Month: August 2018

LRNT 527 – Unit 3 – Activity 2

Throughout the course of this course, we have traversed the steps of the design thinking process to conscientiously develop a digital learning resource.

The ideate phase surprised me the most as the non-filtered brainstorming activity opened my mind to a plethora of possible solutions and alternative ideas. I felt roused by a universe of prospects instead of suppressed by a daunting problem.

The feedback phase offered several helpful suggestions for improvement of my resource. I was already aware of the embedded video’s small size and the scrolling issues – both are related to the capabilities and constraints of Google Forms. I will need to do some ideating, iterating, and fiddling to solve those challenges.

Questions arose about identity confirmation and saving progress partway, both of which I will need to further investigate.

It was especially helpful when constructive critiques included possible solutions. I appreciate the idea to enhance expectations upfront: Road-weary travellers can feel fortified and plan their time better if an introduction includes the number of questions, estimated completion time, when grades will be received, and how administration will receive the results. A comment about how to construct constructivist questions to enhance learning beyond rote memorization is also a well-received suggestion.

Some recommendations I can conquer right away, while other more challenging problems may require a revisit to the ideate and prototype phases.

In essence, the comprehensive design-thinking process has been a valuable exercise that will surely serve my future projects fabulously in this iterative game called life.

 

References

Stanford University of Design. (n.d.). An introduction to design thinking process guide. Retrieved from https://dschool-old.stanford.edu/sandbox/groups/designresources/wiki/36873/attachments/74b3d/ModeGuideBOOTCAMP2010L.pdf 

LRNT 527 – Unit 3 – Activity 1

It can be challenging to create universal criteria for judging digital learning resources when the purposes and contexts of such resources are so infinitely varied.

Without knowing the motivations of the designer and understanding the learning goals and intended outcomes, it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of a digital learning resource. Luckily within this course and pertaining to our Assignment 3, we are allowed to peek behind the curtain of our peers’ creations by reading their accompanying essays.

Without any inside information on the goals of a digital learning resource, the most universally-applicable criterion that I can think of is that the technology works smoothly. The user-friendliness of the technology for any digital learning resource is essential. If the technology simply does not work well for end-users, frustration and failure ensues.

Hadjerrouit (2010) considers technical usability to be a mandatory trait of any digital resource, but insists the design should go beyond being primarily focused on technical usability and must be more predominantly informed by pedagogy and educational content.

If you could choose only one, what do you think is the single most important criterion for judging the quality of a digital learning resource? Is the criterion you favour applicable to every type of digital learning resource?

 

References

Hadjerrouit, S. (2010). A conceptual framework for using and evaluating web-based learning resources in school education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 9, 53-79.