Presented at AERA'18. Abstract: Instructional design as a practice and set of knowledge has long claimed to exist at a level “beyond discipline”—where the principles that designers derive from instructional theory and learning theory are in certain ways “content-agnostic.” This has led to an understanding of instructional design practice that privileges theoretical abstractions of instructional design activities over what are often thought of as “selection of a model” or “modifications to the model.” In this proposal, we rely upon a case study to illustrate these tensions and facilitate a conversation about the limitations of current ID models and practices. In the case, we describe the interactions among instructors and program designers in an experimental undergraduate transdisciplinary degree program across multiple years of course and program development, productively complicating traditional notions of ID practice as model-directed and model-driven. Through this case, we identify multiple tensions in designing across disciplines or in discipline-agnostic ways, including multiple instances where traditional ID guidance or knowledge is currently entirely lacking or insufficient. We conclude with opportunities for inculcating a more expansive notion of design in instructional design and technology to meet the growing need of designing inter/trans-disciplinary educational experiences.

1. COLIN M. GRAY, MARISA E. EXTER, IRYNA ASHBY, & DEENA VARNER
PURDUE UNIVERSITY
BREAKING THE MODEL,
BREAKING THE "RULES"
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN IN A TRANSDISCIPLINARY
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

2. TEXT
TECHNOCENTRISM

3. TECHNOCENTRISM
SOCIO-CULTURAL COMPLEXITY

4. TECHNOCENTRISM
SOCIO-CULTURAL COMPLEXITY
EMPATHY & CARE
HUMANISTIC ENGINEERING
}

5. SOCIO-CULTURAL COMPLEXITY
EMPATHY & CARE
HUMANISTIC ENGINEERING
}REQUIRES THE
TAKING ON OF
MULTIPLE
PERSPECTIVES

6. HOW DO YOU PRACTICE ID
WITHOUT “CONTENT”?

7. HOW DO YOU PRACTICE ID
WITHOUT “CONTENT”?
HOW DO YOU BUILD STUDENTS’
ABILITIES TO BRIDGE DISCIPLINES
AND CREATE NEW ONES?

8. “We refer here to the unarticulated and unexamined means by
which eclectic practices unfold in design work; or stated differently,
we are concerned that merely claiming one’s practices to be
eclectic, and assuming that this admission satisfactorily clarifies
one’s modus operandi in the design process, obscures
fundamental issues regarding the nature of one’s design decisions
in a given situation and masks—often unintentionally—the values,
assumptions, and judgments that guide such choices…”
(Yanchar & Gabbitas, 2011, p. 385)
ECLECTICISM

9. UNRAVELING
DESIGN THEORY
DESIGN METHOD
DESIGN PROCESS
DESCRIPTIVE
PREDICTIVE
PRESCRIPTIVE
GENERATIVE
REQUIRES ATTENDING TO THE DESIGNER’S JUDGMENT
(E.G., HOLT, 1997; GRAY ET AL., 2015; NELSON & STOLTERMAN, 2012)

10. TRANSDISCIPLINARY
UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM
TECHNICAL FOCUS “HUMANITIES” FOCUS
STUDIO + SEMINAR PEDAGOGIES
CASE STUDY CONTEXT

11. TRANSDISCIPLINARY
UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM
TECHNICAL FOCUS “HUMANITIES” FOCUS
STUDIO + SEMINAR PEDAGOGIES
FALL
2014
SPRING
2015
FALL
2015
SPRING
2016
FALL
2016
SPRING
2017
CASE STUDY CONTEXT

12. TRANSDISCIPLINARY MINDSET
DISCIPLINES
COMPETENCIES
DISCIPLINE AS MATERIAL WITH WHICH TO THINK
(EPISTEMOLOGICAL LENSES). MULTIPLE COURSES
TAKEN WITHIN EACH FOCUS AREA, WITH BROAD
DISCIPLINARY EXPOSURE IN STUDIO.
COMPETENCY TO RECOGNIZE SKILLS AND
KNOWLEDGE THAT CAN TRANSFER ACROSS
DISCIPLINES IN SPECIFIED WAYS
TRANSDISCIPLINARITY TO RECOGNIZE SPACE ABOVE,
BETWEEN, AND THROUGH DISCIPLINES THAT INFORM
SPECIFIC ACTIONS (I.E., COMPETENCIES)
SCAFFOLDING
TRANSDISCIPLINARY
THINKING AND ACTING

13. Privileging—Colonizing
Designing for Content—
Designing for Experience
Knowledge/Skills/Abilities—
Ways of Knowing

14. Privileging—Colonizing
▸ Role of signature pedagogies (e.g., Shulman, 2005)
▸ Presence of competing and multiple epistemologies and
ontologies that are rooted in disciplines
▸ Including without marginalizing or universalizing

15. Designing for Content—
Designing for Experience

16. SYSTEMS THINKING
EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION
2
3
DESIGN THINKING1
Links knowledge from
multiple disciplines to
analyze & solve a problem
Aesthetic
engagement
Unstructured
problem solving
D
D
D
E
E
E
P
P
P
Managed & iterative
design with reflective
design thinking
D
E
P
1.4 1.5
1.6
1.7
Problem framing
& research
Idea
fluency
Design options
assessment
D
D
D
E
E
E
P
P
P
1.1
1.2
1.3
™ 1 of 3 at Emerging™ 2 of 3 at Proficient
™ D : 1.1—1.3 at D
™ E : two at E , one at D
™ P : two at P , one at E
Ability to see
holistically
D
E
P
2.4
D
E
P
Ability to see and
understand complexity
2.5
D
E
P
Ability to communicate
across disciplines
2.6
D
E
PAbility to take advantage of
a broad range of concepts,
principles, models, [...]
2.7
Ability to define the
“universe” appropriately
D
E
P
2.1
Ability to define the overall
system appropriately
D
E
P
2.2
Ability to see relationship
D
E
P
2.3
Active
listening
D
E
P
3.4
Information
literacy
D
E
P
3.6
Written
communication
D
E
P
3.1
Audiovisual communication
D
E
P
3.3
Reading
D
E
P
3.5
Oral
communication
D
E
P
3.2
ENVISION & EXECUTE INDEPENDENTLY4
Lifelong
learning
D
E
P
4.1
Ensuring proper time
management
D
E
P
4.2
Entrepreneurship
D
E
P
4.3
SOCIAL INTERACTION & TEAMWORK5
D
E
P
Collaborate in
interdisciplinary teams
5.6
Teamwork
D
E
P
5.1
Individual Contribution
D
E
5.2
Working with clients and
users
D
E
P
5.4
INNOVATION & CREATIVITY7
Taking risks
D
E
P
7.4
Embracing
contradictions
D
E
P
7.5
Creative
thinking
D
E
P
7.1
Innovative
thinking
D
E
P
7.2
Integrative thinking
D
E
P
7.3
ETHICAL REASONING6
Ethical awareness
(developing a global
perspective)
D
E
P
6.1
Ethical analysis and
reflection (moral reasoning)
D
E
P
6.2
Ethical implementation
(recognize different
value systems)
D
E
P
6.3
™ 1 of 2 at Proficient ™ 1 of 3 at Proficient
D
E
P
Give, receive, and
act on critique
5.5
D
E
P
Leadership
5.7
D
E
P
Mentoring of team and
team members
5.8
™ 1 of 3 at Emerging™ 3 of 4 at Proficient
Working with culturally
diverse teams
D
E
P
5.3
™ D : 7.2—7.5 at D
™ E : three at E , one at D
™ P : three at P , one at E
continued on back
Knowledge/Skills/Abilities—
Ways of Knowing

17. ID PRACTICE ORIENTED TOWARDS
EXPERIENCES AND VALUES,
RATHER THAN CONTENT

18. THANK YOU
COLIN M. GRAY
colingray.me
gray42@purdue.edu