We passed it round the Keypath office and some questions came back like, what happened to the graded assessment/knowledge check? What about low level blooms outcomes like, "recite" or "classify"?
Is the assessment now the feedback, or is there an important distinction we missed?
Are low level blooms knowledge checks built into the activities or are they part of feedback? And are we seeing the model too linearly in trying to split them apart and actually activities and feedback are more blurred?
Fantastic post as always - I'm missing one key takeaway - and one reason why a framework like this isn't currently 'leading' the market (volume wise). You need to provide:
- additional functionality / link out to platforms that allow you to practice vs. just play back a video + MCQs - of course it's doable, but takes more time, expertise and possibly cost
- if feedback is delivered via screenshare + walkthrough -it means it's delivered to a person. If it's through social learning - you 'save' on instructor costs but need to provide, manage and moderate the platform. If it's an instructor, you need to pay that person.
So would the revised courses not be both:
- more expensive
- less scalable?
Is this the right approach? Yes. We very much believe in (a version of) this approach at my company, so I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here! Am I surprised that this isn't the standard design? Not really, partly for those reasons (instructor / reviewer cost + expertise and confidence using different platforms).
Great post again and thanks for sharing.
We passed it round the Keypath office and some questions came back like, what happened to the graded assessment/knowledge check? What about low level blooms outcomes like, "recite" or "classify"?
Is the assessment now the feedback, or is there an important distinction we missed?
Are low level blooms knowledge checks built into the activities or are they part of feedback? And are we seeing the model too linearly in trying to split them apart and actually activities and feedback are more blurred?
Or did we miss the point :P
Thanks again Dr! DanC
Fantastic post as always - I'm missing one key takeaway - and one reason why a framework like this isn't currently 'leading' the market (volume wise). You need to provide:
- additional functionality / link out to platforms that allow you to practice vs. just play back a video + MCQs - of course it's doable, but takes more time, expertise and possibly cost
- if feedback is delivered via screenshare + walkthrough -it means it's delivered to a person. If it's through social learning - you 'save' on instructor costs but need to provide, manage and moderate the platform. If it's an instructor, you need to pay that person.
So would the revised courses not be both:
- more expensive
- less scalable?
Is this the right approach? Yes. We very much believe in (a version of) this approach at my company, so I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here! Am I surprised that this isn't the standard design? Not really, partly for those reasons (instructor / reviewer cost + expertise and confidence using different platforms).