🎓 1. Accessing learning science research: Resonate with 100% - To top it, most research and evidence based practises are based on W.I.E.R.D societies i.e. Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) societies. A large part of my practise is for the global south. This means that a lot of the research does not directly translate.
📑 2. Managing project timelines & stakeholders. 100% Always looking for ways to be more efficient about this.
📈 3. Visualising & documenting my design in a way that works for all stakeholders. This is not an issue for me. I think of them as seperate processes - designing and communicating. When merged, you can tend to get side-tracked into either goal.
💾 4. Version control & tracking comments / changes. This is not an issue if you set-up a system from the start. As long as your team continue to maintain the system, this is not a challenge.
👨🎨 5. Visual / UX / UI / graphic design: Not an issue, Find them very learnable. However, client expectations are difficult to gauge. You could hire someone seperately to do these tasks and get the quality up, instead of making one person handle too many tasks at one go. Its a timeline and bandwith problem more than skill in my opinion.
When I started, my main problem was finding a framework to follow which I could trust, and then the practical examples to back it up. Forums and colleagues were #LOVIN "social learning / constructivist theory" but then there was naff' all examples of how to implement that practically... so point 1 and 2.
Now, from my Product perspective I see pain in a few things
* LDs (Learning Designers) who are following practices loosely based on ideas and chats, but not backed up with data to prove it. i.e., "Yeah students like lectures with comments...", but then not accessing the data in the VLEs or students support to prove their thinking.. so point 2.
* pressures of bandwidth for LDs to check the data for their decisions... so point 3.
* pressures of bandwidth to deliver good learning material... so point 3.
* "don't know what you don't know", on many group calls, LDs self confirm "what works" with each other, without knowing there's science and data to show what actually works... so 1 and 2?
* brave tutors who believe the research, implementation and LDs ability. Lots of tutors just want to translate PPTs into text and maybe forums. That's because of their time pressures and the ability of the partnership (company and university) to sell to them new online learning frameworks... so kinda' point 4, but more a new point on "buy in"?
All these ring true Phil! For me one more thing is staying on top of the vast range of new educational apps and digital tools available nowadays. I remember one of the most useful experiences from Aula days was sharing knowledge amongst designers and discovering ‘killer' collaboration or assessment tools, knowing that somebody knowledgeable tried it out That network - community of practice - was invaluable as often designers work on their own and do not have time to research new products.
🎓 1. Accessing learning science research: Resonate with 100% - To top it, most research and evidence based practises are based on W.I.E.R.D societies i.e. Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD) societies. A large part of my practise is for the global south. This means that a lot of the research does not directly translate.
📑 2. Managing project timelines & stakeholders. 100% Always looking for ways to be more efficient about this.
📈 3. Visualising & documenting my design in a way that works for all stakeholders. This is not an issue for me. I think of them as seperate processes - designing and communicating. When merged, you can tend to get side-tracked into either goal.
💾 4. Version control & tracking comments / changes. This is not an issue if you set-up a system from the start. As long as your team continue to maintain the system, this is not a challenge.
👨🎨 5. Visual / UX / UI / graphic design: Not an issue, Find them very learnable. However, client expectations are difficult to gauge. You could hire someone seperately to do these tasks and get the quality up, instead of making one person handle too many tasks at one go. Its a timeline and bandwith problem more than skill in my opinion.
Yeah, very solid list!
When I started, my main problem was finding a framework to follow which I could trust, and then the practical examples to back it up. Forums and colleagues were #LOVIN "social learning / constructivist theory" but then there was naff' all examples of how to implement that practically... so point 1 and 2.
Now, from my Product perspective I see pain in a few things
* LDs (Learning Designers) who are following practices loosely based on ideas and chats, but not backed up with data to prove it. i.e., "Yeah students like lectures with comments...", but then not accessing the data in the VLEs or students support to prove their thinking.. so point 2.
* pressures of bandwidth for LDs to check the data for their decisions... so point 3.
* pressures of bandwidth to deliver good learning material... so point 3.
* "don't know what you don't know", on many group calls, LDs self confirm "what works" with each other, without knowing there's science and data to show what actually works... so 1 and 2?
* brave tutors who believe the research, implementation and LDs ability. Lots of tutors just want to translate PPTs into text and maybe forums. That's because of their time pressures and the ability of the partnership (company and university) to sell to them new online learning frameworks... so kinda' point 4, but more a new point on "buy in"?
All these ring true Phil! For me one more thing is staying on top of the vast range of new educational apps and digital tools available nowadays. I remember one of the most useful experiences from Aula days was sharing knowledge amongst designers and discovering ‘killer' collaboration or assessment tools, knowing that somebody knowledgeable tried it out That network - community of practice - was invaluable as often designers work on their own and do not have time to research new products.