Component display theory: Difference between revisions
(using an external editor) |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
'''Component display theory''' (CDT) addresses the issue of learner control and the separation of instructional strategy from instructional content. | '''Component display theory''' (CDT) addresses the issue of learner control and the separation of instructional strategy from instructional content. | ||
{{quotation | Component Display Theory was an attempt to identify the components from which instructional strategies could be constructed. CDT describes instructional strategy in terms of strategy components: primary presentation forms (PPFs), secondary presentation forms ( | {{quotation | Component Display Theory was an attempt to identify the components from which instructional strategies could be constructed. CDT describes instructional strategy in terms of strategy components: primary presentation forms (PPFs), secondary presentation forms (SPFs), and interdisplay relationships (IDRs). CDT identifies strategy prescriptions for different kinds of learning outcomes. Each of these prescriptions identified a best case combination of PPFs, SPFs, and IDRs for a particular kind of learning outcome. CDT was analysis oriented, emphasizing the components of instructional strategies for different kinds of instructional goals.}} (Merril) | ||
== History == | == History == | ||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
* Component Display Theory. In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.) Educational Technology: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. [http://opencontent.org/docs/cdt.pdf PDF] retrieved 12:09, 4 July 2006 (MEST). | * Component Display Theory. In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.) Educational Technology: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. [http://opencontent.org/docs/cdt.pdf PDF] retrieved 12:09, 4 July 2006 (MEST). | ||
* Wiley David A. (2000). Learning object design and sequencing theory, PDF dissertation, Brigham Young University, [http:// | * Wiley David A. (2000). Learning object design and sequencing theory, PDF dissertation, Brigham Young University, [http://opencontent.org/docs/dissertation.pdf PDF] | ||
[[Category: Instructional design models]] | [[Category: Instructional design models]] |
Latest revision as of 12:31, 10 October 2008
Definition
Component display theory (CDT) addresses the issue of learner control and the separation of instructional strategy from instructional content.
“Component Display Theory was an attempt to identify the components from which instructional strategies could be constructed. CDT describes instructional strategy in terms of strategy components: primary presentation forms (PPFs), secondary presentation forms (SPFs), and interdisplay relationships (IDRs). CDT identifies strategy prescriptions for different kinds of learning outcomes. Each of these prescriptions identified a best case combination of PPFs, SPFs, and IDRs for a particular kind of learning outcome. CDT was analysis oriented, emphasizing the components of instructional strategies for different kinds of instructional goals.” (Merril)
History
This instructional design model was developped through the Time-shared Interactive Computer Controlled Information Telelvision (TICCIT) project in the seventies.
CDT had strong influence on other instructional theories, such as Reigeluth's elaboration theory and Merril's later Instructional transaction theory (ITT)
References
- Merrill, M.D, Instructional Transaction Theory (ITT): Instructional Design Based on Knowledge Objects, Instructional Technology Forum (1997). HTML
- Merrill, M.D. (1983). Component display theory. In C. Reigeluth (ed.), Instructional design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
- Merrill, M. D. (1994). Instructional Design Theory. in M. David Merrill, David G. Twitchell (Ed.). Educational Technology Publications
- Component Display Theory. In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.) Educational Technology: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. PDF retrieved 12:09, 4 July 2006 (MEST).
- Wiley David A. (2000). Learning object design and sequencing theory, PDF dissertation, Brigham Young University, PDF