The Medium is the Method

Okay, that title was my feeble attempt at humor by spoofing a famous Marshall McLuhan quote (More about him here for those who are curious: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_mc_luhan). So, I have already strayed off topic.

My experience as a designer is what drives my media preferences, and those preferences lie in the area of electronic learning media, or eLearning as it is commonly known. My experience as a trainer initially made me suspicious of eLearning. I thought such things as "These computers are going to take my job" or "How could a computer ever do as a good of a job as a real, live trainer?"

As I have come to learn more about eLearning (in the interest of disclosure, I still have A LOT more to learn) and I find it to be a very engaging, flexible and portable family of media. Specifically, I like computer based training. I like it to include simulations that represent, as realistically as possible, real life situations my learners will actually face they get into the job for which they are training. I like to make them interactive so as to make them more engaging. I also like to not only show them how to perform a task, but also to incorporate elements that show the learners how to locate information in online resources that they all have available to them. I wish I could show you an example, but unfortunately all of my stuff is proprietary.

There is plenty of good, as well as bad, examples of eLearning out there and I like to look at them all to see what works and what does not. One thing I always avoid is the click, read, click, read format (or PowerPoint on the Web) of computer-based training. That is more like an online picture book and less like actual learning.

The method I generally follow is Gagne's Nine Events of Instruction (which can be found in Reiser & Dempsey, p. 41):

1. Gain attention
2. Inform the learner of the objectives
3. Stimulate recall of prior learning (this allows the learner to participate by constructing his/her own learning.)
4. Present the stimulus (present the information via text, image, simulation, Flash animation, etc.)
5. Provide learning guidance (to promote encoding)
6. Elicit performance (Provide an opportunity to practice, simulation, information search, etc.)
7. Provide feedback (Let them know how they did so they know if and what needs more work)
8. Assess performance
9. Enhance retention and transfer (Provide examples or activities)

My Life with ADDIE

The instructional design model, specifically the standard ADDIE model, is one that I follow in almost every project on which I work. I work as an instructional designer serving the customer service function of a major telecommunications provider.

For analysis, I will review the new content against skill sets my audience already possesses to determine what will actually need to be trained. Occasionally I will have to perform a complete task analysis for the purposes of designing the most effective training strategy. In one instance, I even submitted to a copy of the analysis to my client to demonstrate that their processes might not necessarily be as efficient as they would like. I do not generally analyze context as that changes little, if any, from project to project.

From the analysis that I perform, I immediately begin to design learning objectives which I will use as a guideline to determine what skills I should be conveying the understanding.

As part of the design phase, I also communicate a design project plan to my client so there is a clear understanding of what I will provide, when I will provide it, and what input I require from them.

My evaluation generally consists of level one and level two on the Kirkpatrick scale. My department has, at various times, engaged in level three analyses in order to demonstrate to our client that some of our larger-scale curriculum is hitting the mark. Level three analysis is not that difficult for us to do as there is no shortage of metrics that our client collects on itself, with which we can demonstrate a cause and effect relationship by comparing the before and after data. To my knowledge, we do not engage in any level four analyses because to do so would require us having access our client’s financial information.

I like the ISD model. I find that is works well for me/us and provides a solid framework for designing the training that we deliver. The analysis phase I find to be particularly strong and I find no significant weaknesses with it as a whole. The version of it I most often follow is the Rapid Prototyping Design Model of Tripp and Bichelmeyer.