I originally was going to make a comparison between Storyboards and educational quicksand, but having seen reactions to similar polemics, I figured I needed to adjust my stance somewhat.
The concept of planning out a highly interactive learning asset has its roots in film-making and – in principle – is a good idea. After all, movies are expensive enough to make without wasting time and film on shots that will end up on the cutting room floor. But the storyboarding process for media is pretty well understood and (I think?) follows some generally accepted conventions so you can(I think?) go from one production to another and make sense of what’s going on.
That hasn’t really been my experience with storyboarding for interactive learning assets. In fact, it’s anything but. Read the rest of this entry
With my wife tackling her B.Ed. (and hoping to transfer to my alma mater for Grad School) and one of my colleagues also starting the MA program I did, I’ve been tripping down educational memory lane of late.
That came to a head a little while ago as I participated in a FB message exchange with some of my former classmates as we responded to a query from one of our number about an instructional design challenge. My friend Peter summed it up well:
As an aside, you have no idea how much I miss this kind of dialogue with you guys. This thread made my day.
With that, I got a pang of sadness. Read the rest of this entry
I love what John E. Smith (@StratLearner) has to say about this topic. It’s closely related to a previously-mentioned post of mine that’s still in the works. As L&D professionals, we need to be aiming for “deep learning” but it seems that our efforts often wind up only getting to a more superficial level; an issue that speaks more to overall implementation and adoption issues, rather than a specific ID fault.
What’s most telling for me is the opening quote. Read it, and you’ll see why.
One of the topics of debate in my workplace is the concept of having the instructional designer also serve as the project manager for their own projects. The rationale is that they are intimately involved in the project from design through implementation and are conveying information over to any project-level resources and establishing the deliverables.
This proposal raises some interesting issues.; PMs are normally positions of some level of authority and can request and assign resources, etc. So, if the PM did not have the authority PMs are also experts in the management and administration of projects, and all the mysterious things that go into them. They are also not necessarily resources for the project, but they have a degree of responsibility to the project sponsor and the customer for the outcomes.
I’m going to try not to salt the waters too much, but I wonder what people think. If you are an ID are you also your own project manager?