[quoting ID2 paper] Many persons associated with educational technology today are engaged in a flight from science. Instructional design is a scientific and technological field. It is not merely philosophy; it is not a set of procedures arrived at by collaboration; it is a set of scientific principles and a technology for implementing these principles in the development of instructional experiences and environments...
...The field of instructional design involves these two important activities: the discovery of the natural principles in instructional strategies; and the use of these scientific principles to invent instructional design procedures and tools.
Conclusion
Too much of the structure of educational technology is built upon the sand of relativism, rather than the rock of science. When winds of new paradigms blow and the sands of old paradigms shift; then the structure of educational technology slides toward the sea of constructo-babble. We're tired of the shifting sands of new paradigms and realities. We have drawn a line in the sand. We boldly reclaim the discipline of instructional design that is built upon the rock of science.
Eloquently said. I've participated in similar discussion threads on AERA-C, which concerned me greatly. A large number of "vocal" participants did not want the word "science" associated with "instruction" choosing to describe it more as an "art form." A discussion group related to learning research that did not want to address the need for quantifiable evidence of validity, effectiveness, or efficiency disturbs me! ITForum, to this point, seems to be more concerned with improving the practice of instructional design and instruction. My compliments to the subscribers! But then, I'm an alumni of Utah State.