Conversations with the Course Champion 1

A basic first step of any successful learning design/courseware development project – be it for the classroom or for Elearning – involves analysis. Usually it’s a needs analysis determining what the problem is and whether or not training may or may not be able to rectify it. (But, that’s the subject of another blog I wrote on that sometime back.)

More to the point answering a few simple questions before everyone gets started.

Right at the start ask the course champion (or perhaps the Subject Matter Expert) “What does a successful outcome from this learning project being proposed look like?” Another way to ask that is “What do you expect the takers of this course to be able to do after they’ve completed it?”

If about this time they give you a blank stare like you’d get if you’d just asked them to define exactly how high is “Up,” then you can guide the discussion further using questions like “Are we just making the learner familiar with the content? Or are we striving to make them proficiency with it?” (And yes, there IS a difference between those two concepts – a big difference.)

That difference usually gets brought to the forefront with your next question, “How will that be measured exactly?” Now you’re asking evaluation methods which can be anything - a knowledge test, a skills demonstration (practical exam some used to call it) and including the issuance of some kind of credentialing for successfully passing said measurement. It could even involve some minimal measurement at the end of the learning event(s) followed by a “transfer to the job setting” follow-on measurement at some given interval (e.g., 6 months) after having reported for duty after the training.

By the end of this portion of the course champion interview – and quite honestly, that’s what it really is -  your instructional design juices should be flowing pretty well and the courseware developer wheels in your head should beginning to spin with ideas about what direction to go with the training. But, I would encourage you to get the answer to some other questions before you begin laying out your design.

These questions involve your typical learner’s demographics – age, first language, skillsets and abilities and credentials they possess coming into the training. There’s nothing more embarrassing (and hugely wasteful) than to build an entire course outline, timeframe and budget based on certain assumed language proficiency, knowledge level etc only to find out it hugely wrong and your course with a huge gap in it that there’s not time and budget left to develop a fix for.

Moral to the story: Never assume anything at the outset of a learning project. Ask anything and everything about you can . And start with expectations and definitions.

Beware: It’s not a miracle cure….

This entry is addressed more to the course champions and project managers of the world.

Imagine the football team that in the last 2 minutes of a tied game sees its big name quarterback come onto the field and…the team’s other 10 players just lay down on the grass and say, “Thank goodness you’re here. You take it from here and win this game for us.”

Believe it or not, this can happen in effect when a credentialed, seasoned instructional designer (ID) effort gets brought into a project. So, a word to the wise here, course champions and others – be it an individual or outsourcing to a whole team of IDs – is not, contrary to what you might think, the miracle cure for a project.

That’s right. Doing so won’t end hunger or bring about world peace either.

I know; it’s disappointing to hear this.

But, I think it’s necessary for everyone amongst The Powers That Be in a courseware initiative to understand this. Just because you bring in folks with courseware development credentials etc – while we can and often do some outstanding educational product development – we are only as smart or dumb as productive or not as your system keeps us.

By this I mean bringing in credentialed ID help doesn’t exonerate the other members of the process from contributing their fair share to the goals of the project. The course champion will still need to procure project funding, subject matter experts (SMEs) will still have to contribute both input and expertise and so on.

Remember; your design team, be they one or a hundred strong, is only is only as effective as the supply of content resources, SME expertise and availability etc keeps them.

If the data or expertise from which content will be built is not made available then you can’t expect a miracle from the ID portion of the team when it’s kept deaf, dumb and blind in the process. One option would be providing the ID portion the opportunity to do independent research – within limits. Just realize research hours go against the timetable and budget.

If the SMEs aren’t made available to contribute basic materials and expertise for content to be developed, then don’t be surprised if the ID portion of the team doesn’t create much basic (alpha draft) content and the schedule begins to fall behind.

Similarly, if SMEs don’t conduct effective alpha, beta and final draft reviews using their professional expertise and give timely feedback to the ID portion, how does it know whether and how to make what changes and improvements to the draft so it is satisfactory?

Adding credentialed and seasoned instructional design professionals to your project can really help it go from just an idea to a very high-quality reality. (The sooner in the project’s lifespan they’re brought in the better.) Just realize that bringing them in doesn’t mean the rest of the entire project team can just abandon any involvement in it. They’re just as critical with an ID on board as before.

Remember, a project team is called a team for a reason. If your project manager doesn't watch out for this "laying down" possibility, your project could be doomed.