instructional_design:elaboration_theory
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
instructional_design:elaboration_theory [2011/08/24 13:29] jpetrovic [What is elaboration theory?] |
instructional_design:elaboration_theory [2023/06/19 18:03] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| ===== General ===== | ===== General ===== | ||
| - | Elaboration theory is one of the [[learning_paradigms:cognitivism|cognitivist models for instructional design]] proposed by [[http://www.indiana.edu/~syschang/decatur/bios/biographies.html|Charles Reigeluth]] and his associates in the late 1970s. It was based on the cognitive research findings available at the time and influenced by works of [[http://www.psych.nyu.edu/bruner/|Jerome Bruner]] (see: [[instructional_design:discovery learning]]) and [[http://www.davidausubel.org/|David Ausubel]] (see: [[learning_theories:assimilation theory]]). Very well accepted, elaboration theory was offering suggestions on how to **organize and sequence different types of instruction on macro level**.(([[http://www.springerlink.com/content/m9380ql6k1107801/|Reigeluth, Charles M. In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development 2, no. 3 : 8-15, 1979.]])) For organizing instructions on the micro level, Reigeluth suggested using [[http://mdavidmerrill.com/index.htm|Dave Merrill]]'s [[instructional_design:component display theory]]. | + | Elaboration theory is one of the [[learning_paradigms:cognitivism|cognitivist models for instructional design]] proposed by [[http://www.indiana.edu/~syschang/decatur/bios/biographies.html|Charles Reigeluth]] and his associates in the late 1970s. It was based on the cognitive research findings available at the time and influenced by works of [[http://www.psych.nyu.edu/bruner/|Jerome Bruner]] (see: [[instructional_design:discovery learning]]) and [[http://www.davidausubel.org/|David Ausubel]] (see: [[learning_theories:assimilation theory]])(([[http://tip.psychology.org/reigelut.html|Kearsley, Greg. Elaboration Theory (C. Reigeluth). The Theory Into Practice Database.]])). Very well accepted, elaboration theory was offering suggestions on how to **organize and sequence different types of instruction on macro level**.(([[http://www.springerlink.com/content/m9380ql6k1107801/|Reigeluth, Charles M. In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development 2, no. 3 : 8-15, 1979.]])) For organizing instructions on the micro level, Reigeluth suggested using [[http://mdavidmerrill.com/index.htm|Dave Merrill]]'s [[instructional_design:component display theory]]. |
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| The key principle of the elaboration theory is that the **content** being taught should be organized **starting from the simplest** and then increasing order of complexity and that learner has to **develop a concept** in which new ideas will be meaningful and well accepted. | The key principle of the elaboration theory is that the **content** being taught should be organized **starting from the simplest** and then increasing order of complexity and that learner has to **develop a concept** in which new ideas will be meaningful and well accepted. | ||
| - | In context of elaboration theory, Reigeluth distinguishes between domain expertise (the process of becoming an expert in the body of knowledge of a more theoretical discipline) and task expertise (the process of becoming an expert in the procedural knowledge of a discipline involving more practical tasks). In order to teach a student to become one of the two, elaboration theory suggests instruction should be organized in the following **eight strategies**(([[http://www.springerlink.com/content/m9380ql6k1107801/|Reigeluth, Charles M. In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development 2, no. 3 : 8-15, 1979.]] Cited by [[http://www.personal.psu.edu/wxh139/Elaborate.htm|Ho, Wenyi. Reigeluth’s Elaboration Theory.]])): | + | In context of elaboration theory, Reigeluth distinguishes between domain expertise (the process of becoming an expert in the body of knowledge of a more theoretical discipline) and task expertise (the process of becoming an expert in the procedural knowledge of a discipline involving more practical tasks). In order to teach a student to become one of the two, elaboration theory suggests instruction should be organized in the following **eight strategies**(([[http://www.springerlink.com/content/m9380ql6k1107801/|Reigeluth, Charles M. In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development 2, no. 3 : 8-15, 1979.]] Cited by [[http://www.personal.psu.edu/wxh139/Elaborate.htm|Ho, Wenyi. Reigeluth’s Elaboration Theory.]]))(([[http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED348040|Wilson, Brent, and Peggy Cole. A critical review of elaboration theory. Educational Technology Research and Development 40, no. 3: 63-79, September 1992.]])): |
| [[http://pjrichardson.com/edit5370/mod7.html|{{ :images:elaborationtheory.jpg|Elaboration theory graphical overview. Image borrowed from: http://pjrichardson.com/edit5370/mod7.html. Click on the picture to follow the link}}]] | [[http://pjrichardson.com/edit5370/mod7.html|{{ :images:elaborationtheory.jpg|Elaboration theory graphical overview. Image borrowed from: http://pjrichardson.com/edit5370/mod7.html. Click on the picture to follow the link}}]] | ||
| - | ^ 1. Structure organizing | | + | * **Structure organizing** can be conceptual (presenting objects, or ideas with certain common characteristics), procedural (presenting a set of actions in order to accomplish a goal) or theoretical (presents theoretical aspects, causes and effects). Selected organizing structure must reflect course's main focus. According to Reigeluth, every course holds one of this three to be more important than the other two. |
| - | | Structure organizing can be conceptual (presenting objects, or ideas with certain common characteristics), procedural (presenting a set of actions in order to accomplish a goal) or theoretical (presents theoretical aspects, causes and effects). Selected organizing structure must reflect course's main focus. According to Reigeluth, every course holds one of this three to be more important than the other two. | | + | * **Sequencing** content((Describes the order in which the information needs to be taught)) in increasing order of complexity. Course should be started with the most basic and more complex ones should be built on them. |
| - | ^ 2. Sequencing content | | + | * **Within-lesson sequencing** can regardless to the organizing structure be **topical** (topic is studied in depth before moving to the next one) or **spiral** (firstly all topics are briefly introduced before going into details about each of them). Sequencing content **within a lesson** with respect to the selected type of organizing structure should: |
| - | | Content should be sequenced in increasing order of complexity: a course should start with the most basic and more complex ones should be built on them. | | + | |
| - | ^ 3. Within-lesson sequencing | | + | |
| - | | Regardless to the organizing structure, within-lesson sequencing can be **topical** (topic is studied in depth before moving to the next one) or **spiral** (firstly all topics are briefly introduced before going into details about each of them). Sequencing content **within a lesson** with respect to the selected type of organizing structure should: | + | |
| * for theoretically organized instruction present ideas from **simple to complex**, | * for theoretically organized instruction present ideas from **simple to complex**, | ||
| * for procedures present steps in their **order of appearance**, and | * for procedures present steps in their **order of appearance**, and | ||
| - | * for conceptually organized instructions start from more familiar and general concepts. | | + | * for conceptually organized instructions start from more familiar and general concepts. |
| - | + | * **Summarizers** (content reviewers) presented as a learned rule followed by example and practice materials. | |
| - | ^ | + | |
| - | ^ | + | |
| - | ^ | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | * | + | |
| - | * | + | |
| - | * * **Summarizers** (content reviewers) presented as a learned rule followed by example and practice materials. | + | |
| * **Synthesizers** (diagrams, images or other) to enable easier meaningful integration and assimilation of new knowledge into existing knowledge. | * **Synthesizers** (diagrams, images or other) to enable easier meaningful integration and assimilation of new knowledge into existing knowledge. | ||
| * **Analogies** to enable easier relation of new knowledge to prior knowledge. | * **Analogies** to enable easier relation of new knowledge to prior knowledge. | ||
instructional_design/elaboration_theory.1314185376.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/06/19 17:49 (external edit)
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
