Artefact 2 demonstrates how I applied the reasoning and theoretical foundation of distance education that I acquired in various MEd courses to get a job as an e-learning designer.Â
How MDDE Helped Me Change Careers
My AU courses, offered in Moodle, provided many examples of best practices in delivering LMS courses, but provided no practical examples of interactive e-Learning courses. I thought about how to design and host lessons on an interactive e-learning platform. This artefact outlines how I was able to clearly understand why, when and how I should use an LMS, such as Moodle, to design a course rather than an interactive e-learning application, such as Adobe Captivate. This understanding helped me obtain employment in the field of e-Learning.
Before beginning this course I was unclear when and why I should use Moodle rather than Adobe Captivate to design a course (1.1). MDDE 621, Online Teaching in Distance Education and Training, clarified the differences between courses designed in Moodle and ones designed in Captivate. Fundamentally, I learned the differences are between education and training. I had to then understand the differences between these two terms. To date, I have taken 14 online education courses only using Moodle and Canvas, but I was very interesting in using Captivate. But, what did online training look like? I had to first clearly understand the fundamental differences between training and education before I could decide which platform could best deliver targeted learning outcomes (1.2). The initials readings in 621 made it clear that designing education courses and training courses requires very different pedagogical approaches (1.4). I made it a key objective to put the readings into practice and design my own learning object in Captivate. Assignment 3 gave me the opportunity to do so.
My Assignment 3 group chose to present Constructivist theory as it pertains to adult learning. We were at a loss on how to best present it. I suggested using Adobe Captivate to design it and the group agreed to supply the content. I threw all our content in front of me, mapped it out, made it linear, threw some out and elaborated on others. I still question whether I was training or instructing (1.3). I thought I wasn’t training, I was just piecing together individual learning objects to present in a Modular fashion using Moodle. I wanted my “students” to understand Constructivist and then apply it in their classroom. I was “training the trainer”. My initial attempt was convoluted and modular until I fully understood my goal, which was to train on a topic: understanding Constructivism and how to apply it in the classroom (1.10). Moving forward, I designed the introduction, content, concept check, remedial check, added engaging knowledge checks and a conclusion. The end result received an A and was much easier to design and more coherent when I understood when, why and how to use Captivate rather than the Moodle when designing courses (1.11). Currently, I see myself as a trainer, therefore I am confident that Captivate is best suited to achieve the learning outcomes I am striving for.
One month before graduation, I applied for a job as an e-learning designer. I had to demonstrate that I had a solid understanding of pedagogical theory (1.2, 1.4). I used the same approach I did for my 621 assignment; I thought since my assignment received an A, then it should be acceptable by the hiring committee (1.9). I combined my practical teaching experience with my MEd courses and created a short e-Learning lesson. I applied the same process as in assignment 3 but included a needs analysis. I created the example (artefact 2) and submitted it. I was offered the job the next day (2.7).
The course that had the most profound impact on my understanding of course content development was MDDE 603, Foundations of Instructional Design. I now feel that I have a good understanding of learning theory and I can apply that understanding to my course development. I structure my lessons to not overtax cognitive abilities and engage students through relevant content (2.1, 2.3). My designs reflect the way that has best worked for me and many of my fellow students over the past two years. For example, I greatly value and incorporate affordances through all m y learning designs. If students have to think about how to complete an activity it will diminish their capacity to learn the content; I ensure my students are given the affordances they need to complete assignments.
Another example of learned content that I applied in this artifact and on a daily basis is the zone of proximal development. Constructing learner-friendly lessons with engaging and challenging content does not happen by accident. Student attrition is very high in our training courses; I have to ensure that I am neither boring learners nor setting them up for failure when designing courses (2.5) by ensuring the content is relevant and useful and they are given the resources required to complete tasks. I can reflect back on times when I had nearly dropped out of a course, and typically it is because I have not been given adequate resources, or the content was too basic. I know I can’t eliminate attrition, but I can certainly minimize it by applying learned theory in the MEd program,
Being an e-Learning developer demands greater collaboration than I did as an in-class teacher (6.5); I have to justify every learning objects (1.7). For example, my supervisor thought there was something missing between his course introduction and the content. I suggested an idea that I liked in many MEd courses, which was to place pre-course questions to focus learners on the course’s content. I suggested we add self-reflective questions, such as “How could this happen?”, “Was it my fault?” and “How can we prevent this?” (1.3). My supervisor put in an avatar, but I recalled from 613, Adult Learning, that every lesson must be relevant and personalized to the learner (1.6). The avatar suggested it was someone else’s problem and/or someone else would deal with it. I recommended putting in a silhouette so the learners could place themselves in the situation and personalize the problem (1.8) thus taking an active role in providing a solution (1.10). Thanks to my MEd, my idea was well received by management and it has been applied to a variety of other courses (1.11). I feel that I now have the skills to make our good e-Learning course great.
Artefact 2
Try the interactive version:
Or copy and paste this link:
googledrive.com/host/0BzTKH_gSWOEcYTZBV3ljOXptYjQ
1) Problem Solving, Analysis, & Decision Making
1.2 Define the aspects of problems
1.3 Formulate questions
1.4 Find and access information
1.6 Compare alternatives using critical analysis
1.7 Make reasoned arguments using critical reflection, leading to rational solutions.
1.8 Justify these solutions
1.9 Present them to others
1.10 Recognize the wider implications of specific knowledge
1.11 Adapt solutions to suit varied situations.
Competencies Achieved
2) Instructional Design & Development
2.1 Critically analyze and discuss the implications of personal perspectives and epistemological orientations for the teaching-learning process
2.2 Appropriately apply systems theory and systems analysis techniques to instructional design situations in distance education
2.3 Describe and appropriately apply a range of learning and motivational theories to instructional design situations in distance education
2.5 Develop instructional products or learning objects in distance education
2.7 Apply instructional design principles and models in distance education, in your workplace, or in other instructional contexts.
3) Communication Technologies and Networking
3.4 Compare and evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of these technologies in various distance education contexts
3.5 Apply these technologies in distance education and in real-life instructional contexts.
6) Management, Organization and Leadership
6.1 Analyze the current and future climate of the distance education and distance learning industry, and formulate strategies to respond to that climate
6.5 Manage workload, other commitments, and information needs within time and structural constraints (in both personal and team management situations).