Instructional design for effective classroom Pedagogy of teaching
Main Article Content
Abstract
The study aims to examine the contribution of instructional design for effective classroom pedagogy of teaching among the respondents and identifies what makes instructional design that leads to effective classroom pedagogy of teaching among the respondents. The research employs the descriptive quantitative design because the method describes the variables and characteristics of the study. Purposive sampling is highlighted in the study. The study comprised Seventy (70) respondents only. Results show that learning process and strategy for effective pedagogy of teaching show to actively involve instruction that will lead students for better learning outcome, show to involve critical thinking, formation, analyzing inferences, and knowledge of the lesson, show to provide a phase of instructional design to effective teaching in applying, inferring, analyzing pedagogy and various learning experiences, show to advance technology of teaching to equip students with better learning, and show to rely on interactive instruction sharing and heavy discussion, role playing, peer learning, cooperative learning, simulation, and discussion. Findings show that there is a significant correlation on the contribution of instructional design for effective classroom pedagogy of teaching as observed among the respondents.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
References
L. L. D. Mallillin, “Different Domains in Learning and the Academic Performance of the Students,” J. Educ. Syst., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2020.
W. Srikongchan, S. Kaewkuekool, and S. Mejaleurn, “Backward Instructional Design based Learning Activities to Developing Students’ Creative Thinking with Lateral Thinking Technique,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 233–252, Apr. 2021.
F. Martin and A. D. Ritzhaupt, “Standards and competencies for instructional design and technology professionals,” in Design for Learning: Principles, Processes, and Praxis, J. K. McDonald and R. E. West, Eds. EdTech Books, 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin and J. B. Mallillin, “Competency skills and performance level of faculties in the higher education institution (HEI),” Eur. J. Educ. Stud., 2019.
R. Rasmitadila, W. Widyasari, T. Prasetyo, R. Rachmadtullah, A. Samsudin, and R. R. Aliyyah, “General Teachers’ Experience of The Brain’s Natural Learning Systems-Based Instructional Approach in Inclusive Classroom,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 95–116, Jul. 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin, J. C. Cabaluna, R. D. Laurel, P. A. C. Arroyo, T. M. Señoron Jr, and J. B. Mallillin, “structural domain of learning and teaching strategies in the academic performance of students,” Eur. J. Educ. Stud., vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 187–209, Aug. 2021.
P. S. Muljana and T. Luo, “Utilizing learning analytics in course design: voices from instructional designers in higher education,” J. Comput. High. Educ., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 206–234, Apr. 2021.
L. Fries, J. Y. Son, K. B. Givvin, and J. W. Stigler, “Practicing Connections: A Framework to Guide Instructional Design for Developing Understanding in Complex Domains,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 739–762, Jun. 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin, “Teacher theory and adaptable model: an application to teaching profession,” Eur. J. Educ. Stud., vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 299–311, Nov. 2021.
B. Cukurbasi and M. Kiyici, “Instructional design and instructional effectiveness in virtual classrooms: Research trends and challenges,” Australas. J. Educ. Technol., pp. 156–174, Jul. 2021.
J. Cooper and I. Lavie, “Bridging incommensurable discourses – A commognitive look at instructional design in the zone of proximal development,” J. Math. Behav., vol. 61, p. 100822, Mar. 2021.
J. K. McDonald and S. C. Yanchar, “Towards a view of originary theory in instructional design,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 633–651, Apr. 2020.
J. Sweller, “The Role of Evolutionary Psychology in Our Understanding of Human Cognition: Consequences for Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Procedures,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., pp. 1–13, Nov. 2021.
L. J. Duckett, “Quantitative Research Excellence: Study Design and Reliable and Valid Measurement of Variables,” J. Hum. Lact., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 456–463, Aug. 2021.
S. Denieffe, “Commentary: Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples,” J. Res. Nurs., vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 662–663, Dec. 2020.
K. R. Rolf and T. A. Slocum, “Features of Direct Instruction: Interactive Lessons,” Behav. Anal. Pract., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 793–801, Sep. 2021.
C. Dignath and M. V. J. Veenman, “The Role of Direct Strategy Instruction and Indirect Activation of Self-Regulated Learning—Evidence from Classroom Observation Studies,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 489–533, Jun. 2021.
J. Fromm, J. Radianti, C. Wehking, S. Stieglitz, T. A. Majchrzak, and J. vom Brocke, “More than experience? - On the unique opportunities of virtual reality to afford a holistic experiential learning cycle,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 50, p. 100804, Jun. 2021.
H. S. Daniyarovna, K. D. Istamovich, and U. Ilhom, “The Contents of Students’ Independent Education and Methods of Implementation,” Psychol. Educ. J., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 1445–1456, 2021.
F. Tuma, “The use of educational technology for interactive teaching in lectures,” Ann. Med. Surg., vol. 62, pp. 231–235, Feb. 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin, “Teaching and learning intervention in the educational setting: adapting the teacher theory model,” Int. J. Educ. Innov. Res., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 99–121, Jul. 2022.
M. Z. Haron, M. M. M. Zalli, M. K. Othman, and M. I. Awang, “Examining the teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and learning facilities towards teaching quality,” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1, Mar. 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin, L. C. Mendoza, J. B. Mallillin, R. C. Felix, and I. C. Lipayon, “Implementation and readiness of online learning pedagogy: A transition to COVID 19 pandemic,” Eur. J. Open Educ. E-learning Stud., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 71–90, Sep. 2020.
L. L. D. Mallillin, E. A. Carag, J. B. Mallillin, and R. D. Laurel, “Integration of knowledge through online classes in the learning enhancement of students,” Eur. J. Open Educ. E-learning Stud., vol. 5, no. 1, Jun. 2020.
J. Sherman, J. Richardson, and J. Vedora, “The Use of Behavioral Skills Training to Teach Components of Direct Instruction,” Behav. Anal. Pract., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1085–1091, Dec. 2021.
T. A. Slocum and K. R. Rolf, “Features of Direct Instruction: Content Analysis,” Behav. Anal. Pract., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 775–784, Sep. 2021.
L. Huang and S. P. Lajoie, “Process analysis of teachers’ self-regulated learning patterns in technological pedagogical content knowledge development,” Comput. Educ., vol. 166, p. 104169, Jun. 2021.
J. Zhang, Z. Chen, J. Ma, and Z. Liu, “Investigating the Influencing Factors of Teachers’ Information and Communications Technology-Integrated Teaching Behaviors toward ‘Learner-Centered’ Reform Using Structural Equation Modeling,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 22, p. 12614, Nov. 2021.
M. K. Khalil and I. A. Elkhider, “Applying learning theories and instructional design models for effective instruction,” Adv. Physiol. Educ., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 147–156, Jun. 2016.
P. Donovan and A. Hood, “Experiential Learning in the Large Classroom Using Performative Pedagogy,” J. Manag. Educ., vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 344–359, Jun. 2021.
L. L. D. Mallillin, “Feedback on the Performance of Students in their Information Technology Module,” London J. Res. Comput. Sci. Technol., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 13–20, 2019.
T. J. Phillips and L. L. Snodgrass, “Examining Individualism in College Student Retention Theory and Practice,” J. Coll. Orientation, Transition, Retent., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1–15, Apr. 2021.
E. Doğantan, “An interactive instruction model design with role play technique in distance education: A case study in open education system,” J. Hosp. Leis. Sport Tour. Educ., vol. 27, p. 100268, Nov. 2020.
Y. Li, V. Garza, A. Keicher, and V. Popov, “Predicting High School Teacher Use of Technology: Pedagogical Beliefs, Technological Beliefs and Attitudes, and Teacher Training,” Technol. Knowl. Learn., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 501–518, Sep. 2019.