{"id":544,"date":"2021-02-18T11:45:59","date_gmt":"2021-02-18T19:45:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0158\/?p=544"},"modified":"2021-02-28T15:54:04","modified_gmt":"2021-02-28T23:54:04","slug":"lrnt-525-unit-3-activity-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0158\/lrnt-525-unit-3-activity-3\/","title":{"rendered":"LRNT 525 | Unit 3 | Activity 2"},"content":{"rendered":"
\nWhat was the problem\/issue to be solved? Were the overall goals communicated? Who benefited? Who were the stakeholders? Was there a project plan put in place? What did this look like? What changes in planning do you think would have helped with any of the barriers or challenges that were encountered?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The project I was tasked with creating was the PLRD Repository (see\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/resource.plrd.ab.ca\/<\/span><\/a>). It was a database that aligned curriculum expectations to local resources. The project’s goal was to create a one-stop resource for curriculum-related resources; this is very beneficial for our division because the physical distance is relatively large. I was in charge of the tool’s technical creation, and such, I made a flow chart of the technical specs, flow of the tool, and its scope following the design methodology based on meetings with the superintendent and deputy superintendent. One focus was how the tool created a simple workflow for adding materials that could easily be shared and searched by students, teachers, and parents. A rather powerful search method was developed and modified for teacher searches, focusing on learner expectations (see\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/resource.plrd.ab.ca\/curriculum\/<\/span><\/a>; see figure 1) and student\/parent searches, focusing on the related keywords (see\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/resource.plrd.ab.ca\/parents-and-students\/<\/span><\/a>; see figure 2). From a technical perspective, the tool was a success, yet the division staff did not adopt it, highlighting the need for systemic thinking paired with design thinking (Conway et al., 2017). Simple issues like being able to designate\u00a0<\/span>teacher-only<\/span><\/em>\u00a0resources were quickly addressed and implemented to ease the anxiety of\u00a0<\/span>sharing\u00a0<\/span><\/em>resources. However, the core issue with the system was not a technical one. It was a social-culture one.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Figure 1<\/span><\/strong>
\n\"\"
\nNote. A view of the teacher section, focusing on expectations, searching and filtering.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Figure 2<\/span><\/strong>
\n\"\"
\nNote. A view of the student\/parent section, that focused on searching through keywords.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

What do you think were the barriers? Considering some of your readings, how would you suggest overcoming those?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

At the time, my thought process was focused on the technical abilities and limitations of the project and not the division’s social-culture. In the autopsy I performed, when I consider the project a failure, I highlighted a few items:<\/span><\/p>\n