Putting Design Back into Instructional Design
•
26 likes•5,006 views
The document discusses putting design back into instructional design. It defines design as a rational, logical process intended to solve problems and create plans. Good design should have purpose and make people feel human. Instructional design processes like ADDIE are discussed, as well as design thinking approaches. The document argues that instructional design is missing design qualities like empathy, experimentation, intuition and emotion. It provides tips for better elearning design such as understanding the problem, considering systems, observing not assuming, making designs touchable and intuitive, and focusing on people.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (11)
Similar to Putting Design Back into Instructional Design
Similar to Putting Design Back into Instructional Design (20)
More from Cammy Bean
More from Cammy Bean (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Putting Design Back into Instructional Design
- 1. Putting the Design Back into Instructional Design Cammy Bean, Kineo #DevLearn-511
- 2. Close your eyes and imagine... good design.
- 3. Now tell each other all about it.
- 4. What was it?
- 5. Boiling down the qualities of Good Design...
- 6. How does it feel?
- 7. How does it look?
- 8. How does it make you feel?
- 9. How does it make you feel? (Good Design makes us feel. And it makes us feel human.)
- 10. Do you know what to do with it?
- 11. Does it solve the problem?
- 12. What else?
- 13. So what IS Design?
- 14. noun. plan - intention - scheme - draft - project - purpose verb. plan - project - scheme - intend - draw - sketch
- 16. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem
- 17. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem
- 18. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem Direct construction (a thing)
- 19. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem Direct construction (a thing)
- 20. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem Direct construction (a thing) A roadmap (a plan)
- 21. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem Direct construction (a thing) A roadmap (a plan)
- 22. Some more definitions. A rational, logical process intended to solve a problem Direct construction (a thing) A roadmap (a plan)
- 23. “Art can exist for art’s sake. Design cannot.”
- 24. Design must have a PURPOSE.
- 25. Design must have a PURPOSE.
- 26. Design must have a PURPOSE. Matt Ward: http://blog.echoenduring.com/2010/05/25/what-is-design/
- 27. What does a good designer look like?
- 28. What does a good designer look like? • Empathic • Thinks integratively • Optimistic (there’s always a better way!) • Experimental • Collaborative (According to Tim Brown, IDEO)
- 29. I’m a walking accident.
- 30. Let’s consider the big wide world of DESIGN.
- 33. Consider...do people really want INSTRUCTION?
- 35. ADDIE • Analyze • Design • Develop • Implement • Evaluate
- 40. Action-Centric Design The actions of real designers: designers who use judgement, common sense, experiment and technical judgment. D
- 41. Design Thinking It’s all the rage. For solving wicked problems.
- 42. Design Thinking • Define (the problem) • Research • Ideation • Prototype • Choose Implement • Learn
- 43. Agile (Sprints & SCRUMS) “early and continuous delivery”
- 44. ***
- 45. What’s missing in Instructional Design?
- 46. It’s certainly not more of this.
- 48. So how do we design better elearning?
- 49. Be a consumer.
- 50. ....and think.
- 51. Know what problem you’re solving.
- 52. Think about the big picture, the SYSTEM.
- 63. Avoid the Clicky Clicky Bling Bling NOCCBB *(game on!)
- 64. Avoid the Clicky Clicky Bling Bling CCBB NOCCBB *(game on!)
- 65. Design within your box.
- 66. Or go blow the box up.
- 67. Rip off good stuff and reuse proven models.
- 68. 1"Get" 2"Set" a@en*on! direc*on! 6"Ac*on" 3"Present" and" informa*on! support! 5"Assess" 4"Exemplify" and" and" Summarize! prac*ce!
- 70. ! What!looked!like!an! entertaining!comic! book!was!actually…a! Knowledge!&!! Skills!Builder!!
- 72. And most of all, remember the people, man.
- 73. Questions?
- 74. Cammy Bean email: cammy.bean@kineo.com twitter: @cammybean blog: http://cammybean.kineo.com References and more on design: http://www.diigo.com/list/cammybean/design
Editor's Notes
- In these modern times, a lot of elearning courses instruct. But along the way, many have forgotten about the design part. We develop courses. We convert information. But we forget about the design part, delivering lackluster programs that fail to connect with the intended audience or deliver on the desired goals.\n\nWhether you call yourself an elearning developer or a designer, it's always good to connect back with your design roots -- to reexamine what you do, to get inspired to do it differently or better.\n\nLet’s take a step back and reconnect with design. \n\n\n
- Let’s all close our eyes and do a little group meditation here. OK – maybe not. But I do want you to close your eyes. And I want you to picture in your mind something that has been well designed. What’s the first thing that comes into your mind when I say that? Hold on to that now and feel your way around it. What does it look like? Can you touch it or feel it? How does it make you feel? What can you do with it? Can you hear it? Does it help you do anything?\n\nNow turn to the people around you and share your something with them. Take a few minutes to talk about the quality of that thing.\n\nFlickr Photo: “Meditation” by Alice Popkorn http://www.flickr.com/photos/alicepopkorn/1676300378/\n\n
- \n
- How many people described something that you could hold in your hand or touch? (How many described an iphone?) Did you describe a room or a place? A building? An appliance? A raincoat? Your music system? Your headset? A chair? A website? An elearning program?\n\nWhat were the qualities you attribute to this well-designed something?\n\n
- I think we can often boil those qualities down into a few key areas:\n
- Something that is well-designed often has a tactile aspect to it. You can touch it and it feels right. The metal is smooth and polished. Or the pillow has a plushness to it. The curves feel right against your body. Small objects I want to run over my face or even lick. So maybe that’s part of my litmus test for good design – would you want to lick it? \n\nWhat makes a classic? The missing piece….\nThe visceral feeling of a good design – the weight in your hands, the feeling of entering a room. When we talk about something that is well-designed, we’re often talking about the tactile experience of that thing – the emotional experience.\n\n
- What about visual aesthetics? How does it look? And some might argue that this is an extension of the tactile element of design – the aesthetic of touch – but here I’m talking about a visual aesthetic. Do you look the way it looks? Is it pleasing to the eye? Do you prefer a Mr. Coffee Maker or a Braun? \n\n
- Next to the physical aspect of a well-designed thing there is also an emotional component. How does this thing make you feel? A sense of serenity and calm? Overwhelming productivity? Sadness? Happiness? Angry? Excitement and fun? For instance, this conference has been designed – and it’s potentially evoking some kind of an emotional response in you. Exhuberance? Excitement? Exhaustion? \n
- What else about design? Well, do you know what to do with it? Is it usable? Is it intuitive enough that you can figure out what it is and then what you can do with it? Who has seen the videos of a two year old figuring out an iPad for the first time? They just get it. That’s good design. \n\n
- And finally, does it produce the desired outcome? Is it solving the problem it’s supposed to solve? If it’s a chair that’s supposed to provide good back support, does your back feel supported? If it’s a light switch, does the light actually turn on when you flick it? \n\n
- So those are some of the elements of good design. I think. What did I miss? What else is there to add here? What makes for good design in your mind?\n\n
- So what is Design?\n\nIt’s possible that if you talked to designers in different fields, you would likely get some different answers. \n\nSo there exists this tension inherent in the word “design” – is it creativity? Is it process? What is design? I actually had to look it up because I realized I didn’t really know. And when you start digging around, it turns out that there really isn’t one definition of design. It’s kind of a shifting, amorphous thing, depending on who you’re talking to.\n\nSo who can tell me what design is? We’ve talked about examples of things that we think are well designed. But what actually is Design? (group discussion)\n\n\n\n
- Design as a verb. Design as a noun.\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- A rational logical process intended to solve problems.”\n•Identify the problem analyze, research, explore, evaluate solution\n\n•Sometimes we design by directly constructing an object. E.g., pottery\n\n•A Roadmap\n
- “Art can exist for art’s sake. Design cannot.” Design must have a purpose. ~ Matt Ward blog. Purpose, Intention, Content. Every element of the design should contribute to achieving the PURPOSE. Elements placed with thought and reason, consider given to details = INTENTION. Content functions as the framework – the lens through which the design is focused. \n\n
- http://blog.echoenduring.com/2010/05/25/what-is-design/\n\nMatt Ward: Purpose, Intention, Content. Every element of the design should contribute to achieving the PURPOSE. Elements placed with thought and reason, consider given to details = INTENTION. Content functions as the framework – the lens through which the design is focused. \n
- http://blog.echoenduring.com/2010/05/25/what-is-design/\n\nMatt Ward: Purpose, Intention, Content. Every element of the design should contribute to achieving the PURPOSE. Elements placed with thought and reason, consider given to details = INTENTION. Content functions as the framework – the lens through which the design is focused. \n
- http://www.ideo.com/images/uploads/thoughts/IDEO_HBR_Design_Thinking.pdf Tim Brown, IDEO\n
- A controversial statement about Instructional Design\n\nI’m walking ID accident. I did not intend to become a part of this field. I did not aspire to be an ID when I grew up. Who of you here did? Who of you are also here by accident?\n\nSo my process for learning instructional design was random and by accident. I probably started getting good at the instruction part first. And I’d venture to say that’s the case for a lot of IDs. They get good at the learning objectives part. The Instruction. But I’d venture to say that not a lot of them learned about the design part. At all.\n\nWho in this room has studied Design? In some form? And maybe you studied instructional design, and that’s ok, too…\n\nAnd I think a lot of instructional designers – like me – got into this field by accident. And with that, you probably started on the instruction side first – being a very good doobie about doling out the information, serving up the learning objectives, and so on. \n\nBut I would venture to say that a lot of instructional designers never got to the design part. Which is why we’ve got a LOT of elearning out there that serves up screen after screen of objectives with narrated text bullets. We forgot to do the design part, people!\n\nThis is where intention comes in.\n\n\n
- When I first started thinking about this presentation, I first tried to write down all of the different types of “designers” that I could come up with. \n\nLet’s try it now. What kinds of designers are there? We’ll see what I missed here… (WORD CLOUD)\n\n
- \n
- And I love it when I’m out looking around on “design” websites and people talk about the “design industry”. And there are indeed design schools (Parsons School of Design – did anyone here go there? RISD?) Not me. For so long – and probably still – when I hear the term design, I think “artist”. I would never have attempted to apply to those skills – I was not talented enough to be a designer. And yet…I’m an instructional designer, aren’t I. And while I’m somewhat creative, I’m no Picasso. So I think it’s sort of an alien term for a lot of people in “our” field…\n\nAnd notice that there’s no Instructional Design on this list. IDs don’t come from design schools - they come from education programs, if anything.\n\nhttp://www.risd.edu/Academics/\n
- Does the term for the word define the function and the thing? “Instructional” design. Do people really want instruction? Is the function of instructional design in our world the right focus? Isn’t the problem we’re really trying to solve one of performance improvement? \n\n
- \n
- In instructional design, we all know our dear friend ADDIE, who is purportedly dead or at least dying.\n\n(Slide of ADDIE)\n\nI think it's important to state at the beginning that ADDIE isn't a design model. \nIt's a project management model, and that's why so many designers, especially those new to ISD, are sort of adrift.\n\nADDIE is sort of a big black box when it comes to how to design, how to develop, and why, and when, and for whom? It just sort of says, "Do these things in this order." Pretty insufficient. One of the steps is “Design” – but there’s nothing to tell you how to actually design something. There’s no creative juice in there, is there?\n\n
- As I was doing research on design processes, I went to Google and did an image search. This is what came up and it really made me laugh. So many different processes – all describing “design”. And yet a lot of commonalities, too. And I would say that most of them are about process and don’t define that black box of design from a creative standpoint. Or do they?\n\n
- This one includes “celebration” as part of the process.\nhttp://www.dentaldesignconstruction.com/dental-design-construction-process/\n
- This one I love (picture of things in a garbage can) –\n\nhttp://v2.centralstory.com\n
- And then there’s this squiggle process. I just lays it all out there, doesn’t it. Design is really messy in the upfront stages. You wade through the complex to get to the simple and most elegant solution.\n\n
- \n
- \n
- (a process for problem-solving)\n\n\n
- \n
- http://toothpastefordinner.com\n
- What’s missing in Instructional Design?\n\nThe problem with Instructional Design is that most people never really learned the Design part. Maybe you got the instruction part down…\n\nThe idea that design is NOT storyboarding. Design is NOT learning objectives.\nI don't see a lot of ISD who understand that. And a lot of customers, and managers, who call for ISDs, really want people who can storyboard and write lesson plans. That is NOT ISD.\nSo design, is what?\nDesign is matching the best possible solutions to the known problems - and not many people think that way. \n
- \n
- Designing inside the box (*Jeannette Campos)\n\nThe reality of the eLearning Design field: we have to design within a lot of constraints.\n\nDesigning for eLearning\n\nThis presentation that I’m giving today – I have been designing this since I first thought of the topic and submitted a proposal for it way back in May (I think)? I’ve been reading and researching and talking to people and thinking about design. That went on for about 5 months. About a month ago I started outlining and writing and rehearsing my ideas in my head. As my kids fell asleep at night, I would sit in the dark and give me talk in my head. I was designing.\n\nIn that same six month time period, I have worked on somewhere between 12 and 20 different elearning projects. In this business, we often just don’t have the time. \n\nMost of us have to live with some pretty serious CONSTRAINTS in this business. Usually it’s “I want it in three weeks and we’ve got limited budget. But it needs to be really kick-ass.” Gulp. It’s the holy triumvirate of budget, time and quality. \n\nDesigning within constraints that is the box of present day elearning.\nBecause sometimes/often the reality is that we do have to design within that box.\n\nThe constraints are the sides of your box – and you need to design inside that box. It doesn't preclude creativity or innovation. It just means you design inside the box. When you do that – and when you can do that well – your solution is more durable, more likely to be sustained, and more likely to *stick*\n\n
- So what do we need to do to make sure we’re designing better elearning? \n
- Easy. First, you consume it. You simply MUST be a consumer of your own product line. You have to know what is out there, what you like, don't like, listen to what people are saying, follow the trends. NO ONE in history has ever said they need more next button. NO ONE!\n\nDesign must be RESPONSIVE - to business need and business demand. We very often miss both.\n\n
- Even if you’re stuck with limited time, before you start storyboarding…stop and think….DESIGN something.\n\n
- Know what problem you’re trying to solve. Make sure it contributes to that desired outcome. Did it help someone do their job better? Did it lead to better performance? Did it open eyes the way it was supposed to? And if it’s all about ticking a box to ensure compliance – well, did it even do that? What problems is it helping to solve?\n\n
- Think about the bigger picture – the SYSTEM – in which this elearning program exists..\nAs my friend Jeannette Campos said to me, “Design must be purposeful, and to be purposeful, you MUST understand the business and the system in which it is intended to live.” (it is called instructional SYSTEMS design for a reason).\nEither you should be designing that bigger system as a true ISD – or you’re building a piece of that bigger picture. And if you’re just building that piece – the single elearning component – that’s fine. Do it and do it well. But know how it fits into whatever other activities are going on to support this performance outcome – be it on the job training, informal knowledge shares, classroom training, and so on.\n\n
- Ben Hamilton-Baille as quoted in “In Pursuit of Elegance” by Matthew May:\n\n“What’s wrong with how we engineer things is that most of what we accept as the proper order of things is based on assumptions, not observations. If we observed first, designed second, we wouldn’t need most of the things we build.” (p. 163)\n
- Remember the aesthetics: Make it look good. Make it tactile? (Will Cammy want to lick it?) Our devices will change that equation and rather quickly as we start building more elearning experiences for touch screens – we soon will be touching everything. So make it touchable. Make a button look like something. Give it presence and physicality. (And I’m not a graphic designer so I can’t tell you HOW to do that – but I can tell you what it is when I see it )\n\n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- Make it emotional. Create a connection with the human being who will be interacting with/consuming this program.\n\n
- Pictures that look at you -- we make an emotional and human connection.\n
- That boiling petri dish of bacteria -- yeah, that’s emotional for me.\n
- Make sure it’s intuitive and easy to use. User Interface Design. GUI. All that and usability too.\n\n
- \n
- Design within your box. Often we elearning people are handed a very small box “go build a course.” Your problem might be to design a good course that people want to sit through. That’s ok, to. Know what your problem is. And then solve that problem REALLY well.\n\n
- \nOr get radical and change the world. Blow up your box and try to solve bigger problems with different solutions.\n
- Rip off good stuff: “Using proven choices and methodologies for achieving and effective design” – it doesn’t have to be new and original. A lot of design is simply ripping good stuff off.\nMake use of design patterns – repeatable and proven solutions that you can apply to save time…\n\nDesign is a creative process with some pretty knowable formulas \n
- Knowledge and Skill Builder\n
- Guided Story\n
- Knowledge and Skill Builder meets a Guided Story.\n
- Goal Based Scenarios\n
- Remember the people – have mercy on them. And love them, even.\n\n
- \n
- \n