In his eLearning Art blog, Bryan Jones asked a question of a bunch of eLearning gurus: "What is your #1 tip for designing a great eLearning slide?"
The answer that best reflects my own view was at the top of the list, courtesy of Allen Interactions' Michael Allen:
"Slides? I don’t think of elearning in terms of slides (which are tools of presentations) but more in terms of events to engage and stimulate thinking. So design elearning as a conversation with the learner. eLearning should be a good listener, responding to learners as their skills falter and grow. Don’t throw slides at learners, one after the other. Yawn. They don’t stick."
Although those of us who work in this field are far beyond the page-turner stage, the concept of an eLearning screen as a slide still irks me, seeming like a conceptual holdover from PowerPoint terminology.
The word itself may just be a harmless anacrhonism. Articulate "slides" are time based and can be as dynamic and engaging as you want. But the conceptual framework of presenting information and then asking a question is a bit hard-wired into the format.
To really have a "conversation with the learner," as Allen suggests, we need to not only ask questions and give corrections, or even get the learner to perform within the context of scenarios. We need to invite their input, learn what they already know and target our content toward filling gaps and rewarding progress, as you would in a true conversation.
In other words, much of eLearing is still stuck in the mode of "give give give" rather than the more constructive and natural "give and take, give and take."
Is this a problem with authoring sytems or designers? I think the latter, though often the former push us into thinking in ways that make for easier programming.
Will a dose of AI make future authoring systems more like a coach than a tutor? I, for one, would like to see it. Maybe then we can replace the term "slide" with something that better reflects the learning conversation we would like to be having.
Mitch
The answer that best reflects my own view was at the top of the list, courtesy of Allen Interactions' Michael Allen:
"Slides? I don’t think of elearning in terms of slides (which are tools of presentations) but more in terms of events to engage and stimulate thinking. So design elearning as a conversation with the learner. eLearning should be a good listener, responding to learners as their skills falter and grow. Don’t throw slides at learners, one after the other. Yawn. They don’t stick."
Although those of us who work in this field are far beyond the page-turner stage, the concept of an eLearning screen as a slide still irks me, seeming like a conceptual holdover from PowerPoint terminology.
The word itself may just be a harmless anacrhonism. Articulate "slides" are time based and can be as dynamic and engaging as you want. But the conceptual framework of presenting information and then asking a question is a bit hard-wired into the format.
To really have a "conversation with the learner," as Allen suggests, we need to not only ask questions and give corrections, or even get the learner to perform within the context of scenarios. We need to invite their input, learn what they already know and target our content toward filling gaps and rewarding progress, as you would in a true conversation.
In other words, much of eLearing is still stuck in the mode of "give give give" rather than the more constructive and natural "give and take, give and take."
Is this a problem with authoring sytems or designers? I think the latter, though often the former push us into thinking in ways that make for easier programming.
Will a dose of AI make future authoring systems more like a coach than a tutor? I, for one, would like to see it. Maybe then we can replace the term "slide" with something that better reflects the learning conversation we would like to be having.
Mitch
RSS Feed
