Prue Salter’s Blog: Exploring the Power of Technology as a Learning Tool

E-Learning Design : Final Model

CONTEXT

My business (ELES) provides support to secondary schools to help develop students’ study skills. I run study skills sessions for schools and write resources for teachers to use with their students. Teachers do not have time to develop these materials/sessions themselves and the students are more receptive to an ‘expert’ in the field.

Three issues have led to a new direction in the business. Firstly, I already cannot keep up with the growing demand for sessions and have no desire to have staff or a franchise - leveraging technology can help to deal with this. Secondly, I believe that we need to tap into students’ passion for technology and use this as a motivational tool to engage them in a topic (study skills) that we know is important, but that they perceive as dry and dull. The third factor is that for commercial reasons, the solution needs to be a web-based subscription service, a membership website that schools subscribe to. Although I am constrained by this factor I have no restrictions (apart from the usual ones of budget and time) as to what technology I use to implement this solution on this site.

The challenge will be to try and capture what I do in a face to face setting without compromising the richness of the experience while taking advantage of the possibilities offered by the technology - therefore an effective design strategy is essential.

I have an existing study skills website (www.studyskillshandbook.com.au) that is a starting point for this process. This website is primarily for the benefit of secondary (Yrs 7-12) students but with FAQs for parents and teachers. There are 26 different sections of content around the topic of study skills. Students can browse the site as needed at home, or secondary teachers can take a class to a computer lab at school to work through a particular section.  I need to determine firstly if I have the right content to address the learning needs I am concerned about (ie improving students’ study skills) and secondly how do I use this content to create an effective solution that will meet these learning needs. I therefore plan to develop a ‘module’ for each section that meets these needs.

 So the context for me is: designing an online web-based module solution to help secondary students develop their study skills.

 

EXPLANATION / LEARNING PROCESS

Overall Principle:

My AIM is that the process of evaluating and improving the solution will be ongoing.
This is not a product that is developed, evaluated and then taken to market. A selling point of this product is that it is an ever-expanding, ever-improving learning experience for students and therefore one of the key features needs to be that it is constantly evaluated and improved.

 This means evaluation is ongoing. One of the criticisms Gordon and Zemke (2000) discuss is that traditional needs analysis is too long. This is something I can relate to. I have found that with web based products you need to keep re-evaluating both the outcomes and the needs on a timely basis - making iterative changes constantly.

 Feedback is therefore to be regularly collected through a variety of ways: formal surveys, informal discussions, interviews, focus groups, online evaluation/feedback/suggestions options as well as unsolicited and solicited comments and suggestions via phone and email. The feedback is collated and a solution is proposed to deal with the issues raised, implemented then feedback collected again.

Initially the data collection is determining needs, potential issues and concerns while in subsequent iterations of the cycle the analysis is to determine if these are being met from the implemented solution and if any new needs, issues or concerns have arisen.

I realized how important this was to me from Eileen’s initial feedback on my first draft posted on my blog (Eileen Chau, E-Learning Design Draft Model, 15 August 2008) about the need to elaborate on my evaluation process. I had not discussed this in my initial model as it was such a fundamental part of the way I view design that I had taken it as assumed - it was so integral to me at an almost subconscious level that I had neglected the need to articulate it. In my business one of my strengths is that I constantly collect and respond to feedback in all aspects of the business. So this was a major revelation to me and thus the re-jig of the model to reflect the importance of this process.

Background:
First Model:

My initial model was originally influenced by the discussions by Clark (2004), Gordon and Zemke (2000) and Zemke and Rossett (2002) about ISD and the ADDIE model. I could see that many of the criticisms of these models were valid, particularly in a corporate setting, but saw value in the ADDIE model as a general principle for design - thus leading to my first iteration of my model in which I modified the ADDIE model to fit my context.

Final Model Features:

After my epiphany on the importance of evaluation and the cyclical nature of my design process in my context, I looked at a more circular model before finally moving to the triangle model shown above where each corner is an essential part of the structure to support an effective design process in this context.

My next major revision came after reading Teo and Williams (2006) and through the discussions on UTS Online where I commented: “Breaking the learning environment down into different components appealed to me and made me realize that in my learning model I need to expand upon the ‘design’ stage of my model, at this point in time it is more focused on process.” (Prue Salter, Theoretical Framework for Effective Online Course Design, 13 August 2008, Week 3-4 Forum).

The UTS Online class discussions on the role of learners prompted me to move my learners to the centre of my model, and the discussion on the role of teachers prompted me to add the circle encompassing my model to represent my role. As this is small business, I am responsible for not only the design process but also play an active support role where students can ask questions, ask for help or make suggestions, and also where I respond to opinions and issues they have raised - hence the arrow from the circle (ELES) to the students.

Main Model Components:

 ANALYSE:

The first component of my model reflects three main principles.
- Importance of understanding the needs of the learner and other relevant stakeholders.
- Need for a rigorous approach to data collection, evaluation and the importance of feedback mechanisms.
- Need to constantly strive for improvement.

I have many opportunities in my business to collect data via surveys and as there are 60 schools already using the site, I can set up mechanisms such as online surveys and feedback mechanisms for the relevant stakeholders to share their views on their needs and on their reactions to the solutions provided. I would like to provide opportunities for some of the learning experiences to be user generated ie students contribute ideas/materials/multimedia to the site.

The model shows that there are a large number of stakeholders with divergent needs and perspectives. Students’ main concern is that it is not boring. Teachers want it to be something that is valuable, helps students, makes parents happy and requires minimal preparation on their part. Schools want it to make them look good. Parents want it to help their students get better results. The problem is, that many of these needs could be at cross purposes to each other - a balance is needed between helping students develop their skills and teachers perceiving it as a valuable tool yet having enough enjoyable activities to also keep students engaged. I want it to be a valuable and useful tool for all stakeholders that will eventually enhance and reduce what I do in a face-to-face setting - this then also leads to a positive commercial outcome.

Justification:

Emphatic design principles were the guiding force behind the first component of my model. Nichani (2002) discusses the importance of observing users in action, capturing data, identifying real learning needs, and brainstorming for solutions. It is the ‘user-centeredness’ of this approach that appeals to me. Nichani also discusses developing prototypes for users to give feedback which is why the arrow from the learners also points to the next stage of the model. 

I was also influenced by the discussion by Baskin and Anderson (2003) on the concept of trial by multimedia. This emphasized the need that all stakeholders are consulted. Teachers have very real concerns about technology (eg. an increase in their workload). This reinforced my idea that the existing site with worksheets that teachers copy needs to move towards a more modular design.

INVESTIGATE:

The next stage in my model is to investigate possible design solutions to meet these learning needs. I start with two main outputs from the analyse step: specific learning needs outcomes and collated concerns and considerations. My next step is to investigate how these needs are best met and when evaluating after the first cycle, what changes can be made to better meet the needs.

Data will be collected on a regular and ongoing basis. Smaller changes from incidental feedback can be made on a weekly basis, monthly updates for medium-sized projects and annual updates for larger overhauls.

Through my readings I developed a number of considerations that will influence the design model at this stage. These are my core instructional design principles for my context. From these I will brainstorm ideas on how best to meet the learning needs.

• Flexible Constructivist Approach

Two assumptions that Teo and Williams (2006) make that are crucial:  learning will not necessarily emanate from one source, and when learning occurs it will occur in diverse ways (many examples of ways to provide for different learners are outlined in Bonk and Zhang (2006)).  I think these principles are essential for ensuring more than a one size fits all solution. Teo and Williams state that taking a constructivist approach to the learning design encourages the potential for deep learning to take place. Learning needs to be constructed through the students’ learning activities and is even more effective if they can then return that knowledge back to the system.

Richards (2003) also discusses the importance of a constructivist approach to learning, the need to present concepts in a variety of different ways ensuring students can direct their learning. Other important factors Richards highlights are the importance of cognitive scaffolding, and students need the opportunity to interact with the learning in a variety of ways with time for reflection between experiences.

Rose and Meyer (2007) point out that one of the greatest barriers to learning is inflexible educational materials and methods. This is reinforced by Spiro et al (1991) who point out that technology is particularly suited to creating flexible solutions. Therefore, at this stage of my design I need to consider how the learning needs can be met within the framework of a constructivist approach to learning, developing rich learning experiences with a flexible format.

• Sequenced, Activity Based Engaging Problems

An important design guideline is captured in Zemke and Rossett’s quote from Foxon talking about the need for good ISD with ‘tight practice opportunities, proper chunk size and sequencing, and learning experiences that are problem based’ (2002, pp.34).

The importance of engaging students in real-world authentic activities is reinforced in Teo and Williams (2006). This aspect is essential in order to overcome students’ distaste of the topic of study skills. As Kalantzis and Cope (2004) point out, learners need to be engaged and motivated by what they are learning.

• Evaluation and Tracking System

The concerns outlined in Baskin and Anderson (2003) about the need to evaluate students and keep track of what they have done highlights the need for some form of evaluation that learning needs have been met to take place, and that completion of these modules by students can be tracked.

Romeo (2004) discusses the importance of creating a valid assessment environment for school students where the environment provides opportunities for feedback, self-evaluation encourages risk-taking and problem solving with assessment activities that reflect the learning goals. The challenge will be to determine an effective way to evaluate whether learning has taken place.

MODULE:

Mason, Pegler and Weller’s (2005) discussion on learning objects inspired me with the idea of creating a module for each unit to meet the learning needs - not a learning object exactly, but a modification of that concept. I also agree that attention spans are changing and the modern world has less time for lengthy courses and more interest in just-in-time learning and that we have to cater for these while at the same time being conscious of avoiding the soundbite-style education discussed.

 This stage has two parts:

• the technical creation of the module
• reference back to the key design principles to ensure that these have been adhered to and have not been lost in the development of the original ideas.

The model then proceeds back to the evaluation phase. Note that once entering the design process there is no ending point - it is an ongoing cycle. The aim is that the online study skills handbook continually responds to the changing needs of students, explores new areas for learning and focuses on looking for more effective ways to meet learning needs through the facilitation of the effective design process

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Baskin, C. and Anderson, N. (2003). The online Classroom: A self-actualising theme park or a trial by multimedia? Australian Educational Computing, 18(1): 11-20.

Bonk, C. and Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 Model: Online learning for

diverse learners of this world. Distance Education, 27(2): 249-264.

Chau, E. (2008) Comment on: Prue Sater’s Blog: E-Learning Design Draft Model, viewed 15 August 2008, <http://psalter.edublogs.org/eld/>

Clark, D. (2004). A Brief History of Instructional System Design.
Available: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/history_isd/isdhistory.html [accessed: 5 Aug 2008].

e-Learning Design 013090  Discussion Forums, UTSOnline, University of Technology, Sydney, Spring Semester 2008.

Gordon, J. and Zemke, R. (2000). The attack on ISD. Training, 37(4): 42-53. 

Kalantzis, M. and Cope, B. (2004). Designs for Learning. E-Learning, 1 (1): 38-93. 

Mason, R., Pegler, C. Weller, M. (2005). A Learning Object Success Story. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, Volume 9, Issue 1 - March 2005.

Nichani, M. (2002). Emphatic Instructional Design. Elearningpost. Available: http://www.elearningpost.com/articles/archives/empathic_instructional_design/ [accessed 7 Aug].

Richards, S. L. (2003). The interactive syllabus: A resource-based, constructivist approach to learning. The Technology Source, July/August. Available: http://www.technologysource.org/article/interactive_syllabus/ [accessed 18 Aug, 2008]

Romeo, G. (2004). Teaching, learning and technology: Research, Reform, Realise the Potential. Keynote Paper presented at the ACEC 2004 Australian Conference for Computers in Education, Adelaide, Australia. Available: http://www.acec2008.info/uploads/documents/store/resources/res_7245_acec2004_romeo.pdf [accessed 5 Sept].

Rose, D. and Meyer, A. (2007). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5): 521-525.

Spiro, R., Feltovich, P,  Jacobson, M and Coulson, R (1991). Cognitive Flexibility, Constructivism, and Hypertext: Random Access Instruction for Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains.  Educational Technology, May 1991: 24-33

Teo, S. and Williams, J. (2006). A Theoretical Framework for Effective Online Course Design. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(1): 12-21.

Zemke, R. and Rossett, A. (2002). A Hard Look at ISD. Training, 39(2): 26-34.

 

 

E-Learning Design : Draft Model

Background

I run a business that provides support to secondary schools in the area of helping develop students study skills. Basically I run study skills sessions for schools and write study skills resources for teachers to use with their students. Based on the demand for my services, there is definitely a strong desire and need for learning in this area. Teachers do not have the time to develop these materials/sessions themselves and the students are more receptive to an ‘expert’ in the field.

 Two concerns have led to a new direction in the business. Firstly I already cannot keep up with the demand for sessions and demand is continually growing. I have no desire to have staff or a franchise so how can I meet the growing need? Secondly, I believe that we need to tap into student’s passion for technology and use this as a motivation tool to engage them in a topic that we know is important but that they perceive as dry and dull. Also by taking a technological approach, this would solve the first issue as the leverage from technology means you can reach a much wider audience.

So I decided to create an online study skills handbook for schools to subscribe to. As both ideas person and designer, I basically just started creating it and let the design ideas evolve throughout the creation process - probably not the most efficient or effective way of working. I was fairly happy with the outcome but knew it could be much improved. When I started this subject I realized just how much it could be improved.

So I have decided to approach this subject as though I had not designed the online study skills handbook yet. I plan to approach the design process as though I was just beginning and the interesting part will be to see if what I have created is what I would have ended up with if I had followed a proper design process - I suspect there will be divergence!

So the context for me is: designing an online solution to help secondary students develop their study skills.

The model clearly shows that one of the features that is salient for this design process is the large number of stakeholders all with divergent needs and perspectives. Students main concern is that it is not boring. Teachers want it to be something that is valuable, helps students, makes parents happy and requires minimal preparation on their part. Schools want it to make them look good. Parents want it to help their students get better results. The problem is, that many of these needs could be at cross purposes to each other - a balance is needed between helping students develop their skills yet having enough fun stuff to also keep them engaged - but not too much so that teachers so not perceive it as a serious tool. ELES (ie me) wants it to be a valuable and useful tool for all stakeholders - if this is achieved it then leads to a positive commercial outcome as well.

Another feature of the model is that all feedback comes to the designer/creator (which is also me). Although I outsource some work, I do most of the actual creation in addition to the design work. This means that design and the implementation of the solution are often intertwined.

Another feature is that I do not plan on doing a ‘pilot’ study per see. Basically the site is created, people start using it and based on feedback it is continually changing and being modified to adjust to feedback and the new needs or improve the way old needs are addressed. This process is continually on-going.

 

• Leave a comment...