Another blog post written for my previous employer:
http://www.epiuse.com/easyblog/entry/evaluating-your-elearning-does-it-measure-up-by-jonathan-atleson
-
I've been asked to write more blogs for the EPI-USE America website. This one is a look at some of the finer points of ADDIE as I've experienced it. Specifically, I look at how each step can be broken down into two parts, and perhaps handed off between different people with different roles. This might help in fitting ADDIE into an AGILE framework, as you can break large tasks into smaller ones, thus having more frequent deliverables.
ADDIE Squared: A Deep Dive into eLearning Project Management - By Jonathan Atleson1View comments
-
As IDs, we're always on the lookout for case studies and examples of eLearning - with pictures! So I put together a blog post on my company's site about a recent project that I was a part of.SERIAL INNOVATOR WARNING: This project was made with Flash, news of whose demise has been greatly exaggerated. Also, Captivate 5.5 was used extensively. No HTML5 was used, abused, or hacked in the process.1
View comments
-
The reason your kids can't get interested in music theory is because standard theory has little to do with performance. Rather, it is an explanatory system of composition. This took me some years to figure out as I was pursuing a PhD in Music Theory at the Eastman School of Music.
That said, as one advances in performance it is essential to have a shared vocabulary to verbalize musical ideas, which is provided by music theory. At early stages of performance, however, you are typically imitating other performers. Newer approaches to analysis (i.e., Schenkerian) can help advanced musicians decide on novel interpretations, but can also mislead the less-advanced.
If you want to spur someone's interest in music theory, challenge them to compose some music from scratch. The gap between what they can create ("yuck") and what they can perform (Gluck) may lead them to explore the language of music. And once you learn the lingo, analyzing music is sort of like solving a puzzle created by a genius. I guess that's essentially why I ventured down that path myself. (Not that you want your kids to go for PhDs in Music!)4View comments
-
A comment to my previous post on The Various Roles of Instructional Design prompted me to think about ways to structure learning organizations around these roles. I'm not quite there yet, though. So in preparation, let me propose some high-level roles and how they might fit into an organization. These are somewhat abstracted and the "various" roles in ID will generally fit inside one of the three. Call them "meta-roles" if you will.
I see three fundamental roles (here optimized for eLearning): Project Management, Instructional Design, and Instructional Technology. PM includes responsibilities often associated with training managers. Instructional Design includes working with SMEs and the whole ADDIE process, with an emphasis on design of course. Instructional Technology would include the "delivery technology" of classroom trainers as well as developers and LMS admins.
Why divide this way? I see these three categories as value systems that may conflict on certain issues, based on different backgrounds and responsibilities.
People in these roles may come from different backgrounds. For PMs it may help to have experience in business, in the particular organization, or industry. For IDs a grounding in theory or best practices can help. For IT a technology background is helpful.
PMs are ultimately responsible for delivering the project on time and managing resources. IDs are ultimately responsible for the content being accurate and effective. The technology people, possibly the developer, are ultimately responsible for the content getting into the brains of the audience with ease without going overboard on expensive and time-consuming methods.
When one person acts in two or more of these roles, the problem is not necessarily that they don't have the skills, but rather that the core values that define the multiple roles may conflict. For example, the PM's need to deliver the project on time and within budget is valid, but can conflict with the ID's need to deliver the most effective experience possible. If the deadline or budget slips, there are business consequences, but if the quality misses the mark, the whole project might be in jeopardy. So both roles have valid but conflicting interests.
OK, so what does this have to do with organizational structure? I would suggest that each of these three roles has a primary decision-maker (if there is more than one person). The primary/lead confers with the others about conflicts that arise and they work things out. If they can't, then there should be a management type to act as the ultimate decision-makers.
So what's a decision-maker? ...someone who shoulders the responsibility of choosing a path based on the information and recommendations provided to them. They free the "producers" to head for the destination without second-guessing the chosen path.
Based on this theoretical structure of balanced priorities and expertise, I suppose it would make sense to have three teams: PM, ID, and IT, with perhaps a fourth team for Trainers. Trainers would fit into the process just like the IT/developer group because they are a delivery medium. But culturally it might not be a good fit, as trainers are often closer to the ID folks in orientation than to the tech folks.
Management would go to the PM lead to ask "How are things going?", go to the ID lead to ask "What are you doing?", and go to the IT lead to ask "How are you doing it?"
And then there are those of you who wear all three hats every day. You must be asking yourself a lot of questions! Which one of your roles ends up making the ultimate decision?0Add a comment
-
Job descriptions in ID (or, ISD) these days are all over the map, with very little consistency. It doesn't help that few HR and Recruiters have any knowledge of, or experience with, the field. So I'm going to propose some roles as I understand them, in the hopes that some day hiring managers will be able to articulate better what they want/need in terms of talent for their training departments or projects.Note that one person can hold multiple roles. These are ROLES not PEOPLE. And most of the time these terms are not used with any degree of rigor or standardization. So don't get offended, but please do share your suggestions and feedback!
(Info-graphic from http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Setzer/Experiencing_Objectivism_through_the_Enhanced_Tri-Quation.shtml)
Instructional DesignerCapable of performing or at least managing entire ADDIE process. Primarily responsible for translating raw content into instructional content. In the ADDIE process, this means Analysis and Design: interacting with SME, defining Learning Objectives, and writing storyboards or scripts. Additionally, IDs will be responsible for Evaluation planning and review, providing that is part of the project.
Instructional Systems DesignerWhile this role is often used interchangeably with Instructional Designer, I think there should be some, albeit subtle, distinction. If the term "Systems" has any meaning, it should define the scope of design to be larger than a single course, involving curriculum planning and delivery/tracking information systems such as LMSs. If you need to develop new technologies, processes and templates, not just new courses, you are working on a Systems level. However, if you just need someone to turn out another course in your existing system, you would be looking for the Instructional Designer/Developer roles. This role will be most active in the Analysis, Implementation, and Evaluation phases, but would also have significant input in high-level Design and Development tools and processes. Generally this role should be strong with IT concepts as well as learning management strategies. This could be your one person training department, doing the whole thing, but even for a small organization that's a lot of ground to cover.
Instructional (Multimedia) DeveloperExpert in one or more learning development and web/multimedia tools, comfortably moving between tools or learning new ones with ease (except perhaps Flash and Actionscripting, which are specialties in themselves). They are primarily responsible for creating the actual learning materials, perhaps from a storyboard or other content that has been processed by an Instructional Designer in the Analysis and Design phases. Strong graphic design skills/talents are helpful here, or you may need a Graphic Designer. In the ADDIE process they will be most active in the Development and Implementation phase. So if you need a course created from soup to nuts, you may actually need an Instructional Designer/Developer.
Instructional TechnologistThis role is less commonly found. But if the term "technologist" has meaning, it is someone who uses or applies technology and existing processes to a problem (as in "medical technologist"). They may serve as Instructional Developers, but perhaps without the Graphic Design/Multimedia skills or Instructional Design background. They may operate or maintain instructional systems designed by the ISD, but you wouldn't expect them to create a new system.
Instructional Systems DeveloperThis is what I would call someone who can program a learning portal, LMS, or CMS, or at least can develop custom code to interface with such things. They'll need to know SCORM/AICC and whatever languages are required by your particular environment (.NET, Java, PHP, etc.). These folks are not Developing the courses, but are creating the environment in which students take the courses. Systems Developers (and Analysts) will want to follow software development processes (like RUP) instead of ADDIE.
Instructional Systems AnalystThis is also a rare beast. This would be someone who operates, diagnoses, and repairs ("optimizes") Instructional Systems, typically enterprise software like LMSs, CMSs, etc. These folks will be heavily involved in the Implementation phase, as that's when all the data begins hitting the servers.
Trainer/Training Specialist (anything with the term "Train")These are your classroom and virtual classroom instructors. They are the extroverts who excel at going in front of people, creating an engaging atmosphere, and teaching synchronously. They adapt their lessons on the fly to changing content and audiences, and travel to various places. People in this role may be involved in the complete ADDIE process, as they are directly in contact with the students, but will generally not be involved with self-paced learning development, unless they are Instructional Designer/Trainers. [That said, I think the title "Training Specialist" as used in the wild is often a holdover from pre-ID days, with the meaning, "HR person who helps employees learn stuff." But they're probably an ID.]eLearning/Multimedia Project Manager"A good eLearning project manager needs to understand what makes good eLearning, so they can make decisions that positively affect the quality of the product, and leverage the talents of the project team. [...] Some organizations have split the PM role, so that instructional designers manage the project team while a PM only manages the schedule and budget." - Bob Elmore via comment on eLearning Guild LinkedIn Group: http://snurl.com/jvlftLet me reiterate, before you get your nose out of joint or start rewriting your resume: one person can hold multiple roles. These are ROLES not PEOPLE. And most of the time these terms are not used with any degree of rigor or standardization. So don't get offended, but please do share your suggestions and feedback!
Next up, Part II,
28View comments
-
Instructional Designers usually receive content in "raw" form from SMEs that needs to be nurtured into good instructional content. Usually I advocate that shorter is better, less is more, etc., but sometimes it helps to flesh things out a little bit to make the content come alive. One way to enhance a dry scenario description is to turn it into a little play. If you only have budget for a single narrator though, you can write it in novella format and have the narrator tell a story.
Here's how it could work. The following examples are based on actual Workplace Harassment court cases. I rewrote them as brief vignettes to be read by a narrator while the learner views a custom photo. This approach serves the same purpose as a brief video for a fraction of the cost and time. The learner is then asked to evaluate the scenario to determine if it constitutes Workplace Harassment or not, and why.1.Original:Sumit complains to his manager, Rose, about the crude sexual slang used by the other sales reps. She says he needs to get a sense of humour and join in.Enhanced:
A new sales rep, Sumit, is shocked by the crude sexual banter he hears at the office every day from his co-workers.After squirming in his cubicle for several days, Sumit works up the courage to approach his manager, Rose. “I am not entirely comfortable,” he says, “with the sexual slang that all of you use here.”Rose rolls her eyes. “If you want to be part of the group, you’ll just need to get a sense of humour and play along.”
2.Original:Sumit disciplines Louise, who is physically disabled, about her increasingly sloppy work.Enhanced: Sumit calls Louise into his office, and gets up to close the door himself after she enters.That was one of the small gestures he had adopted to accommodate her blindness.“Louise,” he began, “I just wanted to tell you that I’m disappointed in the quality of your work these last few months, despite what we have already discussed. It just looks sloppy and careless to me.”Louise sits there impassively.He shifts uncomfortably in his seat before continuing. “I am going to give you one more chance to prove you can do this job, or else we’ll have to see if there is some other position that will suit you better.”I don't pretend to be a gifted creative writer, but I've read enough books to figure out the syntax. And what do you think about the custom still photos - did you really miss the video?
Finding new avenues for creativity in your eLearning design will improve the end result, engage your learners, and also make your work a lot more enjoyable to do!2View comments
-
There are lots of ways to supplement a live seminar/coaching approach with online multimedia that go beyond showing a movie or just dumping the whole presentation online.
- A pre-event "teaser" can serve as advertisement and give students some background so they come to the class ready to learn. They can see the instructor and hopefully look forward to being informed and maybe even entertained a bit.
- A brief webinar or online forum can build community prior to the class, maximizing the use of face time. People can get to know classmates and the instructor over a period of weeks before attending class, and it can be fun to meet someone in person who you've only "met" online.
- In addition to coaching, an entertaining series of brief review videos or exercises, perhaps 20 minutes a week, would really help to reinforce concepts and bolster retention long after the training "event."
I've always wanted to implement a "sitcom" that ties concepts from the training into an ongoing story with characters and cliffhangers that keep people coming back every week or two. This could be podcasts with video or animation. Instead of cruising YouTube, recurring training could fit in nicely into a cubicle work-break, if videos were short and entertaining. Or you could create a game with ongoing competition for points. That's a great solution for competitive people like in Sales and Marketing.The technology is here, the audience is ready, let's make training fun, effective, and an integral part of work.1View comments
-
A common complaint about eLearning is that it's simply too boring. There is this unofficial PowerPoint template where you list a bunch of Learning Objectives, present a bunch of concepts, and ask some multiple choice questions. If you get "creative" with this, you might throw in a scenario to "make it real."
So that's what I would call the first type of creativity in eLearning: augmenting the template.Another type of creativity involves going all-out with animations, metaphors, games, videos -- you know, the "engaging" stuff. However, all too often this approach misses the mark, as the "engagement" is applied as a layer on top of the instructional content, and is not organically tied to the content. So what you end up with is a cartoon or game with bullet points here and there -- "PowerPoint on steroids."
Even if the entertainment value is off the charts, I feel this is a bit of a sellout. This is tacitly admitting that learning is boring and the content is dry, so the only way to make the content go down easy is to put on a show and distract the learner from the tedium. I think we can do better!
The third type of creativity requires a great deal of thought and invention, as it organically merges content and presentation into something that is engaging as it educates. The experience here is of doing something interesting or fun, while learning something along the way. How about creating an avatar and vicariously experiencing some awkward diversity situations? If you were a Threeprong, how would you feel if a Printerhead said this behind your back:
How do you achieve this? First you need to identify the primary goal of the instruction and trim away all the clutter of concepts and facts that the learner should know, but won't remember. Second, you need to really think about what the learner might enjoy, but also what might turn them off. Third, and most important, you have to think backward from the desired result in order to come up with an "authentic" experience that would best create that result in the learner. Fourth, you have to adapt your idea to the practical realities of time, budget, tools, and skills at your disposal. And fifth, you need to sell the idea to upper management and corporate branding, if such stakeholder approval is required.
If the idea is strong and you get the green light, making it happen isn't the biggest problem. You will find solutions along the way and it won't feel like work, because you are doing something creative!0Add a comment
-
Blogging is kind of about Ego (let's face it). Instructional Design is sort of the Super-Ego of Learning. And we should strive to put more Id in our ID.
This means stories, games, humor -- the stuff of life. Why? Because learning is a non-stop part of life.
And in eLearning in particular, the human guide disappears to be replaced by the learner's personal relationship with -- the computer. Do you like your personal relationships to be dry and stiff? No, you probably swap stories, play games, and share jokes. That's probably what learners do online for the most part anyway.So, how do I propose to achieve the Id-ification of Edification? I'll get back to you on that.(With less Freud because I am no Psychology SME. And more complete sentences. My pledge to you.)[infographic from: http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk]0Add a comment
Add a comment