Skip to main content
Log in

Instructional design expertise: A cognitive model of design

  • Articles
  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a qualitative study of problem solving in the domain of instructional design. The study was conducted in two phases: Phase 1 consisted of a “think-aloud” design task with nine instructional designers, five experts and four novices. The results of Phase 2 are reported in this paper. The design task consisted of presenting the subjects with a description of a fictitious piece of equipment (a simulation of a diesel Cummins engine) and audio and video taping the participants while they produced a lesson for training subjects to trouble shoot a diesel engine simulator. Protocols were then coded using a coding scheme adapted from the work of Greeno et al. (1990). This coding scheme considers three aspects of the problem solving process involved in the development of training: subproblems, types of knowledge used, and problem solving operators.

Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the “think aloud” protocols yielded a picture of common problem solving strategies and general features used by “experts” and “novices” during the design process. More importantly, the data showed that experts and novices use divergent design models. These design models differ with respect to the problem solving strategies used by the experts and novices. Experts are more apt to use more design principles and rely on a variety of knowledge sources than novices. Experts spend more time in frontend-analysis or planning and trying to understand the domain than novices, while novices immediately begin to consider in detail numerous design strategies. Expert design models can be characterized by breadth first with considerable elaboration between interconnections while novices' design models are depth first processing with few interconnecting linkages. Moreover, the expert design model is one of integrating, reiterating and cycling through the design process. The expert design process is not a deterministic linear activity, but rather an iterative activity that requires creativity as well as logic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelson, B. & Soloway, E. (1985). The role of domain experience in software design.IEE Transactions on Software Engineering 11: 1351–1360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill.Psychological Review 89: 369–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1985).Cognitive Psychology. Princeton, NJ: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1960).The Process of Education. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. M., Thomas, J. C. & Malhorta, A. (1979). Clinical experimental analysis of design problem solving.Design Studies 1: 84–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices.Cognitive Science 5: 121–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R. & Farr, M. J. (1988).The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase, W. G. & Simon, H. A. (1973). The mind's eye in dress, in William G. Chase, ed.,Visual Information Processing (pp. 215–218). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clancey, W. J. (1984). Methodology for building an intelligent tutoring system, in W. Kintsch, P. G. Polson & J. R. Miller, eds.,Methods and Tactics in Cognitive Science. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clancey, W. J. & Letsigner, R. (1981). NEOMYCIN: Reconfiguring a rule based expert system for application to teaching.Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 829–835). Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, S. A. & Kahler, S. E. (1993). Shared mental models, team performance, and knowledge acquisition. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • deGroot, A. D. (1965).Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • deGroot, A. D. (1983). The range of automatic spreading activation in word priming.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22: 417–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagne, R. M. & Briggs, L. T. (1979).Principles of Instructional Design (2d ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehardt & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gitomer, D. H. (1988). Individual differences in technical troubleshooting.Human Performance 1(2): 111–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goel, V. & Pirolli, P. (1989). Designing within information-processing theory: The design problems space.AI Magazine 10(1): 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1976). Components of a theory of instruction: Toward a science of design.Review of Educational Research 46: 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1982). Instructional psychology: Past, present, and future.American Psychologist 37: 292–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1977). Process of understanding in problem solving, in R. Glaser, ed.,Cognitive Theory (Vol. 2, pp. 43–83). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., Korpi, M. K., Jackson, D. N. & Michalchik, V. S. (1990).Processes and Knowledge in Designing Instruction. ONR Technical Report, Stanford University.

  • Groen, J. G. & Patel, V. L. (1988). The relationship between comprehension and reasoning in medical expertise, in M. Chi, R. Glaser & M. Farr, eds.,The Nature of Expertise (pp. 287–310). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groen, G. J. & Patel, V. L. (1991). A view from medicine, in Mike U. Smith, ed.,Towards a Unified Theory of Problem Solving (pp. 35–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guidon, R. (1990). Designing the design process: Exploiting opportunistic thoughts.Human- Computer Interaction 5: 305–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guidon, R. & Curtis, B. (1988). Control of cognitive process during software design: What tools would support software designers?Proceedings of the CHI' 88 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 263–286). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferies, R., Turner, A. A., Polson, P. & Atwood, M. E. (1981). The processes involved in designing software, in J. R. Anderson, ed.,Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition (pp. 255–283). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H. & Reif, F. (1976). Analysis and teaching of a general skill for studying scientific text.Journal of Educational Psychology 68(4): 431–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., Li, Z. & Jones, M. K. (1990). First generation instructional design, second generation instructional design.Educational Technology 30(1,2).

  • Mitchell, A. A. (1987). The use of alternative knowledge acquisition procedures in the development of knowledge-based media planning system.International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 26: 399–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirolli, P. L. & Greeno, J. G. (1988). The problem space of instructional design, in J. Psotka, L. D. Massey & S. A. Mutter, eds.Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Lessons Learned. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, R. S., Gregory, M. R. & Minnois D. P. (1993). Tools and decision aids for training development in the U. S. Army.Instructional Science, Spring.

  • Perez, R. S. & Neiderman, E.C. (1992). Modelling the expert developer, in R. J. Seidel & P. R. Chatelier, eds.,Advanced Technologies Applied to Training Design (pp. 261–280). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. & Stein, R. S. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction, in C. M. Reigeluth, ed.,Instructional Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current States. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1991).Problem Solving in Instructional Design. Unpublished dissertation, Indiana University.

  • Scandura, J. M. (1977).Problem Solving: A Structural/Process Approach with Instructional Implications. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadbolt, N. & Wielinga, B. (1990). Knowledge based knowledge acquisition: The next generation of support tools, in B. Wielinga, J. Boose, B. Gaines, G. Schreiber & M. Van Somerau, eds.,Current Trends in Knowledge Acquisition. Washington, D. C.: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1981).The Sciences of the Artificial (2d ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. E. & Good, R. (1984). Problems solving and classical genetics: Successful versus unsuccessful performance.Journal of Research in Science Teaching 21: 895–912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. G., Blaise, M. L., Means, B., Greene, T. R. & Ahwesh, E. (1988). Informal reasoning an subject matter knowledge in the solving of economic problems by naive and novice individuals, in L. B. Resnick, ed.,Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essay in Honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 217–249). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y. & Frederiksen, J. R. (1985). QUEST: Qualitative understanding of electrical system troubleshooting.ACM SIGART Newsletter, pp. 34–37.

  • White, B. Y. & Frederiksen, J. R. (1986).Progressions of Qualitative Models as Foundations for Intelligent Learning Environments (BBN Report No. 6277). Cambridge, MA: BBN Laboratories.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y. & Frederiksen, J. R. (1987).Causal Model Progressions as a Foundation for Intelligent Learning Environments. (BBN Report No. 6279). Cambridge, MA: BBN Laboratories.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, R. L. & Hayes, W. L. (1975).Statistics: Probability, Inference, and Decision (2d ed.) (pp. 871–872). New York: HRW.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Perez, R.S., Fleming Johnson, J. & Emery, C.D. Instructional design expertise: A cognitive model of design. Instr Sci 23, 321–349 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00896877

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00896877

Keywords

Navigation