Uzaktan Eğitim Modelleri ve Öğretim Tasarımı
Özet
Bu bölüm, uzaktan eğitim modelleri ile öğretim tasarımı alanını kuramsal, uygulamalı ve eleştirel boyutlarıyla bütüncül biçimde ele almaktadır. Uzaktan eğitimin kavramsal temelleri ve teknolojik-pedagojik kuşakları özetlendikten sonra, geleneksel sınıf-temelli öğretimden çevrimiçi öğrenmeye geçişin pedagojik, kurumsal ve epistemolojik boyutları tartışılmaktadır. Çağdaş uzaktan eğitim modelleri — Topluluk Sorgulama Modeli (CoI), karma/hibrit öğrenme, ters yüz sınıf ve postdijital yaklaşım — kuramsal temelleri, pedagojik vurguları ve sınırlılıkları bakımından karşılaştırılmaktadır. Bölümün ikinci ekseninde ADDIE, 4C/ID ve geriye dönük tasarım modelleri karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmekte; çevrimiçi öğretim tasarımı süreci analiz, tasarım, geliştirme, uygulama ve değerlendirme aşamaları üzerinden TPACK, etkileşim türleri, bilişsel yük kuramı ve Yeni Kirkpatrick Modeli çerçevesinde yapılandırılmaktadır. Ardından öğrenme yönetim sistemleri, sanal öğrenme toplulukları, AR/VR ve beden temelli öğrenme gibi yeni nesil araçlar ile TPACK ve ISTE-SE temelli öğretmen yetkinliği çerçeveleri ele alınmaktadır. Yapay zekâ destekli uzaktan eğitim; yapay zekânın beş pedagojik işlevi, adaptif öğrenme sistemleri, üretken yapay zekânın eğitsel yapıları ve etik ilkeler üzerinden eleştirel biçimde değerlendirilmektedir. Bölüm, çevrimiçi yükseköğretimin geleceğine ilişkin yedi trendin sentezi ve dört paydaş grubuna yönelik somut önerilerle tamamlanmaktadır.
This chapter offers an integrative account of distance education models and instructional design across their theoretical, practical, and critical dimensions. After outlining the conceptual foundations and successive technological–pedagogical generations of distance education, it examines the shift from traditional classroom-based instruction to online learning as a pedagogical, institutional, and epistemological transformation. Four contemporary models — the Community of Inquiry (CoI), blended/hybrid learning, the flipped classroom, and the postdigital approach — are compared in terms of theoretical grounding, pedagogical emphasis, and limitations. The chapter then analyses ADDIE, 4C/ID, and Backward Design comparatively, and structures the online instructional design process across its analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation phases through TPACK, interaction types, cognitive load theory, and the New World Kirkpatrick Model. Next-generation tools — learning management systems, virtual learning communities, AR/VR, and embodied learning — are addressed alongside teacher competency frameworks based on TPACK and ISTE-SE. AI-supported distance education is evaluated critically through artificial intelligence's five pedagogical functions, adaptive learning systems, the educational constructs of generative AI, and ethical principles. The chapter concludes by synthesising seven future trends and offering concrete recommendations for four stakeholder groups.
Referanslar
Argelagós, E., Garcia, C., Privado, J. ve Wopereis, I. (2022). Fostering information problem solving skills through online task-centred instruction in higher education. Computers & Education, 180, 104433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104433
Auer, M. E., Pester, A. ve May, D. (Eds.). (2022). Learning with technologies and technologies in learning: Experience, trends and challenges in higher education (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 456). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7
Beaumier, A. ve Koole, M. (2022). Augmented and virtual reality in the classroom: Adding a postdigital perspective to backward design lesson planning. P. MacDowell ve J. Lock (Eds.), Immersive education: Designing for learning (s. 31–45). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18138-2_3
Bransford, J. D. ve Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80006-9
Brigance, S. K. (2011). Leadership in online learning in higher education: Why instructional designers for online learning should lead the way? Performance Improvement, 50(3), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.20262
Brzezinska, M. (2022). Global skills in the global pandemic: How to build an effective online community of inquiry with university students. M. E. Auer, A. Pester ve D. May (Eds.), Learning with technologies and technologies in learning: Experience, trends and challenges in higher education (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 456, s. 681–702). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7_32
Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
Cramer, F. (2015). What is ‘post-digital’?. In: Berry, D.M., Dieter, M. (Eds.), Postdigital aesthetics (s. 12–26). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137437204_2
Dousay, T. A., ve Branch, R. M. (2022). Survey of instructional design models (6th ed.). Brill. https://brill.com/display/title/63987
Elshahawy, F., AbouZeid, A., AbdelHafez, A. ve Elshazly, M. (2022). Towards developing computational thinking skills among undergraduate students through gamified learning platforms: A systematic review. M. E. Auer, A. Pester ve D. May (Eds.), Learning with technologies and technologies in learning: Experience, trends and challenges in higher education (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 456, s. 197–214). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7_10
Ericsson, K. A., Chase, W. G. ve Faloon, S. (1980). Acquisition of a memory skill. Science, 208(4448), 1181–1182. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7375930
Evans, M., Trolli, E., Pierson, A. ve Tilak, S. (2025). Designing courses with sustainable virtual learning communities: A STEM teacher candidate course that extends beyond higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 37(1), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09391-0
Frey, B. B. (2018). Backward design. B. B. Frey (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation (Vol. 1, s. 152–154). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139.n71
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
García-López, I. M., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. ve Molina-Espinosa, J. M. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in education: A systematic analysis of opportunities, challenges, and responses. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2519133
Glassman, M. (2016). Educational psychology and the Internet. Cambridge University Press.
Gunness, A., Matanda, M. J. ve Rajaguru, R. (2023). Effect of student responsiveness to instructional innovation on student engagement in semi-synchronous online learning environments: The mediating role of personal technological innovativeness and perceived usefulness. Computers & Education, 205, 104884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104884
Han, X. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence for future education: Current research status, hot spots, and research trends. Proceedings of the 2024 8th International Conference on Algorithms, Computing and Systems (ICACS ’24) (s. 31–37). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3708597.3708606
Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(1–2), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00032-4
Hattie, J. ve Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Holmberg, B. (2005). The evolution, principles and practices of distance education. Bibliotheks- und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.
Hsu, H. K. (2020). Developing online engineering courses: A resource kit for collaboration between faculty and instructional designers. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520905773
Huang, R., Pemmaraju, S., & Huang, W. (2026). Exploring the impact of instructors' technology integration on student learning opportunities through the lens of instructional product. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 12, 28–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-025-00174-z
Ivens, J. P. (2023). Instructional design, technological design, and their cultural politics. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 14739–14760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11726-4
Jandrić, P. ve Hayes, S. (2020). Postdigital we-learn. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 39(3), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-020-09711-2
Joia, L. A. ve Lorenzo, M. (2021). Zoom in, zoom out: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the classroom. Sustainability, 13(5), 2531. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052531
Kaouni, M., Lakrami, F. ve Labouidya, O. (2023). The design of an adaptive e-learning model based on artificial intelligence for enhancing online teaching. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 18(6), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i06.35839
Khasyyatillah, I. ve Osman, K. (2022). Use of instructional design models and instructional strategies of mobile learning applications in education: A systematic review. M. E. Auer, A. Pester ve D. May (Eds.), Learning with technologies and technologies in learning: Experience, trends and challenges in higher education (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 456, s. 457–470). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7_22
Kirkpatrick, J. ve Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2022). An introduction to the New World Kirkpatrick® model. Kirkpatrick Partners. https://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Introduction-to-The-New-World-Kirkpatrick%C2%AE-Model.pdf
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P. ve Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303
Kosmas, P. ve Zaphiris, P. (2023). Improving students’ learning performance through technology-enhanced embodied learning: A four-year investigation in classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, 28(9), 11051–11074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11466-x
Lee, M. W. ve Butler, A. C. (2022). The flipped classroom: A guide to making evidence-based decisions about implementation. H. J. Witchel ve M. W. Lee (Eds.), Technologies in biomedical and life sciences education (Methods in Physiology, s. 167–188). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95633-2_6
Means, B. K. (2023). Teaching through technology: The Virtual Curation Laboratory as a campus center for experiential learning at Virginia Commonwealth University. Historical Archaeology, 57(3), 842–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41636-023-00434-y
Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 34–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4930420508
Nguyen, K. V. (2025). The use of generative AI tools in higher education: Ethical and pedagogical principles. Journal of Academic Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09607-1
Ouyang, F., Zheng, L. ve Jiao, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in online higher education: A systematic review of empirical research from 2011 to 2020. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7893–7925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10925-9
Phillips, A., Pane, J. F., Reumann-Moore, R. ve Shenbanjo, O. (2020). Implementing an adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an instructional supplement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1409–1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09745-w
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Simon & Schuster.
Sams, A. ve Bergmann, J. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Seel, N. M., Lehmann, T., Blumschein, P. ve Podolskiy, O. A. (2017). Instructional design for learning: Theoretical foundations. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-941-6
Shankar, S. K., Pothancheri, G., Sasi, D. ve Mishra, S. (2025). Bringing teachers in the loop: Exploring perspectives on integrating generative AI in technology-enhanced learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(1), 155–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00428-8
Stefaniak, J. E., Yang, F., Gilstrap, S. ve Yang, L. (2025). An exploration of instructional design tasks performed by designers in higher education. TechTrends, 69(3), 362–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01041-9
Sweller, J., Ayres, P. ve Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4
Tessmer, M. ve Wedman, J. F. (1990). A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(2), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298271
Thurner, V. ve Böttcher, A. (2022). An architectural concept for didactics: Higher education on a structurally sound foundation. M. E. Auer, A. Pester ve D. May (Eds.), Learning with technologies and technologies in learning: Experience, trends and challenges in higher education (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 456, s. 391–418). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7_19
Tomczyk, Ł. (Ed.). (2025). New media pedagogy: Research trends, methodological challenges and successful implementations (Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 2537). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-95627-0
Uzumcu, O., ve Acilmis, H. (2024). Do innovative teachers use AI-powered tools more interactively? A study in the context of diffusion of innovation theory. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 29, 1109–1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09687-1
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. ve Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315113210
Wedman, J. ve Tessmer, M. (1993). Instructional designers’ decisions and priorities: A survey of design practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(2), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00583.x
Wei, H., Lin, Y. ve Chang, L. (2023). The effectiveness of a blended learning-based life design course: Implications of instruction and application of technology. SN Computer Science, 4(4), Article 360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-023-01730-3
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. ve Snyder, W. M. (2002). Seven principles for cultivating communities of practice. Cultivat. Commun. Pract.4, 1–19.
Wiggins, G. ve McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Xu, G., Yu, A., Xu, C., Liu, X. ve Trainin, G. (2025). Investigating pre-service TCSL teachers’ technology integration competency through a content-based AI-inclusive framework. Education and Information Technologies, 30(4), 4349–4380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12982-8
Zheng, L., Fan, Y., Chen, B., Huang, Z., Gao, L. ve Long, M. (2023). An AI-enabled feedback-feedforward approach to promoting online collaborative learning. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12292-5
