Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions

  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Educational technology seems to be suffering from an identity crisis. Many exciting things are happening in the field, but increasingly we educational technologists find ourselves on the sidelines in our own ballgame. People from other disciplines are taking an interest in educational technology, but they show little interest in our knowledge base (often even little awareness that it exists!) and little interest in our professional organizations and publications. Why is this happening? What can we do about it? To what extent might our mindset be the problem? What new directions do we need to pursue to improve the health and value of our field? These are the central issues which this article discusses.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1985).Computer-based instruction: Methods and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978).Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banathy, B. H. (1988). Systems inquiry in education.Systems Practice, 1, 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beissner, K., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1989, February).Course sequencing with multiple strands using the elaboration theory. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (1988, November).Towards a design science of education. Paper presented at a NATO workshop, Milton Keynes, England. Also in E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer Verlag (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). A cognitive theory of inquiry teaching. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985).The systematic design of instruction (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsey, L., & Olson, J. (1989, February).Midlevel instructional strategies. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Elsom-Cook, M. (1988, November).Guided discovery tutoring. Paper presented at a NATO workshop, Milton Keynes, England. Also in E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer Verlag (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, D. (1988, November).Advanced technology in the teaching of mathematics and science. Paper presented at a NATO workshop, Milton Keynes, England. Also in E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer Verlag (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M. (1985).The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldfried, M. R. (1980). Toward the delineation of therapeutic change principles.American Psychologist, 35, 991–999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational design.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. L., & Briggs, L. J. (1986).The affective and cognitive domains: Integration for instruction and research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCalla, G. (1988, November).ITS: Navigating the rocky road to success. Paper presented at a NATO workshop, Milton Keynes, England. Also in E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer Verlag (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1983). Component display theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1989, February).Knowledge engineering an instructional design expert system. Workshop presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Merrill, M. D., Reigeluth, C. M., & Faust, G. W. (1979). The instructional quality profile: A curriculum evaluation and design tool. In H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.),Procedures for instructional systems development. New York: Academic Press, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, P. F. (1976). Task analysis—an information processing approach.NSPI Journal, 15(2), 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, P. F. (1987). Job and task analysis. In R. M. Gagné (Ed.),Instructional technology: Foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983a). Instructional design: What is it? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.). (1983b).Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983c). The elaboration theory of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1989a, February).A model of instruction for understanding. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1989b, February).Sequencing and integrating cognitive strategies with subject-matter content. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1989c, February).Prescriptions for designing a theoretical elaboration sequence. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Reigeluth, C. M., & Curtis, R. V. (1987). Learning situations and instructional models. In R. M. Gagné (Ed.),Instructional technology: Foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M., & Schwartz, E. (1988, Autumn). A prescriptive theory for the design of computer-based educational simulations.Journal of Computer-based Instructional Systems, 15(4).

  • Reiser, B. (1988, November).Problem solving and explanation in ITS. Paper presented at a NATO workshop, Milton Keynes, England. Also in E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.),New directions in educational technology. New York: Springer Verlag (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roma, K. (1989, February).Formative-evaluation research on the instructional model for understanding. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, TX.

  • Romiszowski, A. (1981).Designing instructional systems. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. (1984).Producing instructional systems. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. (1988). Personal communication.

  • Simon, H. A. (1969).Sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (1985, February). Recognizing research opportunities.Performance & Instruction Journal, 9–12.

  • Snelbecker, G. E. (1983).Learning theory, instructional theory, and psychoeducational design. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the School of Education, Indiana University, 47405, Bloomington, IN

    Charles M. Reigeluth

Authors
  1. Charles M. Reigeluth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reigeluth, C.M. Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions. ETR&D 37, 67–80 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299047

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299047

Keywords

Search

Navigation