• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
C Ce d
 

C Ce d

on

  • 268 views

Distributed CCeD is a process potentially useful for the development of projects for large numbers of students who are widely spread geographically....

Distributed CCeD is a process potentially useful for the development of projects for large numbers of students who are widely spread geographically.



ConCurrent eDesign is an approach to planning from the engineering world which has been transferred to the task of developing student projects. The idea originated when NASA needed to save money and shorten planning time. It has now been adapted to the planning of digital pedagogical projects.



In my session I will present a broad outline of the process which basically revolves around 'if you are not in the room then you are not part of the process'. This means that all relevant decision-makers and stakeholders should be part of the process so that it can move on quickly. When challenges are identified, the relevant person can be consulted, the challenge resolved and so the process can move on.



This process has been tried and tested by the Technical University College of Trondheim with companies such as the major telecoms company Telenor and the the Statoil petroleum company. In these cases the facilitators from the university worked in the same room with the key people in the target organisation.



The UnderstandIT project, supported financially by the European Union under their Leonardo program, is now testing out a distributed version of CCeD. This means that the development process is carried out online instead of physically in the same room. In UnderstandIT we are looking at what is needed to transfer this proven approach online.


I will describe the case study that we used in the project to test out this process. Preliminary results show that it is perfectly feasible to produce a project design document through a process which happens completely online with developers in Portugal, Italy, Lithuania, Germany, Denmark and Norway. One of the key outcomes of this case study was that we were able to adapt the project to fit the local contexts and importantly, the cultural differences in each of the four stations where the project would run, so that we did not end up with a one size fits all solution but instead an adaptable template. This has beneficial implications for groups wishing to develop digital projects across large distances where it is simply not practical to meet physically for the four or five intensive meeting sessions needed for the CCeD process.

I will describe the case study that we used in the project to test out this process. Preliminary results show that it is perfectly feasible to produce a project design document through a process which happens completely online with developers in Portugal, Italy, Lithuania, Germany, Denmark and Norway. One of the key outcomes of this case study was that we were able to adapt the project to fit the local contexts and importantly, the cultural differences in each of the four stations where the project would run, so that we did not end up with a one size fits all solution but instead an adaptable template.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
268
Views on SlideShare
268
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • NASA origins Cced based on intensive collab bet StakeHolders (anyone or anything, such as relevant facts, not in the room are not part of the process)
  • Have you experienced any of these problems? Any others?
  • The following list shows the area of focus for each of the sessions: · Session I – What is the situation; A situation analysis about the current situation in relation to instructional schemes ( Instructional Model ), knowledge aspects ( Knowledge Model ), technological aspect ( Technical Delivery Model ), and financial and administrative issues ( Business Model ). · Session II – What possibilities exist; A study of possibilities in relation to each of the four sub-models where the purpose is to describe a wide range of possible solutions for the e-learning design. · Session III – Selection of solutions; An evaluation of the possibilities and selection of solutions for each sub-model, which we choose to bring forward and use in the current upcoming e-learning delivery. · Session IV – How the solution should be designed; A detailed preparation of the e-learning design where the delivery is organized, e.g. in what order instructional activities will be carried out ( Instructional Model ), in what order appropriate learning material will be presented ( Knowledge Model ), how the different technical solutions should be designed ( Technical Delivery Model ), and how economic models and administrative solutions should be implemented ( Business Model ). · Session V - Completion and implementation planning; To complete the design model for the entire e-learning delivery and make plans with respect to the development and delivery, e.g. who should do what, when will it be done and what resources are needed. The output from the Execution phase is the design document for the entire e-learning delivery.
  • (1) the project manager having traditional project management responsibilities in relation to leadership and management throughout the project, (2) the facilitator who will lead all sessions and contribute to relevant interdisciplinary cooperation between all participants, the session secretary who will assist the facilitator with respect to the technical implementation of the sessions, instructional designer(s) responsible for instructional strategies, learning activities, etc. that are to be documented in the Instructional Model, the subject matter expert(s) who is responsible for the development of the Knowledge Model that contains information about competencies to be developed, learning needs and subject content, technical delivery expert(s) documenting the technical matters such as selection of technical platforms, infrastructure, solutions and tools, in the Technical Delivery Model, business expert(s) who should take care of business related issues and administrative needs, and document these in the Business Model, and several other optional roles such as instructors, students and customer representatives who will cooperate with the above-mentioned roles,
  • The example shows Google docs being used as a collaborative tool during a CCeD session.
  • The skill of the facilitator is in following the discussions and recognising when the sub-groups have issues which need to be referred to the group as a whole. The facilitator may then interrupt the work of the sub-groups to deal with this. This is slightly more difficult and disruptive online. The face to face procedure has been tried and tested with companies such as Staoil and Telenor, international Norwegian companies In UnderstandIT we were interested to see if the process could translate to the online. If the answer is yes then this means that we can apply this approach in international projects..
  • Mention the tools used: Adobe Connect Google Docs The course needed to be longer (maybe that's why mentoring was overlooked in earlier iterations)
  • **What is the situation?** In VITAE we had originally focused on mentoring The mentoring had tended to get lost as learning new tools was prioritised by participants. The course was worth 1 ECTS Most materials and tools come first in English but partners use different languages **What possibilities exist?** A switch from mentoring to coaching to make it more focused A switch to learning through Web 2.0 rather than learning about Web 2.0 A highly interactive approach, learning by doing instead of learning about Using translation tools to overcome language issues (not all) Extending the ECTS value of the course to enable the interactivity **Selection of solutions** Adopting the coaching approach Extending the course to a value of 12 ECTS Implementing automatic translation in a CoP for the course Pilot course for partners to demonstrate how high touch learning operates in practice **How the solution should be designed** Should all courses be in English? Should all courses run in Moodle? The same Moodle? Should we set use a resource repository sorted by language, application and so on **Completion & Implementation Planning** Will be based on the Implementation document compiled after filling in the templates.
  • This is a snapshot of one of the design documents . Let's go live to the Google Doc to see what's in it and how we worked https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DCJboDYju0sxoQSGLDu0t0Y9Io-RUBsaRxAo5ejmM6g/edit?hl=en_GB # .

C Ce d C Ce d Presentation Transcript

  • Distributed ConCurrent eDesign Developing high quality elearning through distributed CCeD Anne Fox
  • What is your experience of e-learning design? Add comments to the chat box
  • What is distributed CCeD? A Visual Impression
  • Existing elearning design models
  • CCeD merges elearning design with concurrent design
  • Why is this a good idea?
    • Efficient & quicker ( Strand & Staupe )
    • Greater client satisfaction
    • Interdisciplinary
  • What problem does CCeD address?
    • long lead times,
    • learning about external client needs
  • How does CCeD address these problems?
  • What does a CCeD process look like?
    • We will look at
    • timeline
    • roles & facilitation process
    • tools & infrastructure
  • Timeline
    • The CCeD approach consists of
    • Preparation phase (agreeing with corporate client the scope of the project, timetable etc)
    • Execution phase (5 x 3.5 hour meetings)
    • Conclusion (evaluation of the design document produced during the execution phase)
  • Timeline 2 Execution phase The following list shows the area of focus for each of the sessions: · Session I – What is the situation; · Session II – What possibilities exist; · Session III – Selection of solutions; · Session IV – How the solution should be designed; · Session V - Completion and implementation planning; The output from the Execution phase is the design document for the entire e-learning delivery.
  • The Design Document The design document is the main outcome of the CCeD process and consists of the following sub-models 1. The Instructional Model 2. The Knowledge Model 3. The Technical Delivery Model 4. The Business Model
  • Roles
    • the project manager
    • the facilitator
    • the session secretary
    • instructional designer(s)
    • the subject matter expert(s)
    • technical delivery expert(s)
    • business expert(s)
    • several other optional roles such as instructors, students and customer representatives who will cooperate with the above-mentioned roles,
  • Tools
    • There is no specific requirement but the process works through collaborative discussion and documentation through simultaneous completions of ready made templates.
    • Mindmapping
    • Google docs
  • Infrastructure Face to face: 4 tables with 4 computers, a management table and the ability to see what is being written in the various documents or mindmaps Online: Adobe Connect using break out rooms and working on Google docs
  • VITAE case study To find out if the CCeD model could work online. Amendments to existing course Eg The course needed to be longer The number of sub-models was reduced because there was an existing course to discuss
  • VITAE: Sample Issues Reminder of the session aims Session I – What is the situation? Session II – What possibilities exist? Session III – Selection of solutions Session IV – How the solution should be designed; S ession V - Completion and implementation planning;
  •  
  • Sample Design Document
  • Business Plan
  • The Business Model
  • What issues would come up for you?
  • References & Links References Strand, K.A. & Staupe, A. (2010). The Concurrent E-Learning Design Method. In Z. Abas et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010 (pp. 4067-4076). AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/34499 Links Understand IT project VITAE approach Business Model Generation Credits ADDIE Model