Lambda Solutions e-Learning 2.0 Online Training and Moodle Experts

At Lambda, we offer both traditional eLearning Course Development, as well as more affordable Rapid Online Course Creation solutions. While Custom Online Course Development involves tailoring the course to the exact specifications of the client, a Rapidly Developed Online Course is less custom, but has a shorter turn-around time (less than a month) and a more affordable price tag.

Here's a great article by Patti Shank from Learning Solutions Magazine, about when an organization should implement a Rapid eLearning approach in an organization:

Rapid works well for lower learning levels

Dr. Benjamin Bloom, an educational psychologist, helped to develop a learning out comes classification system, a hierarchy of learning outcome levels associated with what the learner should be able to do at each level (see Figure 1). This hierarchy helps us think about the level of learning we want the information or instruction to foster, and what we want the learner to be able to do because of the instruction (typically called alearning objective or instructional objective).

Higher level   Level   Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Application Comprehension Lower level Knowledge	What the learner should be able to do
	Recommend, assess, choose...
	Design, plan, construct...
	Compare, calculate, examine...
	Complete, use, demonstrate...
	Describe, identify, give an example...
	List, define, label...

Figure 1: Information -- instruction continuum.

A major factor that impacts whether you can complete a project rapidly is the availability of existing, usable content. Content development often takes a great deal of time, so a rapid approach works best when needed content is already available and adequate for the job at hand. Lack of adequate content is one of the single biggest risk factors associated with rapid e-Learning projects! Even if a rapid approach otherwise makes sense, lack of adequate content will automatically add time to the process.

When considering whether you have adequate content for a rapid approach, you may need to consider the following content type issues.

Slides: If you are using the content from PowerPoint slides as a content source, it’s likely that this content alone will be inadequate unless you are the subject matter expert who created them. That’s because, typically, PowerPoint slides contain abridged content so you will need to consider the effort needed to turn slide content into adequate content. Also consider whether the content you are using will need to be updated, verified, or approved (all of which will add time to the project).

Documents: If you are using content from documents, consider whether the audience for the documents is the same as the audience for the information or instruction. If not, you may need to rework the content. Content from documents often needs condensing, so you will likely need to prioritize and condense it. And, of course, you’ll need to consider whether the content will need updating, verifying, or approval (all of which will add time to the project).

Graphics/Media: Graphics and media can take some time to develop. Consider what graphics and media would be most useful and whether they are already available. If they are available, consider whether they will need to be updated, verified, or approved. If they are not available, consider the time it will take to develop them and whether you can complete the project without them.

Other: Other content may be available or needed. You still must determine if the content is adequate or whether you need to modify it.

Rapid often works well in a hybrid approach

After some analysis, you may discover that a rapid approach won’t work for all elements of an information or instruction project. But that doesn’t mean a rapid approach won’t work at all.

For example, let’s consider a project whose purpose is to train sales staff on a new product. They will need to know the product’s features and benefits, how it fits into the company’s product portfolio, and how it compares to competitors’ similar products. They will also need the skills to effectively sell this product, alone and alongside other company products as well as against competitors’ products. Let’s consider how this situation lends itself to a rapid approach and a traditional approach.

Rapid Approach

Lower-level learning outcomes: The following are lower-level learning objectives:

• Describe product features and associated benefits
• Identify how the new product fits into the company’s product portfolio.

Disposable information and instruction: New product information is extremely time sensitive to sales representatives and others in the organization.

The project is on the information end of the information/instruction continuum: The product’s features and benefits, and how it fits into the company’s product portfolio, are closer to the information end of the information/instruction continuum.

Traditional Approach

Being able to sell against similar competitors’ products, and effectively selling this product alone and alongside other company products, are higher-level learning outcomes. They are also closer to the instruction end of the information-instruction continuum.

Whether you can use a rapid approach for part of this project, however, may depend on the availability of adequate content. Since marketing staff often prepares sales materials well in advance of a new product launch, there’s a good chance that at least some product information will be available for use in this project. You should analyze whether it is adequate before proceeding.

Types of rapid authoring tools

Rapid authoring tools come in a variety of “flavors.” Table 1 describes five commonly used types of rapid authoring tools, what they typically create, and examples of commonly used rapid authoring tools in that category. Remember, for the first four tool types here, the more capabilities you use, the more complex and less rapid the project becomes!

It is easy to see that the dividing line between rapid and more complex authoring may have more to do with what is included in each project and less to do with the tool you use to create it. One critical takeaway: When you use any tool to create more complex content, the project you create will typically take more time and therefore be less “rapid,” regardless of what tool is used. Rapidly produced projects typically produce less complex information and instruction.

Rapid often works well in a hybrid approach

The rapid e-Learning authoring tools marketplace includes numerous vendors and tools. Figure 2 shows the top vendors of rapid authoring tools, and the percentage of responding Guild members who use one or more tools from each vendor. Figure 9 on Page 19 of the complete report shows the percentage of responding Guildmembers who use each rapid authoring tool.

Figure 2: Percentage of responding Guild members who use at least one of each vendor’s rapid authoring tools.

The majority of responding Guild members use one or more of the Adobe tools (See Figure 8 on Page 18 of the complete report). Captivate was initially an authoring product mainly designed to produce quick and easy software application demos. As you might imagine by the large percentage of responding Guild members who use Captivate, the product is no longer limited to that use (although it can still make very rapid and terrific application demos and simulations). Approximately 25% of responding Guild members use Adobe Connect, a synchronous virtual classroom tool. Many of the companies new to e-Learning get started by putting some of their face-to-face classroom-based training online.

Author: Patti Shank
Source: http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/415/

Check out this great article from the Articulate Blog about why eLearning is so effective.

E-learning is hot. And for good reason. If done right, it can produce great results by decreasing costs and improving performance. Also, unlike a one time classroom session, the elearning course is available for others.  This includes the static elearning course as well as any ongoing conversations in networked communities.

Recently, I had a conversation with someone new to elearning and it struck me that she didn’t fully understand the value of elearning.  I think this is common as more people are joining the world of elearning.  Understanding elearning’s value helps you make the best decisions about when and why to use it. 

E-learning Supports the Organization’s Goals

• Improved training costs.  Producing learning content is time consuming whether it’s online or not.  With elearning, each time the course is accessed your return on investment improves because you are dividing the fixed production costs by number of uses.  You also have savings through decreased travel, reduced material, and hopefully improved (and more efficient) performance.
•  
• Decreased material costs.  Let’s say you have to train how to arrange equipment in a sterile environment like an operating room.  If you had to use the real environment, it would be costly.  Even setting up a fake environment has material costs and labor.  By creating the environment online and letting the learner practice, you never have to worry about the costs associated with set up, use, and clean up.
•  
• Increased productivity.  Because elearning is not bound by geography or time, you can control training’s impact on production by training people during down times.  In addition, with the current economy, you’re asking people to do more with less.  So elearning is a great way to give them the tools and skills needed to enhance their performance.
•  
• Standardization.  You may have a great facilitator, but that’s no guarantee that the courses are presented the same across sessions.  Elearning allows you to create a standardized process and consistency in the delivery of content.  It also compresses delivery time.  I’ve combined elearning courses with facilitated sessions.  Elearning delivered consistent content.  Live sessions were interactive case studies that applied the information.

E-learning Supports the Learner’s Development

• • Real-time access.  Live learning events require that those who participate align their schedules to the training calendar.  Elearning eliminates this because the course can be accessed anytime, anywhere.  This can also happen without Internet access.  I saw a Red Cross demo where the learners accessed the content on a PC out in the field and uploaded their results when they were back online.
  •  
  • Freedom to fail.  Let’s face it, real learning requires some failure.  But no one likes to fail in a classroom full of other people.  Elearning lets you fail without fear.  This encourages exploration and testing of ideas.  With the right feedback you create a great learning environment.  Worst case, you can always start over.  Something you can’t always do in class.
  •  
  • Improved retention.  The combination of multimedia and instructional design can produce a very rich learning experience that is repeatable.  Throw in some good practice activities with feedback and you have a learning environment that’s going to help your learners retain the course content which will produce results.
  •  
  • Personalized learning.  Look out the window at your parking lot.  My guess is that you’ll see a dozen or more different cars.  They all do the same thing, yet we have personal opinions about what we want to drive.  The same for learning.  Learners want control.  Elearning allows you to offer control to the learners in a way that classroom learning doesn’t.

E-learning Nurtures a Learning Organization & Community

• Ongoing access to resources.  If you take a class in the real world and need a refresher, you better hope that you took good notes.  Otherwise, you’re out of luck.  That’s not the case with elearning.  Ideally, you continue to have access to the online content and resources to brush up on what you learned. 
•  
• Knowledge management.  Many people see elearning as only the authored courses.  But elearning includes all sort of online technologies.  If you incorporate some of the tools that allow collaboration and conversation, you can capture organizational knowledge that is available for future learners.
•  
• Encourage sharing.  The foundation of a learning community is built on sharing what you know with others.  This is where incorporating a forum or wiki really adds value to your elearning.  Depending on how the course is structured, you can encourage sharing of resources and insight gained from the course. 
•  
• Employer of choice.  People want opportunities to grow.  A cafeteria with high fat foods is one way.  Another is a catalog with all sorts of elearning courses.  This allows them to explore other opportunities in the organization.  During downtime, it would be great to spend fifteen minutes learning to better manage meetings or improve working with peers.  Offering these opportunities to learn makes you a place people want to stay.

Elearning is good for the environment.  Britain’s Open University’s “study found that producing and providing distance learning courses consumes an average of 90% less energy and produces 85% fewer CO2 emissions per student than conventional face-to-face courses.”   

One of the challenges with making elearning effective is how you manage the courses and access to resources.  I’m an advocate of freeing up the course navigation and giving the learner more control.

If you’re using a learning management system you might consider how that impacts the learning.  Do people have access to the resources when the course is complete?  Can they retake it?  Are you punishing them for failing?

Elearning is cost effective and can produce great results.  It’s all a matter of how you use it.  Where do you see elearning’s effectiveness?  What suggestions would you offer to those who are just getting started.

Source: http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/why-e-learning-is-so-effective/

 One of the questions our clients are always looking to answer before implementing their eLearning courses, is "How will this impact my Return on Investment?" Here's a great article by Patrick Lambe that discusses the topic of ROI when it comes to online training courses: 

One of the ongoing admonitions e-learning specialists face is the need to "prove" the return on investment (ROI) for each program they initiate.

But most e-learning programs are funded from ongoing training budgets, which are recurrent (that is, budgeted annually to cover the cost of a year's worth of training, rather than individual projects) and are accounted as operations or infrastructure costs.

Because much training is not budgeted at the project level, discussions about ROI have traditionally had little relevance. It would be like seeking the ROI on groceries in a personal budget or of stationery supplies in a business. Both are simply costs of doing business.

How, then, might one assess the return on an e-learning program?

First, it's important to be clear on the economics of e-learning, which I explain in this article. Second, we must understand some of the most common ways that organizations deploy e-learning to support their strategic objectives, and show how measurement of viability and impact can be approached within those situations.

The Economics of e-Learning vs. Training

A good understanding of the economics of e-learning involves realizing that e-learning is infrastructure.

Infrastructure. Infrastructure is the composite of technology systems, business processes, work culture, and control mechanisms that make up the way an organization operates and does its work. Infrastructure is distinct from assets and resources insofar as an existing infrastructure enables or constrains the performance of assets, such as specific technologies, people, and availability of time. If e-learning were merely a resource or asset, it would be an interchangeable part that could be plugged into an organization and become operational at the flick of a switch.

But that's not the case. In fact, as some of the early implementers of large-scale e-learning initiatives discovered, it introduces significant problems of change management because e-learning is more than an interchangeable, plug-and-play part. Making e-learning work involves more than integrating technology systems. It also involves re-gearing work processes, tuning into soft work cultures, and deeply integrating learning with the needs of business and work processes.

In contrast, although a training class might disrupt employees' work schedules, the class requires no other deep integration. And, although making training stick does require broader change in the workplace, research suggests organizations still offer classroom training without these related changes (see Transfer of Training: Action-packed strategies to ensure high payoff from training investments, by Broad and Newstrom, 2001).

Pervasive nature. This highlights another important difference between training and e-learning. Training has established for itself a distinct niche and role within an organization's infrastructure. It is compartmentalized and relatively easy to manipulate. But e-learning pervades the entire infrastructure. As part of the IT network of the organization, learning content is potentially available at any point in the flow of work, in any business process, and as part of any decision.

Recognizing the role of infrastructure in e-learning has two significant implications for discerning its economic impact or viability. First, because an infrastructure is a complex interweaving of diffuse and diverse elements ranging from "hard" technology to "soft" culture, attributing specific outcomes to specific interventions is extremely difficult. Infrastructure is generally opaque when linking causes to effects, and this substantially contributes to its apparent inertia in the face of change.

Second, any infrastructure-related initiative such as e-learning, has an absorption or integration cost that is extremely difficult to anticipate, precisely because of the opacity of infrastructure.

In layman's terms, an absorption or integration cost is the cost of change management, such as unanticipated costs associated with the technology, like the cost of providing tutoring support to learners (which is a cost that most organizations do not consider when deciding to launch an e-learning effort) or that, despite the fact that staff can access the learning anywhere at any time, if the work environment does not support transferring the learning to the job, learners will not become more productive.

Transfer of knowledge. It's crucial that organizations invest in efforts intended to transfer learning to the job. Whatever these unanticipated change management costs are, they are universally under-anticipated. The consequence is that the economic benefits of e-learning are usually over-estimated and the post-implementation results usually disappoint executives, reducing their confidence in a variety of learning-related issues, starting with the mechanisms for assessing the viability of a proposed e-learning investment.

Benefits of the Infrastructure Perspective

Recognizing the infrastructural aspect of an e-learning initiative is highly advantageous for three reasons.

First, it focuses executives' attention at the beginning of the project on likely integration and adaptation issues with a greater level of precision than if the metaphor of a plug-and- play box is used.

Second, e-learning initiatives that seek to unlock the constraints of an existing infrastructure are likely to have fewer challenges in installation and implementation because they are simpler than those that attempt to graft a complex e-learning system onto an existing infrastructure. In the latter situation, the grafted e-learning system will have more numerous points of integration and, as a result , more issues to address. This is why small, highly localized and focused initiatives always have higher success levels than large-scale enterprise wide initiatives. The smaller initiatives impinge upon, and depend upon, fewer elements of the infrastructure for their success.

The third implication of recognizing e-learning as an infrastructure initiative is that a simplistic ROI model would be inappropriate for all but the most tightly defined productivity-oriented initiatives. For example, simplistic ROI assumes that a quantifiable output can be attributed to the effect of a quantifiable input. But infrastructure often renders the relationships between inputs and outputs opaque. In many cases, the establishment of an infrastructure is not about a single input and output, but several, often unrelated, ones. Attributing the initiative to just one of them seems to underestimate the larger benefits.

Moreover, a complex system has a variety of inputs that affect a variety of outputs, many of which are unrelated to one another or that affect a variety of situations. Purely quantifiable and objective measures are increasingly inadequate for capturing the full range of value that such an infrastructure might create.

So metrics such as "contingent valuation" and "outcomes-based evaluation" are increasingly used for measuring the impact of other intangible, knowledge-based interventions, such as public library services or knowledge-based ecological systems. Because of the similarities of such initiatives to e-learning, perhaps they could be used for measuring the impact of e-learning, too.

Contingent Valuation Model

The key premise of the contingent valuation model is that it measures infrastructures at two different levels. One measure focuses on the value created by the entire ecological system. The other measure focuses on the inter-relations and functionality of the parts as valued by key stakeholders at different points in the ecological system. An ecological system includes all of the facilitating and constraining facets of the environment (in this case, the technology infrastructure) (see S. Macmillan's 2007 doctoral dissertation, "Development of writing for research purposes: An ecological exploration of graduate level non-native English speaker writing process").

The concept is not unique to technological infrastructure; the concept also applies to the design of classrooms.

Contingent valuation was originally developed in 1993 by Nobel prize-winning economists Kenneth Arrow and Robert Solow for the purpose of quantifying the value of ecological systems. It has been applied by a number of public and national libraries as a method of demonstrating the direct and indirect economic impact of the intangible services they provide, such as knowledge supply.

The method involves identifying key groups that obtain value from the services, and then quantifying the economic impact as well as the value perception of those services. This calculation is partly achieved by asking the stakeholders to consider what value they would lose if the service were not provided.

Outcomes-Based Approach

However, it's also possible to take a narrower approach based on objectives, or outcomes-based evaluation. It's similar to criterion-referenced instruction. Both start by identifying objectives at the beginning of the project—even before considering alterative solutions—and, after the solution is implemented, assessing the extent to which the objectives have been achieved.

In the using an outcomes-based approach to assessing infrastructure projects, the entering objectives are strategic business objectives that the infrastructure is mobilized to support. The assessment explores the extent to which these objectives were achieved. Outcomes-based evaluation has several strengths, particularly (but not exclusively) for commercial organizations because it encourages e-learning initiatives to support specific strategic objectives and define the measures of accountability for success. Because the objectives are strategic business objectives for which the organization is most likely already conducting assessment, existing measurement systems, such as the balanced scorecard, can be deployed.

Also worth noting is that, although productivity improvement is one possible type of strategic objective, it is by no means the only one.

Source: http://test.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=107-1
By Patrick Lambe, Straits Knowledge, Singapore

Our Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin Accounts are now up and running! Feel free to connect with us on these social networking sites to receive all the latest news about the company and share your feedback with us! 

Lambda Solutions LinkedIn Profile

Lambda Solutions @ Twitter

Lambda Solutions Facebook Page

Lambda Solutions Facebook Group

We’ve ticked another item off our to-do list this week here at Lambda Solutions, as we've gained approval from Moodle to become an official Moodle partner! 

We’ll be joining over 40 other Moodle-partnered organizations based in over 30 countries, that Moodle itself recognizes as the cream of the crop when it comes to Moodle services. A number of other goodies will also come to us via the new partnership, including endorsement opportunities and access to some of Moodle’s valuable internal resources. Moodle will also list us on their official partner site Moodle.com.

 We’re very excited about the partnership and are looking forward to a bright future as an official Moodle Partner!
 

I know now days it seems as though the internet has been with us all the time, how did we ever live without the web ? Well, heading into 2009, it sure seems like the right time to reflect both on how the web evolved and where it's headed.

1990-2000

Looking back, this was the Web 1.0 era, when 14.4 modems ruled the hardware realm and AOL, Netscape were the big names in this period. We were just starting to explore the web and the big challenge was simply getting people accustomed to buying a computer and paying monthly fees for internet connection. The biggest revolution this time was people buying more PCs and exchanging information online through e-mail.

2000-2010

This will be known as the Web 2.0 period, connection wise we went from modems to wireless built right into our laptops, and connection speed is blazing fast with our fiber optics (of course, it feel blazing fast now, but 5 years down the road, people will be laughing when they read this article). The two main objectives for Web 2.0 was digitizing information, think Google, Wikipedia, Youtube and Slideshare; and forming small groups in an online community, think Facebook, Ning, Twitter, LinkedIn.

So, here we are, we have bits of digitized information and a bunch of folks talking online, what happens next ?

How many of us had the pleasure of trying to learn something online ? Well, I think the next logical step for Web 3.0 is now that we have a bunch of people in social networks, standing around doing virtual stare, is to start learning from each other. The Web, in a grander sense, is about individual empowerment. We used to call a stock broker to trade stocks, now we have all the tools and information available to them as to us, Level II quotes, up the the minute information, combine that with low trading fees, the Web has empowered the individual to trade their own stocks; we used to have to go to a bookstore to browse and find the books we want, now we go to Amazon and we have the world's largest bookstore at our fingertips; we used to go to the library for research when we're writing a paper, now we do Google search; the Web has empowered us in different areas doing different things.

The next step is Odijoo, by empowering the individual to port their knowledge online by creating courses, think of Odijoo as a combination of Wikipedia (Text and images), Youtube (Flash videos) and Slideshare (Powerpoint files).  Now anyone can join the Odijoo community and create their own course using these media tools.  This really is the power of shared learning and the direction of Web 3.0

Hi There,

Recently I was asked about our elearning course development approach so I thought I might just share it with all of you :)

Enjoy

Our approach to course development is to work in close collaboration with our clients through our 7 step course development methodology.  

Step 1 Needs Analysis  

 We conduct a learner profile analysis, learning environment analysis and content analysis. The learner profile analysis allows us to get into the shoes of the learner so that we can design an online course that meets not only their learning style but also their work life. The learning environment analysis gives us the technology specifications that we must use as we develop the course. The content analysis helps us understand the readiness of the content and is the basis for our next step; Design

Step 2 Design

To ensure that the resulting course is based on Adult Education Principles, Lambda Solutions uses an instructional design methodology based on the ADDIE model. In this model we work with your team to:

o   Map content to objectives

o   Identify missing content

o   Collaborate with SME’s

o   Fill in missing content

Next Learner Engagement is designed into the process by identifying opportunities where content can be enriched through media and interactivities. Our instructional design(ID)  team creates an ID script that explains what type of media will be used in each module and topic in conjunction with your input. Where appropriate, storyboards are created for specific media pieces.

To ensure Ease of Use Lambda Solutions designs appealing screen interfaces with a consistent presentation of functionality. All of our screen designs incorporate Adult Education best practices as well as usability principles from the Advanced Distributed Learning’s (ADL) Guidelines for Design and Evaluation of Web-Based Instruction.

Step 3 Development

Based on the design specifications above we build the desired media and the user interface. Next we migrate all the media and text content into the interface. Common media elements in our courses include rich graphics, animations, interactive mini games, video demonstrations, video case scenarios, audio narration, reinforcement quiz questions, assessment questions, and glossary items.  

Step 4 Deployment

In the deployment phase we integrate the course into the deployment  environment and ensure that the course is working properly. Any bugs that come up are fixed and documented in our issues management system, which is highlighted in Section 2.2.

Step 5 Train the Trainer

The Train the Trainer program is customized based on your need. Essentially it helps teach you how to make the most of your eLearning course by covering such topics as eLearning support, updating your content and improving outcomes for eLearners.

Step 6 Pilot & Evaluation

Pilots in general are means of validating the objectives of a project. In eLearning  this translates into assessing if the learners can meet the learning objectives after having taken the course as well as assessing the  subjective data of usability and user engagement.

During this step we start by creating a pilot plan where we identify:

o     Scope and objectives of the pilot

o     Pilot participants

o     Support for pilot participants

o     Technology needed for the pilot

o     Pilot location

o     Pilot communication strategy

o     User tests and feedback methods

Once the plan has been created we lead your user group through the testing phase by:

·             Explaining the procedure to him/her.

·             Determining their prior knowledge.

·            Observing him/her using the program.

·             Interviewing him/her afterwards.

·             Assessing their experience and feedback.

·             Documenting how the course could be revised.

We generally find that interviewing is best done through questionnaires as users tend to feel more confident in providing truthful answers when asked questions indirectly. Once the questionnaires are completed we  then aggregate and analyse the data to determine what might be changed and improved. The data summary is then provided to you with recommended changes and improvements. Changes are completed based on your approval.

Step 7 Maintenance

Our maintenance programs allow your piece of mind and ensure that your course is congruent with the latest technology updates. Our issues tracking system provides you automatic responses when issues are identified and also notifies you with the steps that have been taken to mitigate the issue. Our maintenance programs can be course specific, learning management specific or specific towards both.

In response to our Moodle Mondays the following questions was asked by a participant:

When I delete an account, I know that the grade records are still kept with the class. How can I access the records with the account gone or unassigned from the class?
Furthermore, by deleting a class, would the students' grades also be erased?

Here is the answer as we see it:

Point1:
You might have to reassign the student back to the class in order to get that info. A way to avoid this is to run the course as a new course every term or semester. Simply backup the old course without user info and then restore it as a new course.

Point2:
If you delete a course all of the students grades go with it as well. You should back up and archive the course before deleting. Our completion module permanently stores the users grades.

As always please feel free to contact us if you are looking for Moodle support, hosting or training.

Being in the heart of Vancouver, i.e. hockey town, one can not ignore the impact of hockey here. Well, maybe because it's the only Prime Time Pro Sport here (sorry CFL fans...). For the past two years, Vancouver has been struggling to score points with a defensive minded squad and the team's record has suffered accordingly. With a top notch goalie like Roberto Luongo, it's easy enough to prevent the other team from scoring, key is, you still have to have more points than your opponent to win the game. The Mat Sundin saga which began in summer has finally come to an end, and the city he chose was Vancouver !! The choices came down between NYC and VAN and OMG, VAN won over NYC ? What a great day for the city which is hosting Olympics 2010 and the best place to live on earth !! Now we even have Mats Sundin, Daniel Sedin and Henrik Sedin (try saying that 10 times). At any rate, the Lambda team is very excited about Sundin's arrival and it seems like Santa arrived early here at Vancouver at least.

A little over a month ago a reader of one of the articles we published in the eLearning Guild (A Picture is Worth 1000 Words: Visual Design in e-Learning) had this to say:

“I believe the most difficult obstacle that I face as an Instructional Designer is knowing which tools are robust while still being relatively easy to use. Also, the fact that many organizations faced with tight budgets expect designers to also wear the development hat. I personally do not want to be a Flash Programmer - if I did that is the area I would have pursued. I am a fan of Captivate 3, but I have used it from the RoboDemo days, so I may be biased.


Any insight you can provide would be greatly appreciated.”

Her question peaked my interest in that it is asked by many instructional designers (ID) of themselves: “I enjoy instructional design, do I really need to know any programming or develop my technical skills?” Before we answer this question let us make an assumption which I believe rings true for many eLearning practitioners across the globe: elearning is a subset of LEARNING. As such it is not a branch education/training that is exclusive of all other modes of training and/or learning; it is simply learning enhanced and supported by technology in its many forms.

As an elearning practitioner it is inevitable that an ID understand technologies of the trade as these are the medium of that practice. If we want to explore the possibilities of technology enhanced learning we have to know what it is, what it does, and to some degree how it does it.

Here is what I suggest IDs approach technology in their practice relative to their comfort levels in technology.

At the very least learn “tech-speak”
Let us suppose that you, an ID, have a developer at your disposal who is proficient with the software tools used for creating online courses. Your “tech-speak” literacy level will determine how efficiently and clearly you get your requirements across. Take the time to learn about the products feature list and what they are best used for.

If you must wear many hats, you make sure they all fit!
If you are an ID with some technical skills choose software tools that are template-based. Why reinvent the wheel when you already have many to choose from?! There are many tools out there that are designed to be relatively simple to use and at a modest cost even for the most cost-conscious organization. Take advantage of the trial versions they offer to find out for yourself how friendly the tool really is. Template-based tools are great workaround solutions for the moderately technical who are looking for plugging in variables with minimal to no programming required.

For example Adobe Flash has pre-built learning interactions in its library that can be easily manipulated; for the most part the programming necessary is already pre-built and all you need to do is adjust variables and do some minor tweaking.

There is also Articulate and Raptivity both of which offer a variety of game and presentation shells that can easily be manipulated by the “not so technical” IDs among us. The only word of advice I have regarding these products is that you do your homework. Consider your audience first to determine if the templates you want to use are indeed appropriate for target audience. It’s a tedious process, but somebody’s got to do it.

Moreover, whether we like it or technologies have limitations; they can’t do everything we want them to. This is where you as a skilled ID must start thinking out of the box and find a workaround for the limitations of technology. This is how you make your money and your tools work for you, but this requires that you understand their limits and their strengths.

Not for the faint of heart…where even angels fear to tread
IDs who are also capable programmers (by this I mean individuals capable of a variety of scripting languages used for interactive media such as Actionscript, PHP, etc) are hard to come by. Such individuals have the practical advantage from both technical and instructional design point of view as they have full control over how they want the interaction to work and behave. The only word of caution I have is that tech-savvy IDs never lose sight of the learning that needs to take place and that technology is there to support it and not just an afterthought.

“Without change there is no innovation, creativity, or incentive for improvement. Those who initiate change will have a better opportunity to manage the change that is inevitable.”
William Pollard