Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Teachers as designers of technology enhanced learning

  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While the benefits of teacher involvement in designing technology enhanced learning are acknowledged in the literature, far less is known about shaping that involvement to yield those benefits. Research is needed to understand how teachers learn through design; how teacher design activities may be supported; and how teacher involvement in design in various ways impacts the quality of the artifacts created, their implementation, and ultimately, student learning. Existing conceptual foundations for teacher design work are urgently in need of bolstering, and will definitely play a critical role in the future of instructional science. This special issue presents the work of a large collaborative group of researchers, which, since 2012, has explored divergence and convergence among multiple research projects involving teachers as designers of technology enhanced learning (TaD of TEL), and has endeavored to extend existing knowledge to strengthen TaD of TEL as a field of research.

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
$34.99 /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 excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & I. van Merriénboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 55–68). Oxford: Pregamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschman, F., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2014). Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 393–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners (pp. 229–270)., Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carl, A. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into practice (3rd ed.). Kenwyn, RSA: Juta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran, T., & Silander, M. (2009). Instruction in high schools: The evidence and the challenge. The Future of Children, 19(1), 157–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. New York: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cviko, A., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2014a). Teachers as co-designers of a technology-rich learning activities for emergent literacy. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2014.953197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cviko, A., McKenney, S., & Voogt, J. (2014b). Teacher roles in designing technology-rich learning activities for early literacy. Computers & Education, 72, 68–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., Beyer, C., Forbes, C. T., & Stevens, S. (2011). Understanding pedagogical design capacity through teachers’ narratives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 797–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Varma, K. (2008). Supporting teachers in productive adaptation. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, M. Koppal, & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education: Implications for curriculum, instruction, and policy (pp. 94–122). N.Y.: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Koster, S., Kuiper, E., & Volman, M. (2012). Concept-guided development of ICT use in ‘traditional’ and ‘innovative’ primary schools: what types of ICT use do schools develop? Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 28(5), 454–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and Information Technology, 21(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., Stepich, D., Flanagan, F., Kocaman-Karoglu, A., Reiner, C., Reyes, L., et al. (2009). Impact of guidance on the problem-solving efforts of instructional design novices. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21, 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., Stepich, D., York, C., Stickman, A., Wu, X., Zurek, S., & Goktas, Y. (2008). How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21, 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerard, L. F., Spitulnik, M., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Teacher use of evidence to customize inquiry science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1037–1063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerard, L. F., Varma, K., Corliss, S. B., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 408–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., & Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2008). Curriculum materials: Scaffolds for new teacher learning? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 2014–2026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harel, I. E., & Papert, S. E. (1991). Constructionism. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huizinga, T., Handelzalts, A., Nieveen, N., & Voogt, J. (2014). Teacher involvement in curriculum design: Need for support to enhance teachers’ design expertise. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 33–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafyulilo, A. C. (2013). Collaborative design in teams to develop science and mathematics teachers’technology integration knowledge and skills. Doctoral Thesis, University of Twente, Enschede.

  • Kali, Y., Markauskaite, L., Goodyear, P., & Ward, M-H. (2011). Bridging multiple expertise in collaborative design for technology-enhanced learning. Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) conference (pp. 831–835). New York: ISLS.

  • Kali, Y., & Ronen-Fuhrmann, T. (2011). Teaching to design educational technologies. The International Journal of Learning Technology (IJLT), 6(1), 4–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Crismond, P. J., Fasse, D., Gray, B., Holbrook, J., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design (tm) into practice. The journal of the learning sciences, 12(4), 495–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007). Teachers’ perspectives on innovations: Implications for educational design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Könings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). Participatory instructional redesign by students and teachers in secondary education: Effects on perceptions of instruction. Instructional Science, 39, 737–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S. (2005). Technology for curriculum and teacher development: Software to help educators learn while designing teacher guides. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2), 167–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nihuka, K. A., & Voogt, J. (2012). Collaborative e-learning course design: Impacts on instructors. Australiasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 232–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Designing formative assessment software with teachers: An analysis of the co-design process. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(3), 315–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagy, O., McKenney, S. & Kali, Y. (2012). Teachers as designers of technology enhanced learning. Symposium presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. 16–20, April.

  • Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal education in a knowledge society, 97, 67–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., Almekinders, M., van den Akker, J., & Moonen, B. (2005). A blended in-service arrangement for classroom technology integration: impacts on teachers and students. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 523–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., McKenney, S., & Kali, Y., Breleux, A., Cober, R., Eylon, B-S., Itow, R., Könings, K., Laferrière, T., Linn, M. C., Markauskaite, L., Matuk, C., Reeve, R., Sagy, O., Slotta, J., So, H-J., Svihla, V. & Tan, E., (2014). Teachers as designers. Presentation during an invited session. In J. L. Polman, E. A. Kyza, D. K. O’Neill, I. Tabak, W. R. Penuel, A. S. Jurow, K. O’Connor, T. Lee, & L. D’Amico (Eds.) Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2014 (vol 1, p. 14). Boulder, CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Yael Kali, Susan McKenney & Ornit Sagy

  2. Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands

    Susan McKenney

  3. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Susan McKenney

Authors
  1. Yael Kali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan McKenney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ornit Sagy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yael Kali.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kali, Y., McKenney, S. & Sagy, O. Teachers as designers of technology enhanced learning. Instr Sci 43, 173–179 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9343-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9343-4

Keywords