Summary
Perhaps the most important trend in task analysis today is the substantive and temporal integration of task analysis with instructional design. Task analysis and instructional design are being integratedsubstantively by using designactivities (such as sequencing and synthesis) as a basis for selecting different types of task analysis, and by using specificstrategies (such as a procedurally-based simple-to-complex sequence) as another basis for selecting different task analysis methodologies. The area of synthesis is one that deserves to receive considerable attention in the near future. Also, as new instructional strategies are developed to utilize the capabilities of new delivery systems (such as new strategies for sequencing and synthesis), new task analysis methodologies will be needed to provide the information necessary to design those strategies into the instruction.
Finally, task analysis and instructional design are being integratedtemporally by interspersing different task and content analysis methodologies with different kinds of design activities in the instructional development process. It appears that both substantive and temporal integration of analysis and design are very helpful for producing quality courseware.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ausubel, D.P.Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.
Bruner, J.S.The process of education. New York: Random House, 1960.
Gagne, R.M.The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.
Gagne, R.M. & Briggs, L.J.Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.
Greeno, J.G. Cognitive objectives of instruction: Theory of knowledge for solving problems and answering questions. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
Gregg, L.W. The algo-heuristic theory of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983.
Merrill, M.D. Learner control in computer based learning.Computers and Education, 1980,4, 77–95.
Merrill, P.F. Hierarchical and information processing task analysis: A comparison.Journal of Instructional Development, 1978,1(2),35–40.
Merrill, P.F. Analysis of a procedural task.NSPI Journal, 1980,19, 11–15.
Pask, G.Conversation, cognition, and learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1975.
Reigeluth, C.M. In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory.Journal of Instructional Development, 1979(a),2(3),8–15.
Reigeluth, C.M. TICCIT to the future: Advanced in instructional theory for CAI.Journal of Computer Based Education, 1979(b),6, 40–46.
Reigeluth, C.M. & Darwazeh, A.N. The elaboration theory’s procedure for designing instruction: A conceptual approach.Journal of Instructional Development, 1982,5(3),22–32.
Reigeluth, C.M., Doughty, P.L., Sari, I.F., Powell, C.J., Frey, L., & Sweeney, J. Extended Development Procedure (EDeP): User’s manual. Final Report submitted to the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), 1982.
Reigeluth, C.M., & Merrill, M.D.Extended Task Analysis Procedure: User’s guide. A Final Report submitted to the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1981.
Reigeluth, C.M., Merrill, M.D., & Bunderson, C.V. The structure of subject matter content and its instructional design implications.Instructional Science, 1978,7, 107–126.
Reigeluth, C.M., & Rodgers, C.A. The elaboration theory of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983.
Resnick, L.B. Task analysis in instructional design: Some cases from mathematics. In D. Klahr (Ed.),Cognition and instruction. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
Resnick, L.B., & Ford, W.W. The analysis of tasks for instruction: An information-processing approach. In T.A. Brigham & A. C. Catania (Eds.),Handbook of applied behavior analysis: Social and Instructional Processes. New York: Irvington Publishers, 1982.
Rumelhart, D.E., & Norman, D.A. Accretion, tuning, and restructuring: Three modes of learning. In J.W. Cotton & R.L. Klatsky (Eds.),Semantic factors in cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978.
Sari, I.F., & Reigeluth, C.M. Writing and evaluatory textbooks: Contributions from instructional theory. In D. Jonassen (Ed.),The technology of text: Principles of structuring, designing, and displaying text. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 1982.
Scandura, J.M. Structural learning and the design of educational materials.Educational Technology, August 1973, 7–13.
Scandura, J.M. Instructional strategies based on the structural learning theory. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructinal design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1983.
Skinner, B.F. Reflections on a decade of teaching machines. In R. Glaser (Ed.),Teaching machines and programmed learning, II. Washington, DC National Education Association, 1965.
Wildman, R.M. Cognitive theory and the design of instruction.Educational Technology, 1981,21(7), 14–20.
Winn, W. Content structure and cognition in instructional systems. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Kansas City, April, 1978. (ED 151 315).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reigeluth, C.M. Current trends in task analysis. Journal of Instructional Development 6, 24–30 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02906215
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02906215