• Login
    View Item 
    •   Shocker Open Access Repository Home
    • Graduate Student Research
    • ETD: Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Shocker Open Access Repository Home
    • Graduate Student Research
    • ETD: Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Instructional designers as street level bureaucrats in higher education: A qualitative study

    View/Open
    dissertation (872.8Kb)
    Date
    2022-05
    Author
    Akella, Nirupama
    Advisor
    Patterson, Jean A.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Instructional designers in higher education experience on the job conflict due to a misalignment between official university outlined functions and actual daily job functions. They deal with this conflict by possibly acting as street level bureaucrats. Congruently, this basic qualitative study explored instructional designer job conflict and strategies used to deal with the conflict in three higher education institution, all located in different parts of USA, through the theoretical lens of street level bureaucracy. Interview analysis of semi-structured online or in-person interviews with 17 instructional designers and content analysis of corresponding official job descriptions revealed confusing findings which were categorized into three themes of a) instructional design meaning, job roles, and functions, b) street level divergence, and c) organizational contribution. Findings and constant comparison revealed instructional design had multiple meanings ranging from design process dependent on job role and function, influences of learners, and theoretical underpinnings. Instructional designers in both centralized and decentralized institutions exercised street level divergence. Instructional designers viewed their organizational contribution as direct, indirect, while some saw no need to contribute to organization development. Influences of institutional structure, culture, and personal characteristics emerged as major commonalities which enabled instructional designers across the three institutions develop working relations, respond, and exercise street level divergence. Congruently, the study concluded that a) instructional design was a support function, b) instructional designers were not street level bureaucrats, c) instructional designer job behavior and performance was framed by institutional culture and personal characteristics, c) instructional designers were organizational contributors. The study, subsequently, discussed policy, practice, theory, and future research implications.
    Description
    Thesis (Ed.D.)-- Wichita State University, College of Education, Dept. of Counseling, Educational Leadership, Educational and School Psychology
    URI
    https://soar.wichita.edu/handle/10057/23433
    Collections
    • CAS Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • ISLE Theses and Dissertations

    Browse

    All of Shocker Open Access RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsBy TypeThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsBy Type

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2022  DuraSpace
    DSpace Express is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV