Regrouping on creative-side-of instructional-design agenda

I have purposely put IT 5130 aside for a couple of months, to allow for the necessary space and time for new ideas to bubble up and take shape. Although I think that the course worked for many people, it didn't work for all of the students. And, although I was able to attend to my creative-side-of-instructional-design agenda a bit, I was/am dissatisfied. I just don't think I did enough to promote the creative disposition learning objective. So, all of my thinking about changing the course has been around this learning objective (and trying to reduce the workload, and any sense of an activity being "busy work"). To this end, here are a few ideas I am playing with.

Course Title:

I would like to change the title of the course to something like "Creative Designs for Self-paced Instructional Materials" or "Aesthetics of Self-paced Instructional Materials Design" (could get rid of the "self-paced" part, although that really is part of the context)... I want the title to be a better description of the course, and to get people interested in the course content. And, to be clear about how this course is different from other courses (e.g., the eLearning certificate courses are focused on the design and delivery of instructor-facilitated eLearning opportunities).


Books:

I still like Duarte's slide:ology text, and want to continue to use it next time. But, I will not use Mayer's book again. I believe I can provide a handout that distills the principles shared in his Multimedia Learning book, and mix them with Medina's brain rules and Tufte's lessons. Instead, I want to use books that help us think about the product of our design process -- and the design process itself -- in a different way. For example --

• Scott McCloud's Making Comics. It is really a great book about storytelling, presented as a comic book. I really like the sections on writing with pictures and the power of words.
• Carol Vernallis' Experiencing Music Video. Not sure this is the one to go with, but the detailed analysis of three well-known videos really helps illustrate some "universal" design guidelines that translate to eLearning and instructional message design.
• Matthew Frederick's 101 Things I Learned in Architecture School. I really like this little book. (Related, I also like Hall Box's Think Like an Architect)
• Babak Ebrahimian's Sculpting Space in the Theater. This may be too far off track, but it has to do with how to make "real" what is written/storyboarded...using space, lighting, costumes, etc. I like the idea of working with all of these elements to create a unique and powerful whole.

I wouldn't require all of them...costs too much for students, and I want to be realistic about how much they can read and process. It may be fine for students to pick and choose -- everyone buys Duarte's text, and two others from the list based on their interests (I could make the first chapter of each text available to help them make the decision).


Activities/Projects:

I am thinking about scraping the existing projects and going with a set of "what if" assignments such as:

• What if instruction was like a music video
• What if instruction was like a movie poster
• What if instruction was like a comic book
• What if instruction was like a documentary
• What if instruction was like a radio show
  
• And so on (but not too many more...I'll group them and let students pick one from each list...but, no more than three).
  

I want to spend the first 5 weeks critiquing existing instructional messages (those I bring forward and those the students bring forward), and getting exposed to these other design perspectives. To this end, I am going to:

• Invite guest speakers from the film industry, architecture, game design, music industry, etc. We will use Adobe Connect to spend an hour with each guest. (Note: This means I will need to require participation in synchronous sessions...which is different than what I do in online courses. My thinking is to require 2 hours one evening a week for the first half of the semester. These synchronous sessions will be time for us to work together on critiques and work with guest speakers. Then, for the second half of the semester, I will have synchronous "office hours" where participation is voluntary, on a as-needed basis.)
  
  
• Conduct video interviews with a handful of creative professionals. I want to collect several stories (3-5 minutes in length, at the most), using the following questions (note: these are rough draft questions, and they may not speak to each person interviewed):
  
  • Where do you get your inspiration (insights) for your work?
    
  • When you decide to embark on a new project, what process do you go through from start to finish?
    
  • How do you know when a project is done?
    
  • What is the most important step in your design (creation) process, and why?
    
  • What one piece of advice would you give designers (regardless of domain) about the creative/design process?
    
  • How do you describe the difference between your creative/design process and the product of that process?
    
  • Are there guiding ideas that you’ve learned through experience – that you apply to new projects? If so, can you tell me about one – where it came from and how you find it useful?
    
  • There’s a visioning or imagining part of the creative process that’s really critical. What techniques do you have to stimulate your ability to see problems and solutions better? How do you open yourself up to possibilities?
    
  • Can you think of a case or example that illustrates a particularly satisfying breakthrough or solution to a creative/design problem?
  
  I then want students to deconstruct what they learn from these creative professionals, and determine how it applies to their work as instructional designers, eLearning specialists, and K-12 teachers.

Another thing I am thinking about is resurrecting a classic message design assignment: the ear. I have a couple of old ear illustrations used to help students learn the parts of the ear. One is a simple line drawing, the other is a complex line drawing. As a transition assignment between critiquing existing instructional messages and creating their own (one visual presentation, one audio presentation, one print piece...at least that is what I am thinking at the moment), my thought is to have them select a design perspective (e.g., instruction as comic book), and design a piece that students could use to learn the parts of the ear. (So, if a student decided to create a print-based comic book, then she or he would count this assignment for the print requirement and only have to create two more self-paced instructional pieces: a visual presentation and an audio presentation.)


Misc.:

A concern I still have is the value of this course for K-12 educators (not in the eLearning MA program). I can clearly see the relevance of a course like this for instructional designers and eLearning specialists, regardless of educational setting. But, if someone is a K-12 classroom teacher and intends to continue in that role, then this course may not be appropriate. Still thinking about this, especially in light of the fact that we (ILT program faculty) are thinking about making it required for all ILT students.

Reflecting on my processing of the Zoomerang results

I received some very useful feedback from the Zoomerang survey…I really appreciate when people take the time to share their thoughts and ideas. I haven’t posted to this blog for awhile as I have been focused on the course (grading the second Culiminating Project), and making appropriate adjustments to the course based on the feedback.

Only about ½ the group responded to the Zoomerang survey. Right or wrong, my positive spin on it is that those who did not respond are satisfied with the direction of the course. At least I can’t think of a time when I provided an opportunity to share feedback and those who were unhappy about a particular aspect of the course didn’t take advantage of the opportunity. [Note: It also has a lot to do with how you ask for feedback, the questions you use. I learned from Marty Tessmer – formative evaluation expert – that you have to ask questions in a way that invites a response and assumes that there is always something that can be improved. So, questions that ask, “What three things would you change and why?” indicates that there are at least three things that one should be able to suggest for improvement. The invitation, and structure of questions, can definitely change the response rate and the quality of the responses received.]

Of the responds I received, there were several positive comments, which is good. It is helpful to have reinforcement for what I am doing and what I have designed. Positive comments included things about my attentiveness, quality and quantity of feedback on projects, nature of projects, flexibility to resubmit projects for more points, and the Duarte and Reynolds readings.

I also received several constructively critical comments. Some of the issues shared I immediately addressed. For example, because of comments about the workload being too heavy, I eliminated a Hands-on/Minds-on project to make more space and time for folks working on the final Culminating Project. There were also comments about wishing there were more discussions, so I added a discussion as a way to help the group process Marty Tessmer’s book on designing online tutorials.

Some comments I could respond to now. For example, I received negative comments about the Mayer text. Although I couldn’t fix it for this term, I will find another way to expose students to Mayer’s principles without using his text next year.
Some of the critical comments presented challenges for me because:

• They were inconsistent (some folks liking a particular aspect, and others not)
  
• They were about aspects of the course to which I am committed from an educational perspective (in this case, I just haven’t made the case well enough, I am assuming)
  
• They are about structural issues with the eCollege shell that are out of my control, or – for me to design around – requires a fairly cluegy approach to the design
  
• They are more related to the individuals than the course. At least I think they are…

Let me say a bit more about that last one… Honestly, as an instructional designer, I point my finger at myself as much as possible. It gives me comfort to think that there are things I can do – or do differently – to improve the chances that students’ motivation to learn will be enhanced. But, sometimes, I receive a few comments to a survey like this one that feel more like an abdication of student responsibility than something I can directly address.

For example, a specific comment I received had to do with being consistently confused about due dates. Because it is so easy to lose track of due dates in an online course, I standardized on a single weekly due date – end of day on Sundays. There are three times during the course where there are differing due dates, and those are related to three sets of peer reviews due on Thursdays. The calendar of graded activities (in the Syllabus) and Weekly Agendas – both including information regarding due dates – has been available since the start of the course. My assumption was that people would rely on whatever method they use to track course due dates. For example, I mapped all the due dates to my daytimer so they would be included in my overall view of my week. I also printed out the syllabus and weekly agendas so I could check items off as we went (in fact, I designed the weekly agendas to function as a checklist).

Was my assumption faulty? Yes, or I wouldn’t have received the comments. Was my assumption unreasonable? No. This is a graduate level course, with students who are midway through their programs. Online courses require a proficient level of self-directedness…folks have to be able to manage time, resources, and energy for themselves. Is there something I could do to make things easier to track? I guess so, I’m just surprised I need to.

Where does this leave me? I’ve made some positive adjustments for the remainder of the semester, and have a list of things – like the Mayer text – to reconsider for next time. The feedback – as always – was very useful to my thinking. I always appreciate it when folks take the time to share their thoughts and ideas, even when it isn’t what I hoped or wanted to hear. If you ask for feedback, you have to be prepared for what you receive, and be willing to take appropriate actions based on what you receive. I think I accomplished this.

Not using a week-by-week structure

Typically, I set up my online courses in the LMS using a week-by-week structure. However, I have never really liked that structure because it seems more natural to me to think in terms of activity, especially when those activities occur over multiple weeks. From a student-scheduling perspective, I realize that a week-by-week structure might help folks. But, I am always afraid that the week-by-week structure hides the complexity and context of projects...potentially causing important details to be lost.

When I started working on this course, I kept thinking about what I would do in an on-campus course in an attempt to simplify things, and get the workload for students (and me) under control. So, all of the structure for this course is based on what I do in on-campus courses. I provide descriptions of activities and projects with the syllabus. Then I use weekly agendas to drive what happens each week, with pointers to the various activity and project descriptions. For me, this seems more manageable, simplistic, straight-forward.

I am not sure what the students think about this structure, especially given the fact that many of them have spent a year in online courses that followed a week-by-week structure. So, my decision to structure the course based on activity type -- with weekly agendas for reference -- could fall flat. My hope is that the folks in the course will share with me their views on the design of the course so I can continue to enhance it while in progress and for the next run of the course.

Lining up guest speakers

I knew from the get-go that I wanted to include 2-3 guest speakers during the semester. I am well-experienced with the ebbs and flows of a course, and around November we will need some new ways of connecting and some new folks to connect with. I feel really good about lining up three folks...they will really add new life and energy to a typically low point in the semester.

I am glad that we have access to a good tool for these synchronous live sessions with guest speakers. We will use Adobe Connect, and we will record the sessions for those folks in class who cannot make the live sessions. I also hope that the guest speakers will participate in a discussion forum for a few days following the live session...all are in agreement, so it should work out well.

It launched!

Well, the course is live. Not too much activity yet, but that is pretty normal. Folks are at work, so it tends to be more important for me to check in and answer questions during the evening hours.

I am antsy about not having the Culminating Projects posted. I really do need to wait to gather data from the group, but I prefer to have everything posted when the course starts. Although that has the potential of feeling overwhelming, adult learners prefer to have all of the information up-front so they can start planning their schedules accordingly. [This hearkens back to my conversations with Raymond Wlodkowski and my 22-page syllabus!] Anyway, it should all be fine as long as the detailed project descriptions are available during Week 2.

Doing a tools double-take

I was plugging in Web 2.0 tools everywhere, into every assignment. I am still committed to making a go with Twitter, and to asking folks to use Web 2.0 tools creatively in support of the instructional messages they are designing. But, I have just gone through the course, and pulled out the instances of tools-because-they-are-cool. For example, for the In My Life activity, I originally asked folks to post their photos to a group Flickr account I had set up for the course. And in doing so I violated an instructional message design principle related to proximity. The photos need to be where the text is that describes the photo. Duh.

The added realization is that I was creating unnecessary complexity for each assignment by involving external tools...when the same result could be achieved by using the structure and tools provided within eCollege. Crazy.

Due dates; work week

I think it can be hard to track multiple due dates within a week. When I think about teaching on-campus, I don't do that to my on-campus students. Assignments and projects are typically due at the beginning of a class meeting...with the expectation that learners will complete everything for the week by that date and time. So, for this course, I am going to try to avoid multiple due dates for products. I won't be able to adhere to this guideline when asking learners to discuss and issue using a discussion protocol, or for peer review activities...but I will try to keep due dates as simple as possible.

Related, I have often tried different weekly schedules in order to help learners protect some of their weekends for family and to rest and rejuvinate. I have two small children, and the weekends are all about them...so I am sensitive to this issue. However, whenever I have played with the schedule this way I have received backlash. Learners implore me to give them the weekend to do the work. So again, for the sake of simplicity, this course will function on a Monday-Sunday schedule. This means that the due dates for weekly work is 11:59pm every Sunday. But, let's be honest, it is only 11:59pm in my hopes that learners will get some sleep...I won't be checking timestamps or anything like that. As long as the work is done by Monday morning (9am MST), all is well (except for those who are then sleep deprived).

Weekly Agendas

One of the strategies I've decided to use for the course -- one that I always use in my face-to-face courses and really like -- is the weekly agenda. I like having a one-page document, or checklist, that spells out what needs to be done. The weekly agendas are pithy on purpose...the details are elsewhere (pointed to from the agenda). This means that learners have to click to other parts of the course to get the details, but it also means that multiple agendas can refer to the same assignment, and that assignment only needs to reside in one location (as opposed to being copied and pasted multiple times...which is then a nightmare if I need to make a change to the assignment).

Groupwork

I know that many of the folks who will take IT 5130 have been involved in a lot of complex teamwork activities. For this course, I'm going to focus on individual activities, with a lot of encouraged sharing and required peer review of the three Cumulative Projects. I'm pretty fond of groupwork for online learning communities for a number of instructional reasons. But, time to give them a break.