The biggest issue I find is fighting the fight against the over use of templates. The branding issue huge b/c most large corporations have separate, sometimes even legal, offices that insist on a logo of a certain size on every bloody thing they create. If you don’t follow their rules, then it won’t be released. They’re more concerned about following rules than their end users/workers. I’m pretty sure the users/workers know this product was for use by Company X and having Company X’s logo on every screen does nothing to add to learning.

I love templates/style guides for the basic like navigation and front matter but after almost 15 years of eLearning development I want the content to be King, not the template.

More to your point, I look at my elearning as a course, not a presentation, and since I always look at it that way, no one has ever asked why we don’t use the standard template. I think that if I had started with it, it would have given away my Articulate courses as being built inside PowerPoint – but since I never started that way, most folks have no idea.

We did start out with a standard look to each of our e-learning modules but we soon realised that although the learning worked the environment was becoming monotonous. The content was different but the interface was tiresome after a while.

Now everything we create is fresh and new. The colours and the interface/navigation are all designed to compliment the content. We feel it helps, maybe not to improve engagement, but to stop the opposite.

PS As a classroom trainer I dress casually/comfortably. If I need a uniform so delegates know I am the trainer then I really do need to brush up my training skills.

If possible, please suggest some effective template structures for short on-line synchronous learning solutions.

However, as some have noted, there is a legitimate need to consider some quality standards and those issues. And ultimately, you are being paid by the customer who commissions the course and not the learner.

The key is to find the right balance. I think if you do use a templated approach, it has to be designed for elearning and not for a presentation.

In an upcoming post, I’ll show an example of an organization that actually builds elearning templates that are more like storyboards that guide the learning design, rather than just a static template. They do a great job of creating a branded design, with some standardization, good content development, and still leave a lot of room for the instructional design. In that case, their approach is more about structure and support and less about control.

In my company instructional designer capacity is very limited. We therefore have to work with subject matter experts doing most of the content creation.

Although they are experts in a certain discipline, most of them have never teached and don’t have a clue what effective ID means. Although they are not always completely happy with the “ID-based templates” we provide, they defenitely do experience the benefits of a good template.

I personally think a template based proces is a good way to capture more or less the tacit expertise we want from them. They are not yet ready for any “beyond the template creative ID proces” but – thinking about what I just wrote – we might underestimate our SME’s and we might – with some additional effort – ultimately get them there.

Kind regards,

Marcel van Holstein
Edudocum
The Netherlands

I too, have been in classroom settings (pre-school, k-12, college, and workplace) for over 20 years and have been designing listening and speaking tests, now for over 15 years. When developing a listening and speaking tests, I incorporate a variety of methods and lots of varied stimuli including differing colors, style of language, multimedia, etc. The one thing that is important is to provide the rubric that makes the slide easy to use. I often use the same style of rubric throughout the test. I also always tell the test-taker what I am testing for in each of the components. This way the test-taker is fully aware of what is going on.

When developing a test, you have to field-test it. One of the first things that you look at when reviewing the results of a field-test is, did the item you presented get the result that you wanted. Maybe one of the things missing in developing course-ware is field-testing. I am sure you do not have to field-test the course-ware the same way tests are field-tested but a sampling could help make your courses more effective. It could also help you determine what types of slides has to be developed for what types of populations.

I find that when the population being tested is at a very low language and literacy level, then consistency is very important. However, creativity is also very important. This population tends to need stimuli more than the average. So, I would think the style of courses would also depend on the population being served.

I personally feel that second language learners at low second language levels and unknown educational backgrounds should not be taught solely or maybe at all with computers. It has been my experience that the learning process in these situations are not enhanced with the use of computers. Also, there has been a lot of research on drills. Research finds that drills are not very effective. So, I do not recommend using computers for drills. If you have authentic situations that provide ways of dealing with problem-solving etc., then these maybe okay, if they are presented in their first language at the trainee’s language level. Using the second language will be beyond their abilities. Keep in mind, that some population use a mixture of two languages in their native dialect. These individuals may not have a good foundation of concrete cognitive concepts in any language and will be difficult to train. The use of pictures and other stimuli will be essential.

I also find that very well educated individuals can also be very hard to train, especially when the subject matter seems to be something they already know. These individuals have lots on their plates and do not want to waste time. It is important to give these individuals the material they need to know without repeating lots of the material they know well. It is more important to these individuals that the material provides the exact changes or improvements without providing every detail. This is also a challenge, as every individual could have differing needs. I recommend support information that learner can click on if they do not know it. This seems to be the most effective way of dealing with knowledge bases. The style for these guys should be varied and use plenty of stimuli to help them remember where they left off if the training is self paced.

For those in between, I find that knowing the population and the target information is the most important aspect in developing the course-ware.

In closing, the style and presentation of learning components often depends on the population. The way you present materials should always have some of your personality. One size does not fit all. The fit has to do with you and who you are working with.

Just my thought for what ever they are worth.

Chris B

I think ’standards’ help the designer/developer, the learner, and the company who is offering the training.

Definition of a ‘Standard’
My definition of ’standards’ is “The elements of an e-learning offering that define the look/feel and navigation of the offering. For example, the Articulate player colors, logo, navigation, plus a color palette for use in the page content.”

Standards Help the Developer
I’m all for creativity and have been known to ‘color outside the lines’ (often); however, standards help provide structure for those developers who are better writers than graphic designers. Standards also allow us to concentrate our time on what’s most important, developing instructional sound content.

Standards Help the Learner
When our customers take multiple e-learning courses from us, they can just concentrate on learning the content; not trying to figure out how to navigate each tutorial.

Standards Help the Company
Standards help to build a certain look/feel (brand) for our e-learning offerings.

Why should we care about branding?

Colors and graphics help companies like McDonalds, Nike, Target, Starbuck, Dunkin Donuts, and Apple get recognized. Training companies are no different, they need to get/be recognized and having a similar look/feel to their e-learning offerings helps them achieve the necessary branding that is required to have a successful business.

In summary, standards provide the necessary company branding; however, the designers and developers should be given the freedom to be creative with the content so we can build training that is instructional sound and fun for the learner.

p.s. I agree that the bulleted slide should be avoided whenever possible.

Are corporate trainers in the classroom told to wear the same thing when they instruct? Is there a corporate “trainer’s uniform?” Red bow tie, blue oxford, khaki pants, black wing-tips? I seriously doubt it (and if your company has such a silly policy, I’d love to hear about it).
__________________

I work at a company where the classroom trainers DO dress in a ‘uniform’ of sorts. They have a standard shirt (they can switch off between 3 colors)that they wear, with the company name/logo on it. Why? It sets them apart from the learners so that they are easily spottted, and they do represent the company as instructors. Also our classes are made up of customers, not just employees. Thirdly, our employees are site technicians who also–wear a company shirt at a customer site–so the instructors model that. So yes, corporate trainers do sometimes wear some kind of ‘uniform.’ In our environment, I wouldn’t call it a ’silly’ policy.

As for templates, our training group does use a standard e-Lea rningshell/template for much of our e-learning–but by choice. It creates consistency in look and feel, makes developmemt faster, and it seems to work for learners. We actually have a second template we use as well.

I’m not saying the templates are perfect–or that they don’t diminish creativty a bit (they do), but if it works for now, why re-invent the wheel?

Thanks Tom.
Anne