Abstract
As eLearning becomes an increasingly common strategy to minimize instructional disruptions caused by illness, weather, professional development, and other planned and unplanned events, teachers need to gain the knowledge and skills necessary to design and facilitate these non-traditional learning experiences. Informed by survey and interview data, we developed three learning modules designed to assist PK-12 teachers in preparing, planning, and facilitating eLearning experiences. In describing this design process, we focus this case on design judgments, described here as the deliberate and unconscious thinking processes experienced by designers in the design and development of learning experiences. Through this experience, we found that design judgments occur constantly throughout the design process and manifest themselves in non-linear and sometimes unpredictable ways. With this focus on design judgments, we aim to provide a view of instructional design that can sensitize designers to the complexities of authentic design experience.





Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Boling, E., Alangari, H., Hajdu, I., Guo, M., Gyabak, K., Khlaif, Z., … Tomita, K. (2017). Core judgments of instructional designers in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 30(3), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq
Demiral-Uzan, M. (2017). The development of design judgment in instruction design students during a semester in their graduate program (Publication No. 10690456) Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Digital Learning Collaborative. (2019). eLearning days: A scan of policy and guidance. https://www.digitallearningcollab.com. Accessed 5 April 2021
Dunne, J. (1999). Professional judgment and the predicaments of practice. European Journal of Marketing, 33(7/8), 707–720. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569910274339
Ertmer, P. A., York, C. S., & Gedik, N. (2009). Learning from the pros: How experienced designers translate instructional design models into practice. Educational Technology, January-Fe, 19–26.
Göksu, I., Özcan, K. V., Çakir, R., & Göktas, Y. (2017). Content analysis of research trends in instructional design models: 1999–2014. Journal of Learning Design, 10(2), 85–109.
Gray, C. M., & Boling, E. (2018). Designers’ articulation and activation of instrumental design judgements in cross-cultural user research. CoDesign, 14(2), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2017.1393546
Gray, C. M., Dagli, C., Demiral-Uzan, M., Ergulec, V. T., Altuwaijri, A. A., Gyabak, K., … Boling, E. (2015). Judgment and instructional design: How ID practitioners work in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq
Gray, L., & Lewis, L. (2020). Teachers’ use of technology for school and homework assignments: 2018–19 (NCES 2020–048). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved June 23, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020048.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2021
Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F., Barmer, A., & Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020–144). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved June 23, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020144.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2021
Indiana Department of Education. (2020). eLearning day program. https://www.doe.in.gov/eLearning/eLearning-day-program. Accessed 5 April 2021
Kirschner, P., Carr, C., van Merrienboer, J., & Sloep, P. (2002). How expert designers design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 15(4), 86–104.
Koehler, A. A., & Farmer, T. (2020). Preparing for eLearning using digital learning plans. In R. E. Ferdig, E. Baumgartner, R. Hartshorne, R. Kaplan-Rakowski, & C. Mouza (Eds.), Teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Stories from the field (pp. 47-53). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/216903/
Korkmaz, N., & Boling, E. (2014). Development of design judgment in instructional design: Perspectives from instructors, students, and instructional designers. In Design in Educational Technology: Design Thinking, Design Process, and the Design Studio (pp. 161–184). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00927-8
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.
Nelson, H. G. & Stolterman, E. (2014). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world. The MIT Press.
Parsons, P., Gray, C. M., Baigelenov, A., & Carr, I. (2020). Design judgment in data visualization practice. IEEE Visualization Conference (VIS), USA, 176-180. https://doi.org/10.1109/VIS47514.2020.00042
Smith, K. M., & Boling, E. (2009). What do we make of design? Design as a concept in educational technology. Educational Technology, 49(4), 3–17. Retrieved from https://about.jstor.org/terms. Accessed 5 April 2021
U.S. Department of Education. (2012). National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d12/. Accessed 5 April 2021
Zhu, M., Basdogan, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). A case study of the design practices and judgments of novice instructional designers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/7829
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Farmer, T., Koehler, A. Design Judgments in the Creation of eLearning Modules. J Form Des Learn 6, 1–12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00063-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00063-3