To answer this question, let’s first understand what is “Instructional Design” and who is an instructional designer. (too basic, huh? well, I thought of starting at the basic level!)
As stated in Wikipedia, “Instructional Design is the practice of arranging media (communication technology) and content to help learners and teachers transfer knowledge most effectively.”
If we simply keep that definition in mind, what skills do you think an Instructional Designer should have to transfer the knowledge most effectively to their learners? Do you think an ID who knows how to design a product or how to write well, can transfer or deliver knowledge in the most effective manner to its learners?
I really don’t think so.
In my opinion, an Instructional Designer is one who has a “holistic” picture about the product he/she is designing. The IDs knowledge should not be limited to design or writing skills only. Let’s see why.
The involvemnet of an ID begins even before a project is kicked-off. The ID is the one who needs to understand the client requirements, do a detailed analysis of the client’s needs, create an overall solution that will fulfill the client’s requirement, and so on. Not just this, an ID should also understand the “technology” aspects involved in creating a course/product – a basic knowledge of the templates that would be used for constructing the product/ course or a specific engine or tool that is being used to develop the product/course. The ID should also be aware of the kind of medis that is being used for the product/course.
“Designing” or “Writing” cannot happen in isoltaion without the knowledge of most of these things. Ultimately, this would only give the ID, an edge over all others who simply focus on a particular aspect of “Instructional Designing”.
Having said all of it, I would not say that an ID has to be an “expert” in all of these areas; but an ID should definetely have some basic skills in most of these areas for him/her to come up with something worthwhile that is of value for the end user.
From that perspective, I definetely think that IDs should have skills in lot many other areas than just writing and designing.
However, I would like to point out one of the the bigger questions for me here is not whether the IDs should have skills other than writing/designing; rather, the point is whether an average ID (mainly referring to number of authors/designers working in the organization who are designated as “IDs” or rather call themselves "IDs") even understand that he/she is supposed to have skills outside the “writing” that they do. The pity is that for much longer periods of time in their career as “IDs”, they understand only a perspective of what instructional design is and what all constitutes a role of an instructional designer. In my opinion, an instructional designer should be exposed to much more variety of work rather than making them work in a “factory mode” for churning out one project after the other. Well, to think of how this can be done? This could be taken up in another subsequent blog!
Till that time, it would be good to hear what others think of this issue.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Thinking Design..Part II
In spite of repeated reminders from Manish I have been postponing this for quite some time (owing to the tight deadlines for the project for which we did this design)! However, I am finally here ready to share my very interesting and engaging experience about coming up with “multiple” design options for one of the large IT companies!
At the very beginning of the project, our team got instructions from Manish that he plans to send this course for Brandon Hall and therefore, we better come up with some innovative/out-of-box/something we haven’t done before – kind of design for this course! At the same time, he instructed that he wants to see two “unique” designs that have nothing in common! That very moment, our struggle for a “good” design started. Four of us (2 LD ppl, 1 CD person, and 1 CT person) in the team started with brain storming amongst ourselves; however soon realized that this exercise should be taken to a larger team to get more perspectives and fresh ideas! We held meetings with several people in content and CD practice. We got many creative ideas from different people. Though for the first initial days it was very difficult, we did not limit our thinking to what we had been doing for so long – but focused our thoughts on what “newness” along with “value add” can we bring about in the course.
On submitting the two design options to Manish, he suggested that we scratch those two ideas and come up with another new one! Phew!! K We thought this wasn’t possible considering that we had already exhausted the list of “new” ideas we had in our mind and got from other people!! However, with much vigor, we started to “think” one more time. Unlike our initial belief that we won’t be able to come up with anything new now, we did manage to hit some new ideas! We presented the last design option to Manish which we all finally agreed upon to take forward with some modifications.
While this entire exercise was one of a kind (took us about 5-6 working days) and one that I haven’t done before in my 8 years long stint at NIIT, it sure posed some critical questions in my mind: Do we understand design? Do we understand what all constitutes design? Do we really design our courses? While I am may not be able to answer all these questions right away, some important things that did etch to mind while doing this exercise are:
At the very beginning of the project, our team got instructions from Manish that he plans to send this course for Brandon Hall and therefore, we better come up with some innovative/out-of-box/something we haven’t done before – kind of design for this course! At the same time, he instructed that he wants to see two “unique” designs that have nothing in common! That very moment, our struggle for a “good” design started. Four of us (2 LD ppl, 1 CD person, and 1 CT person) in the team started with brain storming amongst ourselves; however soon realized that this exercise should be taken to a larger team to get more perspectives and fresh ideas! We held meetings with several people in content and CD practice. We got many creative ideas from different people. Though for the first initial days it was very difficult, we did not limit our thinking to what we had been doing for so long – but focused our thoughts on what “newness” along with “value add” can we bring about in the course.
On submitting the two design options to Manish, he suggested that we scratch those two ideas and come up with another new one! Phew!! K We thought this wasn’t possible considering that we had already exhausted the list of “new” ideas we had in our mind and got from other people!! However, with much vigor, we started to “think” one more time. Unlike our initial belief that we won’t be able to come up with anything new now, we did manage to hit some new ideas! We presented the last design option to Manish which we all finally agreed upon to take forward with some modifications.
While this entire exercise was one of a kind (took us about 5-6 working days) and one that I haven’t done before in my 8 years long stint at NIIT, it sure posed some critical questions in my mind: Do we understand design? Do we understand what all constitutes design? Do we really design our courses? While I am may not be able to answer all these questions right away, some important things that did etch to mind while doing this exercise are:
- “Get together” across teams: Instead of working in isolation as LD, CD, or CT teams, it is important that people from each team get together and create design. One of the important things to understand is that a “design” doesn’t only constitutes the overall instructional theme or the instructional strategies you plan to include in the course; but also includes the interface, look and feel of the course and functionality related issues. So, it is best to thrash out those ideas at the initial design phase to avoid any “mishaps” later.
- Brainstorm: Again, one of the biggest mistakes we make as IDs is to work in isolation while creating the course design. The best way to come up with new ideas is to get into a time-packed mode and brainstorm both within and outside the team. The “outside” view is important as it helps in getting non-biased and fresh perspectives in the design.
- Find the key takeaway: While you think about design, try to explore what is the key thing/message you are trying to drive home for the learners. What is it that the learners will carry with them after going through the course? This will help you in coming up with an instructional theme for your course.
- Forget what you know, think anew: One of the biggest limitation is that we work with constraints in our minds: we are either too comfortable with the way we have been working or we are afraid to try anything new. Whatever be the reason, for once if you are creating a design for the course; forget all that you know and think what is the best possible way to teach the learners about this content.
- Do not forget the learner: Amidst all this, do not forget the learner! Evaluate what are the design elements that you will include in the course that will help the learners in any which way – this include the types of interactive you plan to include, the way you want to segregate the “should” know vs. “could” know information, option to print documents, the way you want to test the learners, etc.
Please feel free to add in to this - based on the design experiences you had!
Who is your Customer? - The Client or the End User?
Am sure as experienced instructional designers, this is one thought that may have crossed your mind more than once!This is one of the most important thoughts that comes to my mind (since only over the last few years) while I am developing courses. Let me delve a little deeper into what I really comprehend of this thought.
In my initial years as an instructional designer, I understood that “client” is our customer. And since the customer is “always right”, we created courses based on what they said – not necessarily keeping the end user in mind.Let me explain this to you through an example. I’ll take you back by a few years when I was working on text books for one of our very old and prestigious clients. I was part of the first team that was formed for this project, and also the first time we started with text books at NIIT. As part of the client requirements, we understood that we need to create technical books for some students. Inspite of the lack of indepth knowledge about the varied content areas (books on hacking, gaming, high-end networking, and so on) we struggled hard, very hard to write the books - this trend continued for about two years; as the number of books we delivered to the client increased, so did the error count in most of the books!!When I look back, I clearly remember that we always worked for the “client” and didn’t have a clue about who our “end users” were!Well, things started to change when one of the team members traveled to the client's office: attended the various classes conducted at the client's campus, met the students, understood their background and culture, and their needs and limitations; and finally shared all of his experiences, especially w.r.t the “end user” with the entire project team on his return. He shared with us how our courses taken up by the students affected their life... - the students actually banked upon these courses for their livelihood!
I personally felt..what a pity! We had never imagined how what we were doing - only as a “project”, churning out books months after months in a tight-deadline mode, is impacting someone’s life.For the first time then, it really made me think who is our actual customer – the client who we interact with day in and day out understanding their requirements; or the end user who actually take the brunt of whatever we create and provide to them?This brings me to another thought: how many of us actually spend time in doing a good “audience analysis”? How many times can you confidently say the following?
In my initial years as an instructional designer, I understood that “client” is our customer. And since the customer is “always right”, we created courses based on what they said – not necessarily keeping the end user in mind.Let me explain this to you through an example. I’ll take you back by a few years when I was working on text books for one of our very old and prestigious clients. I was part of the first team that was formed for this project, and also the first time we started with text books at NIIT. As part of the client requirements, we understood that we need to create technical books for some students. Inspite of the lack of indepth knowledge about the varied content areas (books on hacking, gaming, high-end networking, and so on) we struggled hard, very hard to write the books - this trend continued for about two years; as the number of books we delivered to the client increased, so did the error count in most of the books!!When I look back, I clearly remember that we always worked for the “client” and didn’t have a clue about who our “end users” were!Well, things started to change when one of the team members traveled to the client's office: attended the various classes conducted at the client's campus, met the students, understood their background and culture, and their needs and limitations; and finally shared all of his experiences, especially w.r.t the “end user” with the entire project team on his return. He shared with us how our courses taken up by the students affected their life... - the students actually banked upon these courses for their livelihood!
I personally felt..what a pity! We had never imagined how what we were doing - only as a “project”, churning out books months after months in a tight-deadline mode, is impacting someone’s life.For the first time then, it really made me think who is our actual customer – the client who we interact with day in and day out understanding their requirements; or the end user who actually take the brunt of whatever we create and provide to them?This brings me to another thought: how many of us actually spend time in doing a good “audience analysis”? How many times can you confidently say the following?
- I understand my end user
- I know their age and educational experience
- I understand what their current knowledge or skills are and theie confidence in the content area
- I understand their motivational levels and learning ability
- (Last but also one of the most neglected ones) - I know their attitude towards instruction
I believe doing a thorough audience analysis is one of the first steps in designing good “instruction” for the learner! Some of the other aspects it all also helps determine is the tone or language you use for the course, the content depth and complexity you need to bring in, or the examples or scenarios that you use across the course.There is more to this.......for this time, however, if you have any experiences around doing a detailed audience analysis that impacted your course, do share!Till then, don’t forget to analyze your end user! It'll be worth it!
What would you like to do better as a Learning Professional?
I think the Learning Circuit’s Big Question for this month will make each of us introspect quite a bit! At least, I read the question 2-3 times and tried to really ponder on what are the things I personally want to do better as a learning professional.
There are various entities you come across while in a working environment that you think “constrain” or “limit” you to perform your best or perform the way you want to. Some of these entities include the work deadlines, inability to convince the customer on certain aspects of the project, lack of time to learn or induct a new team in the middle of the project, cost, other technology related constraints, and so on. At such times, you wish if you could have things your way, the overall quality of the product you are creating would be much better than what you are currently doing. So, in a nutshell, you have the potential to do it better but you are limited by one or the other so called constraints.
I personally would want to stretch my potential as far as possible and try to do better - especially in the following areas:
There are various entities you come across while in a working environment that you think “constrain” or “limit” you to perform your best or perform the way you want to. Some of these entities include the work deadlines, inability to convince the customer on certain aspects of the project, lack of time to learn or induct a new team in the middle of the project, cost, other technology related constraints, and so on. At such times, you wish if you could have things your way, the overall quality of the product you are creating would be much better than what you are currently doing. So, in a nutshell, you have the potential to do it better but you are limited by one or the other so called constraints.
I personally would want to stretch my potential as far as possible and try to do better - especially in the following areas:
- Understanding my end user better – either by directly talking to them (where possible) or understanding their needs through the customer I am interacting with, so I can add better value in the product I am creating
- Spend time in “designing” the product well (and not just have a “design” phase in the DLC) and having a design walkthrough
- Finding out newer ways (by research or interactions) to make the content more engaging and interactive for the learner
- And most important, to be able to find out (through a feedback survey or similar means) how much impact did the training have on the end user so I can improvise in subsequent work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
