ArticlePublisher preview available

Instructional designer perspectives on the pursuit of quality in online course design

DOI:10.1007/s12528-023-09388-9
Authors:
Jason Mcdonald at Brigham Young University - Provo Main Campus
Jason Mcdonald
Stephen C. Yanchar at Brigham Young University - Provo Main Campus
Stephen C. Yanchar
Read publisher preview
Download citation
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

In this qualitative study we investigated the experiences of instructional designers as they sought to build quality into online courses. Through semi-structured interviews, we explored what enabled and hindered their pursuit of quality, how they experienced their efforts in this regard, what mattered to them, and complexities that accompanied this pursuit. Our analysis of participant experiences suggested four themes: (1) connections between quality and designers’ ability to act autonomously; (2) connections between quality and collaborative, team-based relationships; (3) ambivalence due to tensions between autonomy and collaboration; and (4) ways of coping with limits on autonomy and collaboration. We conclude our report with implications for instructional design practice, suggesting that the pursuit of quality often requires creative work arounds and is informed by affective judgements that lie beyond the purview of traditional instructional design processes.
  • A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
  • Learn more
Preview content only
Content available from Journal of Computing in Higher Education
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Journal of Computing in Higher Education
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09388-9
1 3
Instructional designer perspectives onthepursuit
ofquality inonline course design
JasonK.McDonald1 · StephenC.Yanchar2
Accepted: 1 September 2023
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
2023
Abstract
In this qualitative study we investigated the experiences of instructional designers
as they sought to build quality into online courses. Through semi-structured inter-
views, we explored what enabled and hindered their pursuit of quality, how they
experienced their efforts in this regard, what mattered to them, and complexities that
accompanied this pursuit. Our analysis of participant experiences suggested four
themes: (1) connections between quality and designers’ ability to act autonomously;
(2) connections between quality and collaborative, team-based relationships; (3)
ambivalence due to tensions between autonomy and collaboration; and (4) ways
of coping with limits on autonomy and collaboration. We conclude our report with
implications for instructional design practice, suggesting that the pursuit of quality
often requires creative work arounds and is informed by affective judgements that lie
beyond the purview of traditional instructional design processes.
Keywords Instructional design· Online course quality· Higher education·
Autonomy· Collaboration· Qualitative interviews
Introduction
Quality is a persistent, recurring issue in the literature of online course design.
Indeed, it is likely that, in some fashion, quality is one of the field’s central con-
cerns: what it is (Martin & Bolliger, 2022), what brings it about (Chao etal., 2010;
Lenert & Janes, 2017), what diminishes it (Drysdale, 2019), how it can be recog-
nized or measured (Esfijani, 2018; Zimmerman etal., 2020), and so on. Our interest
* Jason K. McDonald
jason@byu.edu
Stephen C. Yanchar
stephen_yanchar@byu.edu
1 Brigham Young University, 150-E MCKB, Provo, UT84602, USA
2 Brigham Young University, 150-D MCKB, Provo, UT84602, USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Reflective Design in Action: A Collaborative Autoethnography of Faculty Learning Design
Article
Full-text available
  • Nov 2021
Research on how university faculty design courses has been limited and marked by modest detail on faculty design processes. Addressing this gap, seven faculty members supported by an educational developer at a teaching-intensive university used collaborative autoethnography (CAE) to explain how university faculty engage in reflective, iterative approaches to learning design. Collaborative analysis and interpretation of systematically collected data drawn from individual experiences in learning design reveal how faculty use reflection as a tool in learning design to recognize problems, devise solutions and constructively process emotions. Through reflection, faculty identify design solutions that are responsive to circumstances during course delivery, capture reasoning that informs design solutions for future course iterations and accurately gauge the appropriate timing of design changes based on factors such as scale and feasibility. This article offers detailed ethnographic evidence and new findings that enrich our understanding of claims made in previous interview-based studies of faculty design.
View
Evaluating Online Course Quality: A Study on Implementation of Course Quality Standards
Article
Full-text available
  • Dec 2020
This study examined the relationship of intentional faculty professional development, intentional online course design, and informal course reviews to the results of official interinstitutional peer review within higher education institutions. Quality MattersTM (QM) provided the setting for this exploration of the relationship of three independent variables at the course level at institutions that have voluntarily implemented QM online learning quality assurance tools and processes. Data for this study were extracted from a larger statistical project conducted regularly by QM, which included the results of 5,436 online course reviews completed between September 2014 and May 2020 at 360 institutions. These courses were assessed for meeting quality standards in structured, interinstitutional, reviews, conducted by three faculty peer reviewers. QM provided the setting and data for this study; however, the study was not about QM. Instead, it was about exploring the relationships of variables within an institution’s control in the quest for benchmarking and improving online learning. Having and disseminating online course quality standards does not ensure implementation of those standards and quality assurance processes. This observational study provides a better understanding of how the implementation of those standards and quality assurance processes might impact outcomes.
View
Question Asking and the Common Good: A Hermeneutic Investigation of Student Questioning in Moral Configurations of Classroom Practice
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2019
This qualitative study (based on a hermeneutic moral-realist interpretive frame (Yanchar & Slife, 2017)) explored question asking as it unfolded in the everyday practice of being a student in a graduate course on design thinking (with an emphasis on design in education). Findings are presented as four key tensions that occurred within the complex classroom setting under investigation: “theory and overlapping practices,” “convergence and divergence,” “participation and reticence,” and “give and take.” Overall, these thematized tensions point to a dynamic interplay between student agency and the common good of the class. These findings have significant implications for understanding student questioning experiences and the study of classroom interactions.
View
The Collaborative Mapping Model: Relationship-Centered Design for Higher Education
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2019
Instructional designers list one of their primary obstacles as collaborating with faculty (Intentional Futures, 2016). Additionally, instructional designers experience a high degree of role misperception and struggle to advocate for clear and defined roles (Drysdale, 2018). In order to address these challenges, I created the Collaborative Mapping Model (CMM), a model of instructional design for higher education instructional designers that puts relationship at the center of design and addresses issues of scale, quality, and empowerment. I first identified four primary roles of instructional designers in higher education by evaluating the industry standard models of instructional design, comparing their structure and usage for relevance to the consultative role designers assume in higher education. The collaborative designer role had no associated model of design, and led to the development of the model. Development was informed by several key theories, including authentic leadership theory (Kiersch & Byrne, 2015), shared leadership theory (Bolden, 2011), and appreciative inquiry (Kadi-Hanifi et al., 2014). After several years of implementation and refinement, I developed an action research study to determine the effectiveness of the model. I administered a mixed methods survey to a group of 50 faculty who had designed a course in partnership with an instructional designer through the CMM. Among other results, 92% of respondents (n=37) indicated an improvement in the quality of their courses and 73% (n=37) saved time by working with an instructional designer in the CMM. Key themes from the qualitative survey question included value and respect for the expertise of the instructional designer, a significant improvement to the online courses designed and developed through the CMM, and enthusiasm for continued collaboration with instructional designers. This study describes the development of the model, an overview of theoretical influences and processes, and the effectiveness of the Collaborative Mapping Model of instructional design. Keywords: instructional design, instructional design models, collaboration, faculty partnership, advocacy, leadership, course mapping, curriculum design, professional roles
View
Instructional Designers' Perceptions & Experiences of Collaborative Conflict with Faculty
Article
  • Feb 2022
The purpose of this qualitative research study was to investigate how instructional designers perceive and experience conflict in their collaborative work with faculty across higher education settings. Prior research studies have captured instructional designers’ perspectives on building and maintaining successful collaborations with faculty but have largely ignored the times when conflict arises with faculty. In an attempt to fill this knowledge gap, we conducted interviews of fourteen instructional design practitioners who had experienced various types of conflict with faculty at different higher education institutions. Our analysis of the data revealed participants characterized their perceptions of conflict with faculty in four ways with some subtleties in these perceptions. Additionally, instructional designers identified eight different types of conflict which consolidated into three major conflict themes: (1) Design & Development Collaborative Conflicts (2) Philosophical, Pedagogical & Autonomy Loss Conflicts (3) Communication & Scheduling Conflicts. In conclusion, we offer directions for future research and recommendations for instructional designers, faculty and administrators involved in the instructional design process.
View
View
Understanding Distinctions of Worth in the Practices of Instructional Design Teams
Article
  • May 2021
In this article we report our research into the concerns and other matters of significance for members of instructional design teams. Specifically we studied how members of a design team depicted the quality of their own motives while participating in team pursuits. This is a type of self-evaluation known as drawing distinctions of worth. Our research took the form of a case study, focusing on an instructional design team at a university in the United States. Based on interviews with team members and observations of their work, we developed an account of our research participant’s distinctions of worth organized around three themes: (a) distinctions of worth could guide their decision-making more than did the goals of the project; (b) competing distinctions of worth could be difficult for them to reconcile; and (c) their distinctions of worth could be accompanied by unanticipated costs. Overall, these themes reflect that distinctions of worth were a real aspect of our participants’ team involvement, and not merely their subjective responses to situational factors. This has implications for those managing teams or otherwise helping teams improve, which we discuss. We also discuss how research into instructional design teams that only focuses on external dynamics team members experience, and not on factors such as their distinctions of worth, cannot fully account for what it means for people to contribute towards team outcomes.
View
Cognitive load and online course quality: Insights from instructional designers in a higher education context
Article
  • Nov 2020
This multiple case study investigates instructional designers’ perceptions of online course quality, their use of cognitive load strategies when designing online courses, and whether utilization of these strategies contribute to online course quality. The participants of this study were instructional designers ( n = 5) who worked in various campus programs at a large Midwestern university. Data sources included pre‐interview survey, semi‐structured interview and sample course design documents. Employing a pattern matching technique, the results showed that instructional designers (a) define online course quality based on established standards and rubrics; (b) apply cognitive load strategies intuitively while designing online courses; and (c) consider CLT design strategies as an element contributing to course quality. The results also showed instructional designers’ use of cognitive load strategies mainly focused on reducing extraneous cognitive load. Implications for practice and research as well as directions for future research are discussed. Practitioner Notes What is already known about this topic Cognitive load theory (CLT) provides empirically tested strategies to manage cognitive load in different settings CLT strategies has a positive impact on student learning processes and outcomes When designing online courses, it is important for faculty to collaborate with instructional designers to manage cognitive load and improve online course quality There is a need to investigate instructional designers’ perceptions of online course quality and their use of CLT strategies when designing online courses What this paper adds Provides a deep understanding of instructional designers perspectives on online course quality, application of CLT strategies while designing online courses and how application of these strategies contribute to the online course quality Although instructional designers identify multiple CLT strategies from their work and perceive CLT strategies as an element contributing to course quality, they apply these strategies innately Implications for practice and/or policy Multiple stakeholders should be involved in determining online course quality Collaboration between faculty and instructional designers is essential to manage cognitive load and increase online course quality CLT and related theories should be emphasized in instructional design programs Future research should focus on how instructional designers integrate CLT strategies into the systematic instructional design process and instructional designers’ decision‐making process through think‐aloud and/or journaling efforts
View
The Utility of Design Thinking to Promote Systemic Instructional Design Practices in the Workplace
Article
  • Nov 2019
Designing within a system is ubiquitous to instructional design. In order to understand the systemic impact of design decisions within an organization, one must understand the interrelatedness of the objects within the system. Developing an understanding of context as it relates to the utility of instructional design solutions will position instructional designers to systemically influence the organization in a positive manner. This paper acknowledges the systemic challenges encountered by instructional designers in the workplace and discusses how design thinking can be leveraged with HPT strategies to assist the instructional designer with designing solutions that have a systemic impact on the organization. This paper also introduces a conceptual framework, grounded in general systems theory, that combines design thinking principles with instructional design practices to improve performance.
View
The influence of multimedia development knowledge and workplace pressures on the design decisions of the instructional designer
Article
  • Jul 2019
This study explored the interaction of multimedia production competencies of expert and novice instructional designers on the design decisions made during the instructional design process/workflow. This multiple measures study used qualitative survey instruments to access and measure the production competencies of participants, then a design aloud protocol to capture and measure the instructional design decision-making process for those same participants. A follow-on interview after the initial design aloud session was conducted in order to triangulate and confirm any trends or findings uncovered during the earlier design aloud session. Ultimately, the objective of this study was to provide some evidence that suggests whether certain production skills are influencing instructional design decision-making. Employer influence on the instructional designer’s decision-making was also explored. Results indicated that a substantial number of instructional designers (n = 30) who participated in this study were selecting media as a preliminary step in their workflow process, and were often then using analysis as a measure to confirm the early media selection. Expert instructional designers appeared to be less susceptible to the early media selection behavior, though not immune. Results indicate that one reason the expert instructional designers were less likely to adopt media as a preliminary instructional design step was that the experts conducted a more diverse set of analysis activities. Additionally, results indicated that instructional designers were often experiencing pressure to adopt media based on employer demands, and project constraints such as budget and time.
View