Category: LRNT 524

User-centered design: In a hybrid model environment, users need to put in a lot of effort to comprehend the needs, preferences, and barriers to design solutions. Therefore, an effective user-centered design should be created to ensure usability and flexibility. According to Altay (2013), the design improves a broader range of diverse users’ ability to use and accept tools, increasing productivity and reducing errors. This requires having a thorough understanding of the learners’ goals, objectives, skill levels, and potential learning challenges. Additionally, we must collaborate and communicate with the learners to understand their requirements and preferences, putting them at the center of the design process. 

Functionality: The learning experience should be functional and efficient, serving the purpose for which it was designed. Chakrabarti and Blessing (1996) said that knowing how something works is essential for a wide range of design tasks, such as comparing, evaluating, and choosing between design options. Therefore, learning content should be organized and presented logically and efficiently, with delivery methods alterable to learner needs. 

Aesthetics: The design must be appealing to the eye and consistent with the company’s image. Additionally, this implies that the layout, typography, and visual components of the learning experience should be appealing to learners. According to Parrish (2007), aesthetic principles offer more than just compatibility with preexisting theory; they also support and complement it by showing how to apply it to engaging learning experiences. With the right aesthetic, the overall effectiveness of learners is improved as the learning experience is more memorable and engaging. 

Flexibility: The design should be adaptable to changing needs and technology, meaning that the learning experience should evolve as learners’ needs change or new technology becomes available. Moreover, it allows the learning experience to stay current and relevant, which is essential in keeping the learners engaged and motivated. Kokoc (2019) noted that flexible learners tend to be more engaged. 

Usability: It is essential to have a system that is easy to use and quick to learn so that users can apply it regardless of their level of experience or technical knowledge. A helpful learning tool should be simple to comprehend, navigate, and use, effectively assisting learners in meeting their learning objectives. Lynch (2019) claimed that usability is the most crucial component of any digital solution regardless of the product, but this is particularly true for digital learning. Additionally, no matter how many resources the system offers, if learners cannot use them easily, it will not matter how many there are.

Sustainability: Sustainability is a crucial principle when creating and delivering learning programs in a corporate setting. As Niederhauser et al. (2018) noted, sustainability is defined as continuous change. This principle emphasizes the value of developing learning opportunities that support organizations and their stakeholders long-term. By prioritizing sustainability, organizations can provide their employees with the knowledge and skills to meet our ever-changing world’s social, environmental, and economic challenges. 

References:

Altay, B. (2013). User-centered design through learner-centered instruction. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(2), 138–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.827646

Chakrabarti, A., & Blessing, L. (1996). Special Issue: Representing functionality in design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 10(4), 251–253. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0890060400001608

Kokoç, M. (2019). Flexibility in e-Learning: Modelling its Relation to Behavioural Engagement and Academic Performance. Themes in ELearning, 12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1251161.pdf

Lynch, M. (2019, March 1). Digital Learning and the Importance of Usability. The Tech Edvocate. https://www.thetechedvocate.org/digital-learning-and-the-importance-of-usability/

Niederhauser, D. S., Howard, S. K., Voogt, J., Agyei, D. D., Laferriere, T., Tondeur, J., & Cox, M. J. (2018). Sustainability and Scalability in Educational Technology Initiatives: Research-Informed Practice. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9382-z

Parrish, P. E. (2007). Aesthetic principles for instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(4), 511–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9060-7

For this blog, we were asked to consider the impacts of innovation on a learning innovation tool and critique it. Numerous innovative learning tools today can revolutionize how learners learn and interact with their content. However, I wanted to discuss the use of “Chatbots” on this blog, as I did in a forum post. Adamopoulou and Mousiades (2020) defined a chatbot as a type of artificial intelligence application and a paradigm for human-computer interaction (HCI) (Gerov, 2022).

To provide learners with a more interactive and individualized learning experience, chatbots can be incorporated into learning management systems, messaging applications, or standalone applications. Chatbots have become increasingly popular in recent years due to their ease of use and ability to respond to learner queries in real-time. For example, my organization is leveraging the power of chatbot technology to provide a more interactive and individualized customer service experience. According to Essel et al. (2022), chatbots can positively and negatively affect learning. In contrast, chatbots can engage learners more interactively and engagingly than traditional methods, provide personalized recommendations for further comprehension, and provide learners with immediate feedback. They can supplement conventional training methods by providing learners with additional resources and support. Chatbots could replace actual instructors or reduce the need for face-to-face interaction during the learning process. However, chatbots can also create confusion or difficulty for learners if they are not properly implemented and managed.

In addition, chatbots may need assistance comprehending or responding appropriately to complex or nuanced learning questions, which could limit their usefulness as instructional tools. Adamopoulou and Mousiades (2020) stated that chatbots are easy to use and access, particularly for those accustomed to using technology. The benefit of using chatbots in the workplace is that they can facilitate self-directed learning and provide learners with a more personalized and interactive learning experience. To ensure that chatbots are utilized appropriately and effectively, it is necessary to consider their potential effects and limitations. As chatbots make learning more personalized and interactive, they have the potential to have a substantial impact on education. Chatbots can interact with students more interactively and engagingly than conventional methods, providing immediate feedback and individualized recommendations for problems that students may encounter. However, essential considerations are the potential for chatbots to replace human trainers or reduce the need for interpersonal interaction in learning and their inability to comprehend or respond to complex or nuanced learning questions. In educational settings, it is essential to consider the extent to which technology is utilized and the efficacy of chatbots. Educators can maximize chatbots’ positive effects while minimizing potential disadvantages by considering the above-mentioned factors. Chatbots have the potential to transform education by providing a simple, effective, and efficient method for students to interact with technology.

References:

Adamopoulou, E., & Moussiades, L. (2020). Chatbots: History, technology, and applications. Machine Learning with Applications, 2, 100006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mlwa.2020.100006

Essel, H. B., Vlachopoulos, D., Tachie-Menson, A., Johnson, E. E., & Baah, P. K. (2022). The impact of a virtual teaching assistant (chatbot) on students’ learning in Ghanaian higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 1-19. 19:57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00362-6

Gerov, M. (2022, December 17). Chatbots. Royal Roads University. https://moodle.royalroads.ca/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=917425

For the past couple of years, my job entailed enabling, implanting, and teaching technology to end users. Honestly, it was the first time I came across Instructional Design (ID), its work, and all the different aspects of ID models. Models such as ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement and Evaluate), ARCS Modes of Motivation (Attention, Relevance, Confidence and Satisfaction), Backward Design Model, Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model and many more. I found it interesting that I have been using some of the models we learned in class during my work. The models that resonate with me and fit the design that our project team is using today are the ADDIE model and the Backward design model.

Today, before implementing new technology, our project team follows the ADDIE model for analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating. As, Dousay (2018) stated, regardless of the model chosen, ADDIE forms the fundamental underlying process that is a distinctive component of instructional design. Furthermore, the author noted that irrespective of the model one chooses, one must understand the expected delivery format. Will the course be delivered synchronously online, face-to-face, asynchronously online, or in a hybrid of various formats? Since my organization delivers in different forms, it is sometimes hard to land on one type of model, which makes sense to me as I am reading about the different types now. We work with people all around the globe, and our end users are also located worldwide. So, as Dousay stated about the importance of understanding the delivery method, I could understand it now quite clearly.

The Backward design was the second model that resonated with me while reading the literature, as it is something we do alongside the ADDIE model. As Fox and Doherty (2021) stated, identifying desired objectives, choosing acceptable evidence, and organizing learning experiences and instruction are the three stages of the backward design. To do this, we ensure to engage the right stakeholder to determine what is needed, and then we give the training and technology necessary for the ultimate result.

I found the Universal Design of Learning (UDL) fascinating, and many of the concepts they spoke about interested me. For example, Takaces et al. (2021) stated that UDL aims to involve as many students as possible in the learning process by providing a different path to the same learning outcomes. Moreover, the authors spoke about encouraging learners’ interactions to “create expert learners” so they can think critically about their learning choices and objectives (p. 13). As I read more articles on the various ID models, it has become clear that there is a process for choosing the ideal model that best meets the needs of the students and the teachers and how to address the current learning gaps.

To address the gaps and diversity at my workplace, I look forward to learning more about various ID models and how I may use them there.

References:

Dousay. T. A. (2018). Chapter 22. Instructional Design Models. In R. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/instructional_design_models

Fox, B. E., & Doherty, J. J. (2012). Design to learn, learn to design: Using backward design for information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 5 (2), 144-155. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2012.5.2.109

Takacs, S., Zhang, J., Lee, H., Truong, L., & Smulders, D. (2021). A comprehensive guide to applying Universal Design for Learning. Justice Institute of British Columbia. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/jibcudl/