Editors' Note High-Tech Instructional Development Theme Issue

Years ago, Lumsdaine (1964) showed how both physical and psychological science relate to educational technology. Advances in both sciences often occur independently, he argued, and the educational technologist's task is to develop programs based on psychological science for delivery on hardware developed from the application of physical science. The predominant teaching devices then were film, television, and teaching machines, and the psychology guiding program design was largely behavioral. Today the new technologies are microcomputers, interactive video, and compact discs, and the psychology guiding design is mainly cognitive. At the time of Lumsdaine's article, there was much excitement about the prospect of using then-developing technologies to apply newly discovered behavioral learning principles. Now there is excitement about using emerging interactive, multi-media environments to apply learning principles based on knowledge and information processing. When Lumsdaine's article appeared, the application of behavioral psychology's learning principles was through programmed instruction. Now artificial intelligence and hypermedia are emerging as the main mechanisms for realizing instructional designs that are cognitively based. A short time after Lumsdaine's article appeared, however, Hooper (1969) diagnosed w h y the new advances in educational technology at that time were failing to penetrate education. Exclusion of technologists from the inner circles of educational decision making and the overselling of technology ETR&D, VoL 37. No. 3, pp. 61-62 ISSN 1042-1629

were identified as two of the causes. Rereading the Lumsdaine and Hooper articles today gives one a sense of d~ja vu. Today's new technologies may indeed engender changes in the way learning and instruction are viewed, but whether they will fundamentally alter education is another story. That is why most of the articles in this issue's development section on "high-tech ID" are so cautiously optimistic. Articles are sequenced so that specific issues are presented before more general ones. Richards discusses expert systems and analyzes some of the misconceptions and false expectations developers may have about them. Park and Seidel outline the status of intelligent computer-assisted instruction, pointing out current shortcomings. Nelson describes AI knowledge representation and acquisition techniques useful for developing instruction that can take advantage of the rich information environments new technology provides. Ullmer suggests some of the subtle affects new technology may have on the instructional development enterprise, arguing that conceptualizations of ID as the application of empirically verified design rules may be obsolete. This issue's high-tech ID theme was adopted by the editorial board of the Journal of Instructional Development prior to the journal's merger into ETR&D. The topic was thought to be of interest to graduate students, but it also appears to be of importance to AECT's general membership, given results of a recent survey (Higgins & Sullivan, 1989) and the number of articles received. The ~

62

ETR&D,Vol. 37, No. 3

manuscripts in this issue and others reviewed are thoughtful and provocative, but, regrettably, not all could be published in a single issue. Articles by Hannafin and Rieber (1989) on psychological foundations of instructional design originally slated for this issue, were published in a previous one, and other articles are under revision as this issue goes to press and m a y be published later. Craig Locatis, Guest Editor National Library of Medicine N o r m a n Higgins, Editor for Development Arizona State University

REFERENCES Hannafin, M., & Rieber, L. (1989). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies, Parts I and II. Educational Technology Researchand Development, 37(2), 91-102. Higgins, N., & Sullivan, H. (1989). Perspectives on educational technology research and development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 7-18. Hooper, R. (1969). A diagnosis of failure. AV Communication Review, I7(3), 245-264. Lumsdaine, A. (1964). Educational technology, programmed learning, and instructional science. In E. Hilgard (Ed.), Theories of Learning and Instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.