000). Designing web-based training. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
• Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing effective instruction, 4th edition, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
• Reiser, R. A. (1987). Instructional Technology: A History. In R. M. Gagné (ed.), Instructional Technology: Foundations (pp. 11 - 40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Reiser, R.A. (2002). A history of instructional design and technology. In R.A. Reiser & J.A. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 26-53). Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
• Ryder, M. (2006) (2 December 2006). Instructional design models.
• http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/idmodels.html (20 December 2006)
• Silvern, L. C. (1965). Basic analysis. Los Angeles: Education and Training Consultants Company.