Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development an instructional design model selection approach for maritime education and training using fuzzy axiomatic design

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Due to the inherently dangerous environment in the maritime industry, it is an essential aspect for the human resources in the industry to have a high level of knowledge, skill and competence. Therefore, maritime education and training needs to be structured as a unique instructional design model that will ensure the acquisition of the required knowledge, skills, and competencies at the highest level. In this paper, we develop a new approach using an axiomatic design methodology extended with fuzzy set theory to define the suitable instructional design model for maritime education and training. Accordingly, we aimed to establish a decision support system for instructional designers at an institutional level and instructors at the individual level who focus on instructional design, development, and processes. The demonstration of the proposed approach is conducted for basic offshore safety induction and emergency training which is one of the compulsory training courses for people who already work or will work on offshore facilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

References

  • Ab Kadir, W., Huda, W. N., Abdullah, N. S. Y., & Mustapha, I. R. (2021). The effectiveness of form four STEM-based physics interactive laboratory (I-Lab) by employing isman instructional design model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 20(2), 140–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almazyad, R., & Alqarawy, M. (2020). The Design of Dick and Carey Model. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 544–547). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 3(4), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02904348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A. T. (2019). Media theory. In Open and distance education theory revisited (pp. 95–104). Springer, Singapore.

  • Branch, R. M., & Dousay, T. A. (2015). Survey of instructional design models. https://aect.org/survey_of_instructional_design.php.  Accessed 10.06.2022.

  • Bright, A. C. (2020). Making instant adjustments in online journalism education: Responding to continuous needs assessments in asynchronous courses. Online Learning, 24(2), 245–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carol, C., Saara, L., Tiina, P., Gregor, Š, Eva, S., & Esther, C. (2021). Integration of the ASSURE model for bachelor of nursing training: An international project. Интeгpaция oбpaзoвaния, 25(3 (104)), 372–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Celik, M., Kahraman, C., Cebi, S., & Er, I. D. (2009). Fuzzy axiomatic design-based performance evaluation model for docking facilities in shipbuilding industry: The case of Turkish shipyards. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(1), 599–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.09.055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daud, W., Teck, W., & Ghani, M. (2018). A conceptual framework for mobile application in learning Arabic language proficiency. The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, 4(1), 66–70. https://doi.org/10.32861/jssr.spi4.66.70

  • Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Dhiu, K., & Laksana, D. N. L. (2021). The aspects of child development on early childhood education curriculum. Journal of Education Technology, 5(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v5i1.30764

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1978). Instructor’s manual for the systematic design of instruction. Scott, Foresman & Company.

  • Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (Eds.) (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

  • Durrani, U. K., & Kamal, M. M. (2021). Application of ARCS model for a blended teaching methodologies: A study of students’ motivation amid the COVID-19. EAI Endorsed Transactions on e-Learning, 7(21), e2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, G. S., Branch, R. C., & Mukherjee, P. (1994). A conceptual framework for comparing instructional design models. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 55–72.

  • European Maritime Safety Agency. (2021). Annual Overview Of Marine Casualties and Incidents 2021, EMSA 15.12.2021.

  • Friedman, A., & Schneider, E. (2018). Developing a visualization education curriculum in the age of big data using the dick and carey model. Visual Communication Quarterly, 25(4), 250–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, C. G. (1994). Introduction to instructional development: Process and technique. Cengage Learning, 1994.

  • Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). Survey of instructional development models (4 ed., vol. 45, issue 1, pp. 48–50). ERIC. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02763388

  • Hamdani, M., Gharbaghi, A., & Rio, R. S. (2011). Instructional design approaches, types and trends: A foundation for postmodernism instructional design. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(8), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, A. A. (2015). Comparative analysis between system approach, Kemp, and ASSURE instructional design models. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(12), 261–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabaay, M. J., Grcevich, L. O., Marotta, D. A., & Reynolds, J. H. (2020). Trauma and triage: Applying the Dick and Carey instructional design model to a primary survey clinical workshop. Cureus, 12(6), e8656. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.8656 

  • Jeter, G., Baber, J., & Heddy, B. (2019). Students at the Center: Insights and Implications of Authentic, 5E Instruction in High School English Language Arts. In Frontiers in Education (vol. 4, p. 91). Frontiers.

  • Joshua, C. E., Eyitayo, B. A., Hammed, A. A., & Samaila, D. (2020). A review of instructional models for effective teacher education and technology integration. Sumerianz Journal of Education. Linguistics and Literature, 3(6), 86–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman, C., & Çebı, S. (2009). A new multi-attribute decision making method: Hierarchical fuzzy axiomatic design. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 4848–4861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolcu, M. İB., Öztürkçü, Ö. S. K., & Kaki, G. D. (2020). Evaluation of a distance education course using the 4C-ID model for continuing endodontics education. Journal of Dental Education, 84(1), 62–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulak, O., & Kahraman, C. (2005). Multi-attribute comparison of advanced manufacturing systems using fuzzy vs. crisp axiomatic design approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 95(3), 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.02.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larmuseau, C., Elen, J., & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of students' cognitive and motivational characteristics on students' use of a 4C/ID-based online learning environment and their learning gain. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 171–180).

  • Lee, J., & Jang, S. (2014). A methodological framework for instructional design model development: Critical dimensions and synthesized procedures. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(6), 743–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9352-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, L., & Lee, C. S. (2021). Evaluating the effectiveness of blended learning using the ARCS model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(5), 1397–1408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddens, L., Depaepe, F., Raes, A., & Elen, J. (2020). The instructional design of a 4C/ID-inspired learning environment for upper secondary school students’ research skills. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 11(3), 126–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melo, M. (2018). The 4C/ID-Model in physics education: Instructional design of a digital learning environment to teach electrical circuits. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. L. (2016). Developing distance education content using the TAPPA Process. TechTrends, 60(5), 425–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nam, C. W., & Jang, S. Y. (2013). The development of an ID model for collaborative learning in mobile learning environments. In Proceedings of 2013 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 207–212). IEEE.

  • Nonthamand, N. (2020). Guideline to develop an instructional design model using video Conference in open learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(03), 140. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i03.10842

  • OPITO. (2020). Basic Offshore Safety Induction and Emergency Training (with Compressed Air Emergency Breathing System) standards Revision 0, Amendment 9 (January 2020)

  • Pehlivan, D., & Cicek, K. (2021). Quality in Higher Education A knowledge-based model on quality management system compliance assessment for maritime higher education institutions. Quality in Higher Education, 00(00), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1905654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, R. A., & Dick, W. (1996). Instructional planning A guide for teachers. Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R. C. (2014). Encyclopedia of Terminology for Educational Communications and Technology. In Reference Reviews (vol. 28, issue 5). https://doi.org/10.1108/rr-03-2014-0052

  • Samur, Y. (2019). Kes Sesi: A mobile game designed to improve kindergarteners’ recognition of letter sounds. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(2), 294–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, T., Janson, A., & Schöbel, S. (2018). Understanding the effects of gamified feedback in mobile learning—an experimental investigation. In Proceedings of the Thirty Ninth International Conference on Information Systems ICIS 2018.

  • Sdravopoulou, K., Muñoz González, J. M., & Hidalgo-Ariza, M. D. (2021). Assessment of a location-based mobile augmented-reality game by adult users with the ARCS model. Applied Sciences, 11(14), 6448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making instructional design decisions. Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2004). Instructional design. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh, N. P. (1990). The Principles of Design. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumarwati, S., Fitriyani, H., Setiaji, F. M. A., Amiruddin, M. H., & Jalil, S. A. (2020). Developing mathematics learning media based on E-Learning using Moodle on geometry subject to improve students’ higher order thinking skills. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 14(04), 182–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, C. H., Tan, W. K., & Teo, H. H. (2010). Designing an information systems development course to incorporate agility, flexibility, and adaptability. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 26(1), 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yulia, E. (2019). The Feasibility and Effectiveness of Interactive Multimedia using Gerlach and Ely Model in Learning Planning Courses. In ACEIVE 2019: Proceedings of the the 3rd Annual Conference of Engineering and Implementation on Vocational Education, ACEIVE 2019, 16 November 2019, Universitas Negeri Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia (p. 375). European Alliance for Innovation.

  • Za’ba, N., Ismail, Z., & Abdullah, A. H. (2020). preparing student teachers to teach mathematics with GeoGebra. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5A), 29–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy Sets*. Information and Control, 8, 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

 The article has been produced within the scope of the doctoral thesis which executes in a Ph.D. Program in Maritime Transportation Engineering of Istanbul Technical University Graduate School entitled as “A systematic instructional design model for training delivered to offshore structures employees” and supported by Istanbul Technical University (ITU) Research Fund. Project No: ITU-BAP 42711.

Funding

This article is produced as part of the Research Project supported by Istanbul Technical University (ITU) Research Fund. Project Number: ITU-BAP 42711.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Maritime Transportation and Management Engineering Department, Maritime Faculty, Istanbul Technical University, Tuzla, 34940, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ismail Kandemir

  2. Marine Engineering Department, Maritime Faculty, Istanbul Technical University, Sahil StreetTuzla, 34940, Istanbul, Turkey

    Kadir Cicek

Authors
  1. Ismail Kandemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kadir Cicek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: [Ismail Kandemir, Kadir Cicek]; Methodology: [Ismail Kandemir, Kadir Cicek]; Formal analysis and investigation: [Ismail Kandemir, Kadir Cicek]; Writing—original draft preparation: [Ismail Kandemir, Kadir Cicek]; Writing—review and editing: [Kadir Cicek]; Funding acquisition: [Ismail Kandemir, Kadir Cicek]; Supervision: [Kadir Cicek].

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kadir Cicek.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Financial interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kandemir, I., Cicek, K. Development an instructional design model selection approach for maritime education and training using fuzzy axiomatic design. Educ Inf Technol 28, 11291–11312 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11623-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11623-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation