This paper originally started as a two-page, mini case study on how design can’t be understood in process oriented terms. It was combined with the data that ended up in the paper Objectivation in Design Team Conversation (also originally meant to be a two-page case). It quickly became clear each case deserved to be its own paper, since while they could be used in service of the broad point I was trying to make they were also interesting contributions in their own right that deserved to be built out completely. I’m glad I took the road I did, both for the other paper and for this one. They make much better contributions on their own.
The purpose of this research was to study what university faculty valued when working with instructional designers and instructional design teams to develop educational simulations. We did this through a case study of three faculty, where we analyzed what they discussed among themselves or communicated to other team members about what mattered to them about their team relationships or the design processes they employed. We structured our case report around three thematic issues that expressed how our participants depicted good relationships and processes. Our report concludes with a discussion of how instructional designers could use our findings in their practice.
McDonald, J. K., Elsayed-Ali, S., Bowman, K., & Rogers, A. A. (2022). Considering what faculty value when working with instructional designers and instructional design teams. Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 11(3). https://edtechbooks.org/jaid_11_3/_considering_what_fa