Instructional Technology Chapter 1

Chapter 1

The 1994 Definition of the Field

Instructional Technology is the theory and practice of design, development, utilization management and evaluation of processes and resources for learning.

For at least forty years the field of Instructional Technology periodically has pursued processes of collective self-examination, resulting in statements which describe it self professionally. In 1963 such efforts produced the first formal definition of the field. This definition has been updated a number of times, with each change providing new directions for the field. Since the last formal definition seventeen years ago, dramatic changes in the profession and in technology have occurred. Consequently, this process of reexamination has once again evolved. The result of  this collective analysis is the 1994 definition of the field shown above. This book will explore the dimensions of the new definition and its implications for both theory and practice. First, Chapter One will introduce the new definition by discussing the assumptions on which it was based and the implications of its terminology.

Instructional Technology Chapter 3

Chapter 3

The Sources of Influence on Instructional Technology

Instructional Technology has developed and emerged as a separate field with diverse domains of research and practice. Figure 1.1 in Chapter One portrayed the range of activity encompassed within the traditional bound­aries of Instructional Technology Design, Development, Utilization, Management, and Evaluation. Each of these domains was defined and discussed in Chapter Two.

The range of domains in this field reflects its eclectic nature. Ele­ments of research, theory, and practice from related fields have found their way into the sphere of Instructional Technology by adoption and adaptation. As new influences are felt, they typically dominate for a time and then blend into the existing paradigms, but even when orientations become less dominant, their influence is usually not totally lost in either thought or practice. However, the integration of new ideas occurs within, and reflects, the impact of the broader social and technological contexts of the field.

Instructional Technology Chapter 2

Chapter 2

The Domains of the Field

The 1994 definition is built around five separate areas of concern to instructional technologists: Design, Development, Utilization, Management, and Evaluation. These are the domains of the field. In this chapter there are definitions for each of these domains, the domain subcategories, and related concepts.

Instructional Technology Chapter 4

Chapter 4

The Practice of Instructional Technology

Instructional Technology has developed through consistent interaction between theory and practice. At times, theory has provided direction for practice, and at other times practice has preceded theoretical analysis. This phenomenon is not unusual for a distinctly applied and practical pro­fession.

The influence of diverse theoretical stances was explored in Chapter Three Instructional Technology is somewhat unique in that it also relics upon models to supplement theory. The most generally used models in the field are procedural in nature, and the vast majority of these models guide the design processes. While these procedural models have a theo­retical basis, most also summarize successful practice or respond to the unique characteristics of a given setting.

Instructional Technology practice has influenced, to a great extent, the evolution of the field and, therefore, has had considerable impact on how the field itself has been defined. Moreover, practice has had more influence than theory on the manner in which the field is viewed by those outside of the field.

Instructional Technology Chapter 5

Chapter 5

Implications of the Definition of Instructional Technology

In Chapter One it was argued that a new definition of Instructional Tech­nology was needed to reflect the growth and diversity of the field today, as well as to serve as a catalyst for creativity and further change. This premise is consistent with Ely's (1983) position that "definitions do not create a field but, rather, help to explain its functions, purposes and roles to those within and those outside the area" (p. 2). This definition effort has the further goal of encouraging the development of a more cohesive community of scholars and practitioners amid extreme diversities of phi­losophy, job, and work context. This chapter will more specifically exam­ine the role and implications of this particular definition in a rapidly chang­ing field.