The devil is in the details: Reflecting on Analysis and moving forward to Design

Reflecting on the analysis phase, we are reminded that student needs are often linked very closely with personal learning expectations and the status quo in any programme, more so than the outcomes of a module or learning opportunity. Remember that regardless of the mode of delivery, a curriculum (programme or module) should be developed with the outcomes at the forefront of decisions made around teaching and learning opportunities and assessment.

I re-read the article by Gedik et al in preparation for this post and am reminded of the necessity of planning. The use of the knowledge that you have developed over the course of the MPhil programme regarding learning, curriculum design, and assessment, among others, is imperitive if you are to design an effective blended or e-learning intervention for this module. For a more detailed discussion on the Design phase of the ADDIE process, please refer to the post on this blog focusing on the topic.

To continue with my endeavour to demonstrate the process using this particular elective, I will reflect on my thinking and planning thus far and how this influences design. Just as a disclaimer, I will remind you that this is an example of how I am approaching the ADDIE process.

I initially decided to re-organise the e-learning elective into a Faculty development opportunity for a fellowship in which I am involved centered around HPE. However, my analysis resulted in the following realisations. Firstly, this is already a registered programme and our Univeristy already offers a Blended Teaching and Learning Short course which is also accredited for staff members.  In analysing the module and potential student cohort, I have concluded that there is a wide variety of participants with regard to roles. This includes clinical facilitators, academics and a combination of both. I have also discovered that potential participants are using mainly e-mail communication to engage with students via electronic means with a range of perspectives regarding the need for e-learning and skills development in this regard. Therefore, as with any potential design, I had to take the findings of the analysis into account and recognise that I need to change my idea.

My decision was therefore to focus on staff development within my own centre, particularly focusing on the support team responsible for supporting lecturers on a technical level more than on an academic one, in developing skills around the use of learning technologies. Analysis of the current "programme" and "students" resulted in the following findings:

• There is a wide variety of resources both online and off-line for the participants to use in gaining experience and skills in providing training and support to lecturers.
• The resources are not organised in a central location or according to known protocols.
• Participants have, for the most part, been self-taught over a period of time making it difficult for new members to gain expertise without physically shadowing or being taught by more experienced members.
• New participants/members find it overwhelming to develop their skills without the use of a formalised and structured training programme.
• The overall aim of the support team is to provide training and development opportunities for lecturers to facilitate student learning using technology.

Moving on to the design phase, my initial reflections are that I need to develop a programme which is constructively aligned. I am using a site to help me visualise and plan this initiative called Learning Designer which uses both Blooms Taxonomy and Laurillard's Ways of Learning as a theoretical basis for curriculum design and planning. 

Aim: To enable support personnel to develop an understanding of learning technologies and support opportunities at SU. 

Outcomes:

At the end of this programme, participants will be able to:

1. Describe the roles and responsibilities of the integrated support systems at the University responsible for learning technology systems.
2. Understand the purpose and function of the supported learning technologies.
3. Use each of the supported learning technologies.
4. Provide basic instructions to end-users on how to use the supported learning technologies.
5. Create training materials for novice and intermediate end-users of the supported learning technologies.
6. Conduct a training session for academic and administrative personnel on the learning technologies required for their work.
7. Identify the most applicable learning technologies for stated educational needs by academic personnel.

Potential Teaching and Learning Activities

1. Reading (Acquisition) the team vision / mission
2. Meeting with the team to discuss (Discussion) roles and responsibilities
3. Reading (Acquisition) training manuals for the learning technologies.
4. Creating (Production) a module with all available activities on the learning managements system.
5. Creating a podcast (Production)
6. Creating a training video for publishing to YouTube (Production)
7. Facilitating a consultation session with a client and providing solutions and resources for the client (Investigation)
8. Co-facilitation of a training session (Collaboration)
9. Identifying FAQ's and training needs with team members based on feedback from clients and partners (Collaboration)

Potential delivery (e-learning prototype)

There are a number of options which can be used for this personnel development opportunity. I am currently considering the following:

1. Google Sites

2. Wikispaces

3. Sharepoint

4. One-on-one training

Regardless of which one I will use, the following should be included as separate pages, files and activities. Each of the delivery methods allows for this type of delivery:

• Overview of team vision, mission
• Profile of each position in the team 
• Summary of each Learning Technology and links to formal training manuals
• Examples of current training resources
• Monitoring processes for training of staff