Now that I’ve gotten back into blogging, I’ve decided to release another post on my annual goals for instructional design. Keeping these goals public helps keep me on task.
Like last time, I am aiming for quality over quantity when it comes to my goal setting. I am continuing to split my goals into categories, but this time into only two: Design and Development. I want to be realistic as possible this year. After the chaos of covid-ravaged 2020, 2021, and 2022, I want to ensure my goals are achievable regardless of external forces.
Design
I will focus on promising areas of design:
Microlearning
Simulations
Scenarios and stories
Development
I will focus on development directly related to my job, not simply areas that interest me in general:
3D modelling (going beyond basics) plus 360-degree images and videos
Video-based learning using more advanced features of tools I am already familiar with (such as green screens, PremierePro, AfterEffects, etc.)
JavaScript (going beyond basics)
Conclusion
Here’s to 2023 and let’s hope it will be a much better year than the past few.
There is still quite a bit of debate over the term ‘learning experience designer’ (LXD). The intent of the term was to distinguish L&D professionals who design by considering the entire learning experience rather than focusing only on the content (Read Connie Malamed’s article, for more details about the term). However, some have taken to criticize the term by stating ‘it is impossible to design an experience.’
While this statement is somewhat valid, no one intended for the term to be taken so literally. Its just that ‘learning experience designer’ is a much catchier term than ‘instructional designer who plans for all aspects of learning, including research-based inclusive human-centered user experiences and real-world metrics, rather than just content.’ The latter is just a little bit wordy.
Now, I can’t be inside your brain and force you to think, remember, or feel certain things, and I also can’t force you to learn in exactly the way I want you to; however, I can help design the learning in a way that will guide your experience.
Exhibit A
I was slated to give a talk about the use of video-based eLearning at a conference a couple years ago (cancelled due to COVID-19) and one part of my talk I was going to use the following example about bringing about certain emotions in your audience:
Watch the three videos.
(Note: I was also going to use these same videos to emphasize the importance of lighting… so unfortunately, you’ll just have to imagine the ending yourself)
Conclusion
How did you feel during each video? They were identical aside from the music. Yet the emotions you felt were likely different.
Learning experience design takes this idea but considers all aspects of learning in order to design a course, lesson, job aid, video, etc. that will have the greatest positive impact on learning.
When I recently re-started blogging I thought I should also resume the eLearning Heroes Challenges. I’ve yet to actually submit an entry and I don’t plan on submitting this one either. However, it’s always fun to brush up on some skills and to play around with new ideas.
For this challenge, I combined two challenges:
Custom Bookmarking and Conditional Navigation in eLearning (390)
Using 3D Models in eLearning (347)
You might notice this demo is light on content. But that’s okay – this challenge has more to do with features than it does with content.
I started with the challenge #390, which was about locking down navigation. While I am typically not a fan of locked navigation, I used this as the basis for my demo.
I kept things simple with only 4 areas of content to be viewed in order. I locked the main table of contents page using simple Boolean variables. When learners visit one section, it unlocks the next section by triggering a switch from False to True in the appropriate variable. The hover effect works in the same way.
In the end, I decided not to lock the navigation in each section to prevent learners from going back to the table of contents without viewing the section content. This could have been achieved using a similar Boolean variable approach, but it seemed like overkill. There I would have triggered the change in variable following a final interaction (specifically: the end of the video, the end of the animation, the final click of the anatomy piece, and the selection of a choice for the ‘truth, truth, myth’ game.
After creating the table of contents, I needed some content. I recalled there was a 3D model challenge in 2021 so I decided that would be one of the content pieces. I used the same approach as described by Tom Kulmann in his blog to create the interactive 3D animation model.
Finally, I added continuous audio playback on the main screens by creating a single slide for the introduction and the table of contents by placing the table of contents on a slide layer. I then set it to resume previous state so that the music continues, and progress is kept each time the learner returns to the table of contents.
I recently read an article that Patti Shank wrote back in 2020 about ways to reduce the challenges that learners face when learning from smaller screens. The entire article was fascinating, but for me there was a single section that stood out the most: interaction cost.
The reason this topic stood out for me was not actually related to screen size, but rather due to an argument I’d had a few years ago. It turns out that I might have easily won the argument had I used Patti’s research-based information. Let’s start with the argument and then jump into how Patti’s article is relevant
The argument
I was once told that every single slide of every single eLearning course must have some sort of clicking interaction. This was ostensibly because the learners would get bored otherwise.
At the time my main argument against this was that the specific learners and the specific content should drive the format of the slide (i.e., slide design is not based on designer/developer desires). If clicking interactions made sense for that particular content, that’s fine. However, if those types of interactions didn’t make sense, they should be excluded.
I also tried to argue that information interaction is far more important than interface interaction and that our focus should be there. For more on this topic, see one of my very first posts. Briefly, interface interaction is the clicking, dragging, swiping, etc. used to get more content from a single slide. On the other hand, information interaction is the way that learners intellectually engage with the information and process it. For example, reflecting, connecting with prior knowledge, practicing concept attainment/inductive learning, engaging with scenarios, etc.
The research-based solution
What I didn’t know at that time, was the concept of interaction cost. Interaction cost is the effort (both mental and physical) required for make the course progress. We’ve all experienced the frustration of dealing with screens that seem to scroll forever, multiple clicks to get to a single section, and needless dials and sliders, but we may not have thought about the increased mental effort required to deal these as well.
Decreasing cognitive load is the key driving force for many of Mayer’s principles of multimedia learning. By requiring learners to click, scroll, drag, etc., we are increasing the cognitive load required to complete the course. This is likely not our goal. And all these additional interactions can backfire when cognitive overload occurs, and learners’ brains become overwhelmed. While interface interaction can be exciting and flashy, it isn’t necessarily the best way to present content.
Conclusion
I always have and always will keep cognitive load on the top of my mind when designing slides, to help determine whether interface interaction is adding or subtracting from the slide. If it impedes learning, I will always seek to eliminate those flashy clicks, drags, and swipes.
I am excited to be presenting at the 2022 Canadian eLearning Conference. I’ll be presenting on inductive learning – one of my favourite topics! Check out my promo for this conference.
This conference will be held virtually again this year. To learn more, go to www.canadianelearning.ca.
Well, 2020 was a tough year and so far 2021 has been more of the same. Hopefully we will soon be looking at covid-19 in the rear-view mirror.
During this time I’ve dealt with several other major life hurdles, but I’m back again – hopefully I will be able to blog more regularly going forward.
Today I thought I’d create something for the eLearning Heroes Challenge. This piece marks my (second) return to completing the eLearning Heroes Challenges after a long hiatus.
I combined two challenges:
Use Audio, Music, and Sound Effects in eLearning (242)
Using Video Backgrounds in eLearning (329)
I originally planned on creating something only for #329, but I felt the finished project needed a little something extra. After adding in the audio, I thought it would be a nice little piece for challenge #242 as well.
I wanted to make use of video for two purposes.
To set the scene: this was accomplished with the introductory video.
To add a bit of interest to the background of the main content: I chose something that was interesting but not so interesting that it distracted from the content or caused cognitive overload.
Additionally, I chose an inductive style of content presentation. Although typically this would include more detailed feedback, I wanted to keep this quite simple for the challenge.
When it comes to technical challenges, I addressed the continuous video and audio playback by creating a single layer course, with different visibility settings for each layer to ensure the background video and audio continued to play while new content was presented.
