The Role of Instructional Design in Multimedia Development
By Peggy Troupin
Dumping raw content into multimedia formats isn't going to improve training. An early role for the instructional design function in multimedia development can save many headaches, dollars, and delays.
According to a recent statistic, there are approximately 30 million pages of material on the Internet. From the perspective of instructional design, however, it's all raw content. The volume of information is staggering, but the amount that's in a learning format or instructionally designed is small.
It's relatively easy to transfer raw content from paper to technology delivery. But it's much more challenging to put material into a format that helps people learn.
The essence of design
Architecture provides a good analogy for the value of instructional design. Like the architecture that supports a building, instructional design is invisible, but there are clear signs of its presence or absence if you know what to look for. In this age of digital learning, I continually ask myself, "Where does instructional design reside, and how does it apply to the new learning formats we're developing?" I'm particularly interested in the shift of classroom training to online delivery, because it's the most sweeping phenomenon of recent years--and one whose consequences we know so little about.
If a training program has excellent instructional design--or a building has excellent architecture--the following statements will ring true:
- It fits in with and enhances its environment.
- It feels natural and comfortable to its users.
- It also excites and challenges its users--they sense a new experience and want to explore further.
- It is functional and demonstrably fulfills its purpose.
What happens when a building is constructed without help from an architect? Stairways lead nowhere. Light switches are hard to find. Doorjambs are too low. Many multimedia training courses are constructed similarly, without sufficient planning. In the traditional classroom medium, you can work around poorly designed material with good classroom and interpersonal skills. In multimedia, where the learner is often on his or her own, you cannot.
Good instructional design is much more critical to the success--and even functionality--of a multimedia learning program than to traditional programs.
Two kinds of classroom conversions
There are two widely divergent types of classroom training that require different design strategies to translate them to multimedia. Let's call one type Class A, in which content experts deliver a series of presentations during several days. The speakers distribute overhead copies for note taking and question answering at the end--the audience's one chance for interactivity. The next time the training is delivered, there may be different speakers--and different content. This is a familiar and popular format in organizations, and it can work effectively. However, from the instructional design perspective, the learners are being exposed to raw content. They must wander through the content, as they would through a house with many corridors and unidentified rooms. Without the structure, sequencing, and techniques in place to guarantee mastery of learning objectives, there's no design control. Instead, there's accidental learning.
Now consider Class B, a well-designed classroom program in a curriculum that builds progressively. It uses a variety of learning modes to deliver the content, such as facilitated interactivity, case studies, job aids, breakout groups, interactive team activities, and a judicious use of experts. It also includes evening assignments, site visits, quizzes or certification tests, trainee presentations, games, coaching, and instructor and peer feedback. There's an experience of bonding, team spirit, and support during the program with reinforcement after it. Trainees leave with specific skills, knowledge, and attitudes (the learning objectives). We have design control!
If you're contemplating converting a Class A type program to an Internet classroom format, you have a redesign on your hands. You can't put overheads and lecture notes on the Internet and expect viewers to learn because you have removed the thing that held that material together--a real person at the front of the room. The content must be completely analyzed and repurposed, and learning interventions developed for the intended audience. The happy news is that you're going to end up with a superior learning result because you'll have a course with guaranteed learning objectives, reinforcement, and retention.
If you're converting Class B, you have less of a redesign but a dilemma of a different kind: It's harder to improve on the original. The challenge is how to compensate for the loss of a truly interpersonal, interactive program with computerized interactivity. Unlike Class A, which offers us great opportunity for quality improvement, our goal for Class B is to try to match the quality of the original.
Multimedia and training quality
One unexpected result of the multimedia revolution is the opportunity to improve the quality of training. Many training programs lacking in instructional design are repurposed as multimedia distance learning programs because of the lure of cost savings in travel, space allocation, salaries, and time away from the job. As a result, there's an opportunity to make formerly wobbly classroom programs into something well designed that delivers the learning objectives. Recent studies, like one conducted by The Forum Corporation, indicate that there's plenty of room for improvement. Some 58 percent of the business leaders interviewed in a 1999 survey were dissatisfied with the overall effectiveness of training, and 57 percent didn't feel they were getting a return on their training investment.
Instructional designers are concerned about context, which is why they like to do needs analyses. But their real work, like an architect, is in the building process: assessing, extracting, molding, refining, and repurposing the content for learning results. The needs analysis phase may take weeks, but the building phase typically takes months. Each activity, bulleted list, or case study is part of the overall program design and must advance its purpose. In a well-designed training program, nothing is accidental--just like a well-designed building.
Everything that's true about the importance of instructional design in traditional training development is even more critical when multimedia is involved. Why? The multimedia training product must serve as both content and instructor.
Stages of multimedia development
The multimedia design process is heavily weighted by up-front organizational and technical decisions that commit a project to a path that's often difficult to change. Assigning an early role to the instructional design function (internal or external) can save many headaches, dollars, and delays down that path.
The table below highlights the main categories of issues that typically arise. The role of the instructional designer is suggested in the right-hand column.
|
MULTIMEDIA DESIGN PROCESS |
Stage
(Issues and Decisions) |
Instructional Design Role |
1. Analysis: Context vs. Content
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Curriculum
Content
Performance objectives
Learning objectives
Environment
|
Diagnostic
(team resource) |
| 2. Technology Selection |
Consulting
(team resource) |
| 3. Development Strategy and Process |
Strategic
(active team role) |
| 4. Design/Build/Test |
Design & Develop
(major team role) |
Here are issues to consider under each of the categories.
1. Analysis. Curriculum decisions drive the start of the process. What portions of the curriculum are candidates for multimedia development? Are they new courses or conversions? How are they being run now? Should programs be combined, or split? The introduction of multimedia will shake up your curriculum, but it will eventually strengthen it. The instructional designer can perform a diagnostic on what portions of content would be best served by multimedia, what the learning/performance objectives call for, what the sequencing should be, and how that can be blended with more traditional formats (assuming a mix of formats for most curricula).
2. Technology selection. There are dozens of authoring systems for developing multimedia. Product selection discussions should center around
- the user interface
- system capabilities
- how the learners will use and learn to navigate the system
- how program elements and general interactivity will be integrated, where links are possible
- the roles of facilitators, coaches, technical support, and administrators
- graphics use
- audio and video use.
The choice of technology (hardware and software) will determine what learning strategies you can and can't use. If involved early, the instructional designer can provide insight into such tradeoffs--again, based on the content and target audience.
3. Development strategy and process. Multiple development stages and at least one test with the target audience are usually necessary when developing multimedia. The strategy will define not only what parts of the technology most need to be tested, but also what part of the design needs to be tested before full development begins.
4. Design/build/test. This is the most labor-intensive part of the process. Like building a house, coordination is key. The project leader must know how to mesh each team member's contribution to produce a working program. Communication breakdowns can sidetrack or undermine the project. Decisions that were made up front are appreciated (if good), or bemoaned (if not). The instructional designer is a major team player, generating the actual program nuggets. He or she is responsible for ensuring the integrity of the content and the program's accessibility to its users.
Multimedia training development is more complex than traditional development and requires sophisticated decision making. The learning mission must be kept in focus to avoid veering off-track into technology issues, at the expense of the project's true purpose. A good strategy is to involve the instructional designer at each development step as a representative of the content, the endusers, and the learning purpose.
Published: February 2000