As of this writing, my course is complete except for a few details. I still need to add my final evaluation, which will be done as a survey and focus groups.
From a technology perspective, the main challenge I had was during development. I wanted to move quickly from one page to another. I often wanted to see what a previous direction or week’s assignment had specified. I overcame this challenge (partly) by having multiple tabs open. Canvas still makes it challenging to open and navigate while designing a course. I suppose another way of addressing this is to complete the full text of all of the assignments of the course before putting them into Canvas. However, beyond the fact that seems like extra work, sometimes the structure of the course highlights something you might have not seen when drafting the text in a document. The people challenge I see is having an editor. In my current role at Scaled Agile, all products have a formal editing and quality assurance review before being released. This is a little different than the peer feedback we’re doing as part of the coursework. An editor has a specific skill set, and is able to look beyond the design at details the designer may have missed. For example, this week I noticed that I have week numbers spelled and in numeral form. Beyond that inconsistency, it would be worth a conversation with an editor on whether that is the best way to label the modules. It feels important as a designer, because that’s how I divided the content. However, as a student, I learned after Spring Break that can be problematic, as I have two classes on different weeks now. One class numbered Spring Break and one didn’t. I considered putting dates in the headers instead for easy reference for students. However, that introduces tech debt that would require updates every semester. That may be a useful exercise, but also unrealistic, depending on an instructor’s workload. My experience with working with professional deadlines helped me manage the expectations for what I could accomplish in the timeline. I would have liked to add two additional videos, but I recognized that I simply didn’t have the time to create them. But as a fan of working in an Agile way, I believe the course could be improved every semester, given what I would learn by teaching it, as well as from student feedback. Additional videos could be one of the improvements I make on future iterations. I’m sure there are things I can improve as a designer. However, as a capstone project for my Master’s, I’m quite proud of this accomplishment. It’s a course that has promise in the customer education community.
0 Comments
As the semester comes down to the last few weeks, I still have about a quarter of my course development to complete. Since the course is sixteen weeks, I divided the development into four-week chunks to keep from feeling overwhelmed with all the small things that need to be considered or included.
I have weeks 13-16 left to develop. This section includes an assignment that improves a previous assignment based on peer feedback. It has two more discussion assignments and another quiz to write and develop. It also has the final assignment to complete. I considered two more videos in this section, but I think I will save those for a future improvement of the course, as I am running out of time. I also have the final assessment and evaluation plans to develop. That includes writing a survey for students to self-assess their progress, as well as guidance for the small focus groups the instructor would have with volunteers after the course to gain learner insights on the subject matter and learning activities. The development needs to be complete next week. It’s not a small amount, but I believe I have a good pattern of development and the time set aside to complete those tasks. Some of the challenges I’ve faced stem from turning the sometimes sketchy plans in the design document to real assignments. The main example I found this week was in providing the structure for peers to give feedback and get graded on that. I’m still not sure if that changed my point structure on the course. But I hope to check that next week. One of the questions I’ve considered is whether I’ll be able to implement the course. I would love to teach this course at a university. There are unknown hurdles in implementing that plan. I’m working on my own career goals to have the qualifications to do so. But I’m not sure what it takes to get a new course approved. I do have a possibility simmering for a pilot, and that is where I could evaluate the current design for this format. I’m halfway through the development of the course I’m building in Canvas. So far, the design is working fairly well. While a 100% online course is not exactly what I imagined for this content, once I decided to go with the theory and types of assignments that I did, I had a clear picture in my head of how the course would progress. That has stayed fairly true as I got into the details, with a few exceptions.
My most successful online classes in this MS program have had very clear directions. The ones that haven’t done as well with that can introduce an unpleasant level of cognitive load and confusion. My design didn’t have thorough directions; it only contained a sketch of the activities to include each week. So I found some adjustments happening along the way as I built out the directions. For example, I created a heading for each module. I had one class that did this in a way I wanted to try. I started with “Read”, “Do”, and “Discuss”. However, after a couple of weeks, I decided that “Learn” and “Activities” as headings better captured the inputs and outputs the course requires in each module. Along those same lines, I realized that I needed to have clear directions about class meetings, especially thanks to my peer feedback. The directions were the perfect place to motivate learners to attend, while letting them know that not attending wouldn’t affect their grades. A struggle here is designing the class without having those details yet (and them being different each time the class is offered.) I went with stating that the meeting details would be provided via an announcement. I also like the idea of adding hyperlinks to particular pages and assignments, although I haven’t added those yet. Another thing that came to mind in terms of clarity was related to the group assignments in my course. One piece of feedback I've provided in previous classes that had group assignments was to give students a little more time to get a group together. So I added a nudge the week before the group assignment to let learners know they should start asking for people to work with (and where they can do that). It’s really all about making the directions as clear and predictable as possible, so that learners can spend their time and energy on learning. One of the things I’ve been wondering is when and where to add rubrics. For my online classes as a student, I’ve seen this done in different ways (and not done, too, unfortunately). I know how important it is to let learners know what the grading will be looking for in each assignment. But I haven’t yet decided on quite how to address that. However, I did find during the development of this first half that my overall grading percentages changed a bit. It seemed appropriate to give each discussion a point for each post and response or reply. The quizzes had a point per question as well. It made sense to me to have the grading for the semester add up to a total of 100 points. In my quest to have really clear directions, I've tried to not over complicate the learning interface. I know that learning will happen as the students reflect on their readings, through their discussions, and in their assignments. I don’t need to provide very much structure for that to happen (as long as the directions are clear). I wonder if sometimes learning designers think they need to do more. But I'm beginning to believe that we actually need less. Our instruction is a guide through the student's efforts to learn, and in many cases (at least in the context I'm most familiar with), less instruction is better. But I also am looking for the right balance of repetition. For example, the weekly directions give students a consolidated way to plan their time for each week. Then the assignment directions are repeated with the pages where students have that discussion or turn in that assignment. These ways of repetition help learners in different ways at different types as they move around the platform. In this week’s post, I’ll reflect on the first stage of developing my first full undergraduate course. It’s called Developing Effective Customer Education. It’s meant as an introduction to the field, both for people who want to create and lead a customer education function, as well as students targeting other roles where customer education could be a key collaboration (such as Business and Marketing students).
Although the requirements of the assignment made me reconsider how I wanted to develop this course, I’d been thinking about the possibilities for a long time. This has helped the development go smoothly. You may have seen my LinkedIn posts summarizing The Customer Education Playbook (Quick & Kelly, 2022) chapters after the book was first published. I knew the 12 steps in this book had a perfect framework for developing into a 16-week course. The incredible community participation in my series of LinkedIn posts contributed to my decision to include lots of discussions in the course. You can read more about me using Connectivism as the overarching learning theory behind my design here. Peer feedback is another important tool in learning. My peer provided some good insights on things that I could clarify or modify from my original design. For example, she commented that the course seemed to require a lot of writing. Writing is a good way to reflect and consolidate learning, but it makes sense that (as a writer), I would default to it as an activity. In response to her comments, I removed some of the blog assignments. I also gave all of the discussion, blog, and report assignments word count requirements to clarify them, as well as providing the option to do them as videos as an alternative. The intent is that these are reflections. This course is the first time I’ve developed learning activities in Canvas. But I have the benefit of having worked with several other learning management systems. That means that even though I needed to learn some functionality specific to Canvas, my knowledge of using other systems transferred easily. Canvas is significantly easier to learn than the system I used back in 2015, which required frequent collaboration with a WordPress developer. One thing I especially appreciated in Canvas was the duplication option to help me set up the Modules framework. Currently, there are lots of copies of the first week, which I’m updating as I go through the development process. The main challenge I’ve had in developing is knowing what is enough to support the audience’s learning. I’ve been reading Donald Clark (Clark, 2020) for my other class, and love his frequent reminders that ‘less is more’ in learning design. So I have weekly directions, a smattering of videos to complement the reading, discussions, and other assignments. I wanted to make it very clear what students need to do. I have had classes where it’s so hard to figure out what I’m supposed to do, that the cognitive load for that gets in the way of learning. So I modeled off one of the online classes I’ve taken in this program that I thought did this well. I settled on headings in the Modules of Learn and Activities. The course is complete through the first four weeks. I believe I can use that to speed development for the next sections. References Clark, D. (2020). Artificial Intelligence for Learning: How to use AI to support employee development. Kogan Page Limited. Quick, D., & Kelly, B. (2022). The Customer Education Playbook. Wiley. As an instructional designer for (mostly) short adult learning experiences, I was only fully aware of two instructional design models: ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate) and SAM (Successive Approximation Model). My MS in Learning Technologies program classes have all seemed to focus on my ability to use ADDIE.
But here’s my hot take: ADDIE is not an instructional design model. Both ADDIE and SAM describe the process for designing instruction. Ideally, designers would work to include effective instruction as part of the analysis and design phases. Ideally, they would also make improvements based on the evaluation. However, the models themselves don’t include the direct guardrails that would ensure effective instructional practices are included from the start. This week, I’ve been reading research related to the ARCS Model of Motivational Design, which John Keller created in the 1980s. ARCS is an acronym for Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction (Francom & Reeves, 2010). The model is named for the ARCS components of motivation, and it includes several motivational strategies to address each of those components. The point of the model is to ensure instruction is motivating for learners, so they will be willing to put in the effort required for effective learning. In an asynchronous online context, motivation is a key consideration. I sometimes get the impression that the suggestion for addressing motivation is always in a single sound byte: gamification. I’m glad to know there is much more to it. The analysis, design, development, and evaluation phases of the motivational design process is of course, quite similar to ADDIE. The ARCS process includes ten steps in total to improve the motivational appeal of learning experiences (Francom & Reeves, 2010). One theory that the ARCS model is based on is the expectancy-value theory (Small, 2000). There is a difference between a theory and an instructional design model. A theory is more about understanding how learning occurs. An instructional design model, on the other hand, is about creating effective learning experiences. This distinction is important. We cannot create effective learning experiences without some understanding of how learning happens. But does that distinction matter for a client? I’ve worked with many clients. I can’t remember anyone mentioning either learning theories or instructional design models. My experience may be skewed to mostly an audience of startup software companies, who may be least likely to care about either. But regardless of whether the theory or the model is important to them, they want results. And to get the best results, learning experiences need to be grounded in effective strategies. That’s where a model like ARCS shines. References Francom, G., & Reeves, T. C. (2010). A Significant Contributor to the Field of Educational Technology. Educational Technology, 50(3), 55-58. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44429809 Small, R. (2000). Motivation in Instructional Design. Teacher Librarian, 27(5), 29. This week I got feedback from my professor and a peer on my design for a semester-long course for undergraduates on customer education. This post reflects on that feedback and changes I may implement to improve the design.
One of the challenges with customer education is that it is rapidly evolving as the field matures. Because of that, I want the course to be more about building a foundation of awareness and skills, rather than students being able to become experts in a specific set of knowledge. So I was very happy to discover George Siemen's theory of Connectivism (Siemens, 2005). One question my peer reviewer brought up that I’d like to explore is in the Theoretical Basis of Design section of my design document. I'd like to explain more why I chose Connectivism over the Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism theories that are all mentioned in the theory paper. To me, Connectivism is the ideal approach for this course for many of the same reasons that Siemens points out that these older theories aren’t able to address the learning needs of today. Two questions of note that Siemens (2005) asks, in relation to the limits of the other theories are: “How are learning theories impacted when knowledge is no longer acquired in the linear manner?” and “How do learning theories address moments where performance is needed in the absence of complete understanding?” The challenge is in delivering such a learning experience in a 100% online asynchronous manner. As it is intended to be delivered through a university (such as University of North Texas’ Learning Technologies program), it is a cohort-based course. That means that discussions can still be a key component of the course. My peer brought up that the design includes many writing assignments. I realize that as a writer, writing is my go-to option for reflection. To address this, I’m going to incorporate options for students to turn in their reflections that include writing a blog or doing a video blog. The design hinges on the diversity of opinions introduced in the discussions, so the reflections just need to be accessible to students’ classmates. There were several other details that I want to clarify in the design, such as clarifying the audience and grading of some of the listed optional activities. These details highlight the fact that instructional designers can always improve their designs by getting at least one other opinion on their designs before they start building. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning. 2(1). Retrieved 1/25/2024 from https://itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm. Both asynchronous and synchronous e-learning use a computer to facilitate learning, and Piskurich (2015) leans into this detail in our instructional design textbook. I want to explore both of these key delivery formats in this post. However, I think in today’s learning landscape, it's a confusing way to distinguish them. Therefore, for the purposes of this discussion, I will use the term eLearning (with a more modern spelling) to mean the asynchronous variety and VILT, for virtual instructor-led training for the synchronous version. Synchronous learningI’d like to talk about VILT first, because as part of a strategy for teaching your audience, it should come first, at least as a pilot. VILT is less expensive and time-consuming to develop. Piskurich mentions that the design doesn’t have to be perfect for VILT, since there is a facilitator, who can talk through any gaps in the design. While VILT can reach a wide audience, the number of learners is best limited to around 15 (or 20 at most with the right support) in each session. (Let’s recognize here that a webinar with a larger audience isn’t really about actual learning; it’s informational, and any learning is an accident.) However, Piskurich does point out that since it is synchronous, all learners and the facilitator have to be present at the same time. Though Piskurich mentions that these sessions can be recorded and shared with people in other time zones, I share his doubts that learners get much value from a recorded VILT. But I also accept that whether due to fear of missing out (FOMO) or that a box needs to be checked that someone has “done the learning”, these recordings will persist, though they are a poor substitute for being in a virtual classroom together.
Frequent mini-interactions and discussions are important. If VILT doesn’t engage the audience, you may as well give them a video to watch or an audio to listen to. The value of the classroom, whether it’s virtual or face-to-face, is the interaction from both instructor to student and student to instructor, as well as from student-to-student. Student-to-student learning can continue asynchronously in a community, but Piskurisch also makes some key points about the effort and maintenance required for an effective learning community. Asynchronous learningA well-designed eLearning program, on the other hand, does require a complete design that considers not only individual interactions but the context in which those interactions live. These asynchronous learning experiences can reach many more learners, in any time zone, whenever they like to learn. Even though eLearning may cost more initially and take longer to develop than learning with an instructor, the cost per learner can be significantly lower, especially if there is a very large audience. (For example, my potential audience for my job at Snyk can be thousands of developers at an individual customer account, and we have lots of customer accounts.) Cost per learner for a program is one of the factors in tying a learning program back to the business need it is meant to solve. There are plenty of examples of poorly designed eLearning out there. A few clicks, especially if they are only navigational, do not help learners learn. In order to create an eLearning experience that learners might actually want to learn from, it’s best to create opportunities for thoughtful interaction and practice. I highly recommend Michael Allen's Guide to E-Learning (2nd Edition) (2016) for some examples of interactions that get learners to think beyond consuming information. The other aspect of eLearning to consider as part of the design is that good learning experiences aren’t enough. Getting people to the right learning experiences for their needs and helping them understand how to make the most out of that experience is an important consideration. As Avramescu and Derington (2020) have said “If you build it, they won’t come.” In addition to making a learning experience that people actually want to learn from, you have to promote those experiences and connect them to learners where they need them. Reflections on Project AWhat worked well for Project A is working on a project where I had quite a bit of knowledge and interest. It was unlikely that I’d find something that met the project requirements from my work at Snyk. The courses I design for Snyk are mostly asynchronous eLearning of 10-30 minutes each, and between our business needs and our learner audience, a 3-hour course is impractical. It was great to find a client and need that fit my interests and allowed me to practice skills that I need to work on.
I did a good job with making my workshop interactive, but some of the activities didn’t go as well, and some of them felt forced for the sake of the project requirements. When I develop this course further, I will leave out Kahoot! altogether. Even though it’s engaging, it wasn’t right for this audience. I’m working on a completely different type of project for Project B, but will bring what I learned about the process from analysis, through design, development, implementation, and evaluation. It will be a different challenge that I’m looking forward to! References Allen, M. (2016). Michael Allen's Guide to E-Learning (2nd Edition). Wiley. Avramescu, A. & Derington, D. (2020, July 27). Customer Education Strategy: 6 principles for success. Customer Education Laboratories. https://customer.education/2020/07/customer-education-6-principles/ Piskurich, G. (2015). Rapid Instructional Design: Learning ID Fast and Right, 3rd Edition. Wiley. Definitions
It is important to follow a design process when developing computer-assisted learning experiences. The definitions of design and process can help with understanding of what that means and why it's important.
The definition of design includes the concept of creating something, as well as the concept of using a plan (Merriam-Webster, 2023a). The purpose of a design varies, depending on the type of design. Examples include different disciplines including visual design, user experience design, and even fashion design (Indeed Editorial Group, 2022). The definition of process includes the idea that there are a series of steps involved that lead to something. (Merriam-Webster, 2023b). In my experience, a process may be ill-defined and informal, but there are still steps that take the creation of something from an idea to publication. Or the process may be a formal, well-documented and established series of steps involving multiple teams. For example, in a literature analysis that looked specifically at research around an "Integrated Building Design Process" for climate responsive buildings, there were 5303 relevant documents (Li et al., 2022). Importance of Using a Design Process
It's important to follow a process to ensure that what you are creating meets the goals and needs that thing is intended to address. For example, in The Customer Education Playbook, the authors point out that a bad user experience causes not only frustration, but even negative emotions for the users (Quick & Kelly, 2022). If you are designing a learning experience, it’s important to reduce frustration to support and optimize learning.
Outcomes can differ based on how something is implemented. This can be especially true with learning design, with impactful differences. For example, a study that looked at advanced life support training in medical professionals found that an e-learning delivery of the training led to fewer people passing the cardiac arrest simulation tests than the traditional in-person methods (Perkins et al., 2012). Examples of Effective DesignAsana Academy
Asana Academy (Asana, n.d.) is a high-quality example of the result of an effective design process to help people learn via computer. The screenshots in the slideshow illustrate three scenes from one of the courses aimed at new customers.
The screen animations are simpler than an actual use case of Asana, which helps reduce the cognitive load for a person who is just learning.
TechSmith Camtasia Tutorial Video
TechSmith produces great tutorials for their products. In the Record, Edit, Share video (TechSmith, 2019), we can see good use of alignment, space, and contrast. The TechSmith video also simplifies the screen to focus on the most important parts for a new learner. In addition, this video makes use of a zoom feature, which increases one section of the screen significantly, while keeping it in reference to where it is located on the screen. Zooming into something in a video is a great way to draw attention to something specific, as the related narration explains it.
|
AuthorMichele Wiedemer has worked in software as an "accidental instructional designer" for many years. She is currently completing the MS in Learning Technologies at The University of North Texas. This blog represents reflections on specific assignments in the coursework. Archives
February 2024
Categories |