Morons

Rules of the game:

1. Put yourself in the learner's shoes and design a course.

2. Assume that the learner is a moron and doesn't know a thing about elearning.

Conclusion: Assume you are a moron.

Now that should be easy. Then why do most elearning courses suck? And if they do, then obviously point 1 or 2 (or both) is(are) wrong.

#1. Stepping into someone's shoes

And walk 2 miles in 'em. Or the whole way in this case.

Problems:
1. What road is he gonna take - race track, sidewalk, or a dirt track?
2. What pace - a walk in the park, run in bursts, or sprint thru to the destination?
3. Is he gonna walk at all or hitch-hike at some time, or take a bus, car or flight?

Answers:
1. You're goin to build the road, so might as well do good landscaping. Or is that additional effort, he could be running thru and hardly be bothered with the view, just concerned about the quality of the track.

So, good track (ideal for walking or running) + decent view (for those breaks, just don't make it so good that he would rather sit and stare).

2. For strollers - They don't care the path they take to reach their destination. So here, signboards to Turn Right, or Click Next is of no consequence. These may also be the ones to venture into all parts of your course. So, presentation is king.

For runners (both sprinters and those who take breaks) - Now they would need occassional pointers to where to go. A word about sprinters: for all you know, they'd just keep clicking the Next button and complete your course. To make these guys stop and see, design the landscape, or your content screens accordingly. Yeah, I'd stare at a Van Gogh for hours, but someone else may find Picasso as engaging. (So every screen a masterpiece of a different genre? Once again, presentation.)

So now what?
Design a course that is:

1. Easy to navigate, with clear instructions to the learner. Spell it out, or design intuitive markers. They may or may not make use of it, you never know.

2. Presented logically and aesthetically. With or without activities for the learner.

How many of us just observe and learn? Do we really need to try something out? Yes, if only to prove us right and them wrong. Just to know. So why make a rule out of this, with the excuse that with time the learner would get bored? We get just as bored when we do something, are doing something, or done with it.

So if your content is meaningful and presented well, it should hold the learner's attention. Without having to ask him to try an activity. Just like any good novel.

Enough said about this. Could go on forever. So let's get to the 2nd assumption.

#2. Assume your learner is a moron

Now this is something I heard two of my colleagues (morons?) say about three times a day, in the last two days. Perhaps they were trying to tell me something? Oh, moron that I am!

Anyway, who are we to judge? Once you put yourself into a learner's shoes, then you become the moron. Do you want to? I don't. What gives you the right to put limitations on anybody's ability to learn? Yes, not everyone has an IQ of 130, but everybody learns. Even a lunatic learns that a certain behavior won't get a desired effect in the course of time. Raving and ranting turns to apathy. and vice versa. or alternates. Whatever.

The point is, if you are designing courses for corporates who wish to train their employees on certain skills, they are not going to be complete duds. About the subject, maybe. But not in terms of the ability to learn.

Even if the learner is new to elearning, it doesn't in any way diminish this factor. Presented with an environment/ interface where he is goin to learn, he IS going to figure out a way to go about it. Unless of course, he doesn't want to.

Now about the content, how basic are you goin to keep it, despite your content analysis, entry behaviors and other wierder terms (who came up with these anyway?)? I feel as long as the stuff you are goin to teach is complete and not make it some dangling conversation, its alright. Even the Unfinished Symphony is beautiful.

About the amount of content on screen - now this depends. Some people like to have their space and some don't mind. So again, why make a rule of 100 words on screen, 7 bullet points and so on with the excuse that that's how much of information is what a person can process? Its not about word count, its the reason you give for the word count. (If we could understand just 7 bullets at a given time, little wonder the 10 commandments are not much of a success.

The point of this whole rambling thing is just this: elearning sucks b'cuz of all these rules, and the reasons they put behind it. And the morons who design it.