2 Instructional Design

At the Center for Learning and Technology  (CLT) at Thomas Edison State University, we  strive to design and deliver courses to the  self-directed adult learner that are intuitive  in design, systematic in organization, and  coherent in content.

At the same time, we tend to agree with one  of Matt Groening’s animated characters,  who says: “When you do things right,  people won’t be sure you’ve done anything  at all.”

In other words, we believe that the  principles and processes that lie behind  our course design, though vital to our work,  should be invisible to the student. We invite  you, however, to lift the cover on these  principles and processes as you explore this  document. You’ll see what, why, and how  we do what we do. We will illuminate our  guiding principles, provide an overview of  our design and delivery process, and point  in the direction we think we are headed in  the future.

And when we’ve done the  job right, our learners may  not be aware we’ve done  anything at all.

When we’ve done the job right, our courses  will meet our learners where they are and  provide the tools for them to direct their  own learning. And when we’ve done the job  right, our learners may not be aware we’ve  done anything at all.

One way to visualize the way we develop our courses is to think in terms of how a movie  is produced. A blockbuster movie, like any successful project, relies on the synergy created  by a dedicated group of people working together toward a common goal. In developing a  course, although one team member has the responsibility for maintaining the project’s focus  and promoting its forward progress, the design team as a whole creates the course in a  collaborative manner.

The makeup of each individual team varies with the project, but all team members share a  commitment to a transparent process and a collaborative design.

A staff of instructional designers oversees all course design, development, and revision for  Thomas Edison State University. For each course development project, the instructional  designer (ID) acts as project manager and quality control leader. But the ID can produce a  course only by collaborating with a team:

• Subject matter experts (SMEs) to create and manage content
• A dean or associate deans from one of the schools of the University to advise and  guide curriculum
• Learning outcomes (LO) leadership to systematize outcomes
• CLT assessment developers (ADs) to build the assessment strategy and guide test item  development and implementation
• CLT instructional technologists (ITs) to help implement technology and ensure  compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
• The CLT media studio team (MST) to provide expertise in media implementation
• Instructional services (IS) specialists to ensure access to course materials for students  and facilitators
• The assistant director of course design and academic quality, to oversee implementation  of outcomes collection
• A copy editor to ensure accuracy, readability, and consistency

The makeup of each individual team varies with the project, but all team members share a  commitment to a transparent process and a collaborative design.

Based on External Design Principles

So while our courses cover a  variety of subjects  on a range of levels,  all our courses hold in common  certain theoretical  foundations based  in research and best  practice.

A film is nearly always based on something. It may be based on a true story or a literary work or  a legend, or it may spring from a vivid idea in the mind of the director or screenwriter.

Successful course design is based on explicit ideas and principles. So while our courses cover  a variety of subjects on a range of levels, all our courses hold in common certain theoretical  foundations based in research and best practice.

• Our design process mirrors the ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and  Evaluate) framework.
• We adhere to the eight general standards of Quality Matters.
• We ensure that all our courses meet or exceed the federal and New Jersey standards of  credit hour definition, as well as the standards of our regional accrediting body.
• We ensure that adult learning theory animates both course design and delivery.

The ADDIE Framework

The ADDIE framework, in some  form or another, is the basis for the  design and development of most  educational and training programs.

We reflect each of the five elements of the ADDIE framework in our course design process, which unfolds in two phases: Phase 1, the Basic Course Outline (BCO), and Phase 2, Content Creation. 

• Analysis. Who is our audience? How does this course fit into our curriculum, and how is it mapped to institutional, programmatic, or other outcomes?

• Design (our Phase 1). What are the objectives of this course? What print, digital, or other media will we use as resources? How will we deliver content and assess learning? How will the material flow, and how will we chunk it? Where are there chances for collaboration in course design?

• Development (our Phase 2). What types of instructional technology will promote our objectives? How will students learn through formative assessments such as quizzes and written assignments as well as summative assessments such as exams, papers, and other methods?

• Implementation. How will we deliver our course through our learning management system (LMS)? What form of technology will allow us to deliver content efficiently to our online students?

• Evaluation. Does the course need to be updated to reflect new information or methods? How do our mentors and students respond to our courses? What can we improve?

Quality Matters

Quality Matters (www.qualitymatters.org) is a leader in quality assurance for online education,  and it has gained national recognition for its peer-based approach and focus on continuous  improvement in online education and student learning. The QM organization has developed a  rubric based on eight standards on which an online course can be evaluated for quality. The  CLT uses these standards as benchmarks in the development of every course.

• Course Overview and Introduction. Our learners  receive an effective introduction  to every course through the  syllabus.
• Learning Objectives (Competencies). We begin  with appropriate and measurable  objectives, which are clearly  stated.
• Assessment and Measurement. Our assessments measure the stated  course objectives.
• Instructional Materials. We  select materials that contribute  to the achievement of objectives  and maintain the currency of  these materials.
• Learner Activities and  Learner Interaction. Our  learning activities promote the  achievement of stated objectives  and provide opportunities for  interaction.
• Course Technology. Our  technology tools support the  learning objectives.
• Learner Support. Course  instructions indicate avenues for  learner support.
• Accessibility and Usability.  Course navigation facilitates ease  of use and meets the needs of  diverse learners.

Standards of Academic Rigor

We ensure that our class activity workload  meets or exceeds existing credit hour  definitions and standards, including those  from federal and state governmental bodies  as well as ones set forth by the Middle  States Commission on Higher Education  (MSCHE).

This means first that content must be  appropriate and sufficiently rigorous. In  addition, the course experience should  make demands on the learner that are  equivalent to those that would be made  in the classroom. We rely heavily on our  schools as well as on our subject matter  experts, who are both academics and  skilled instructors, to ensure proper content  and rigor. Maintaining equivalency, however,  is the job of instructional design. Part of  this task is making sure the course as a  whole justifies the number of credit hours  assigned. In addition, the workload should  be in proper proportion. Thus, the hours per  week students spend in the LMS reading  syllabi and module documents, watching  videos, listening to podcasts, participating  in discussions, and posting assignments  (equivalent to classroom time) must be  properly balanced by their time spent in  reading, study, research, and assignment  preparation (out-of-class time).

The policies that guide these efforts are  detailed in the University’s Policies and  Procedures on Academic Expectations  document.

Adult Learning Theories

Our courses embrace the self directedness of the adult learner  and acknowledge the wellspring  of experience from which adult  learners draw.

Several adult learning theories undergird  all course development at the CLT. Our  courses embrace the self-directedness  of the adult learner and acknowledge the  wellspring of experience from which adult  learners draw. An engaging online setting,  clear and measurable objectives that link to  practical outcomes, and careful sequencing  of learning are additional elements that  address the needs and characteristics of  the adult learner.

The graphic on the next  two pages draws connections between our  course design and it’s theoretical basis.

(Insert New Graphic Here, Pages 15-17)

The Storyboard (Phase 1): Course Initiation and Overall Planning

Every movie tells a story, and every movie director makes decisions about how to reveal that  story: What’s my opening scene? What comes next? What should the audience already know  to make this particular scene make sense? In film production, that process is visualized with  a storyboard, a chronological representation of the film’s narrative. The use of storyboards  developed at Walt Disney Studios in the 1930s, and the process essentially consists of  sketching out—physically on a whiteboard or sticky notes or in some electronic form—a  visual map of what leads to what, and what comes next. A good storyboard reveals gaps or  inconsistencies in a narrative and can spark ideas about how to tell that story more effectively.

Phase 1 of the CLT planning process is where our storyboarding takes place. Phase 1, and  in particular the Basic Course Outline, is the place where the design group blueprints the  course and envisions the way forward.

Before we start talking about the storyboarding of a course, we should step  back to consider what goes on before an  instructional designer even begins his or her  work.

A good storyboard  reveals gaps or  inconsistencies in  a narrative and can  spark ideas about  how to tell that story  more effectively.

Every CLT course is established firmly  within a web of connections that reach  back ultimately to our institutional goals  and outcomes. Every new course passes  through the Office of Curriculum Planning  and Outcomes Assessment, where the  sponsoring school initially presents a  curricular map showing how the proposed  course fits into the larger strategy of  the school as well as the University and  indicates which outcomes will be assessed  within that course.

From there, all courses must also undergo  scrutiny by the following:

• Curriculum Outcomes Assessment  Steering Team (COAST). The COAST committee interfaces with the  schools about degree alignment and  learning outcomes, assisting them with  mapping outcomes, creating indicator  statements, and exploring external  standards to which they might align  their degree programs.

Every CLT course is  established firmly within a  web of connections that  reach back ultimately to  our institutional goals and  outcomes.

• Course Creation Committee (C3). The Course Creation Committee is a  means for aligning institutional priorities  with proposed course development.  In other words, the C3 makes sure  that University resources (the CLT)  are being put to work to carry out  University priorities most efficiently.  The C3 also acts as a quality check  to ensure that the CLT has all of the  information (and mentors) it needs for  course requests before we begin a new  development project.

These discussions result in a course  request, submitted to the CLT, which  specifies the course content area, a  summary description, desired outcomes,  and any other known elements (such as a  proposed subject matter expert or semesterstarting date). This document is the starting point for the collaborative development process within the CLT.

A Collaborative Planning Process  

Phase 1 officially begins when the course is assigned to an instructional designer within the CLT. In collaboration with a representative of the school, the outcomes director, and the SME, the instructional designer refines the course details, including the target audience and the relationship to other courses already in or planned for the curriculum. (Most courses fit into a progressive course of study that allows learners to achieve the outcomes of their program in a logical order.)

A typical Basic Course Outline includes very specific information, providing a blueprint for the course down to descriptions of various activities and assessments and how they relate to module and course objectives. Phase 1 is a period of intense collaboration between the SME and the ID and sometimes others.

At the end of Phase 1, the detailed course outline document goes to the appropriate curriculum committee for review, discussion, and (usually) approval. The committee often returns questions or suggestions for revision to the CLT. The ID shares these suggestions with the SME and posts them within the Google development site.

Lights, Camera, Action! Course Design

This part of filmmaking is filled with  intense activity: scenes are blocked and  set up, actors move across the set or the  landscape, and multiple cameras record  the action from different vantage points.  With our storyboard—the BCO—in place,  the design team turns its attention to  course development, or Phase 2. In this  phase, the content proposed by the subject  matter expert is fleshed out and animated.  With a varied group of designers in the  CLT as well as a broad range of subjects  to cover, no two course developments are  the same. Certain themes and principles,  however, emerge clearly in every course  development.

Outcomes-First Design

With a varied group of  designers in the CLT as well  as a broad range of subjects  to cover, no two course  developments are the same.

Most filmmakers know exactly how their  movie is going to end—even if they want  to keep the audience guessing as long as possible! Knowing the ending, they can  make every scene in the movie contribute to  and point toward the last scene.

Likewise, the best course design also  starts at the end—with course outcomes.  As designers, we have to know what our  students should be able to do at the end  of a course in order to be sure that every  part of the course helps our students get  there. We build courses with a transparent  structure and plenty of signposts that allow  students and mentors alike to see how each  assignment contributes to learning.

A Process Centered on the Learner

Learners and the value proposition we offer them are at the center of our development  process. At an institutional level, we work to identify new technologies and processes that drive  down institutional overhead. We continuously work to create new efficiencies in our processes to minimize waste and  redundancy. During development, we seek alternative solutions and retire existing and aged services  and technologies. When choosing course materials for learners, we try to incorporate open educational  resources (OER) and other valid materials freely available on the Internet.

We make decisions about course materials based on many factors:

• Textbook. Is it reliable and available? Is it current? Is it at the appropriate level? Are  there instructor’s resources? Is it reasonably priced? Is there technical support?
• Lab Kits. Are they available? Are they affordable? Do they have clear directions? Are  they safe and do they provide for safe disposal? Are the materials accurate?
• Journal Articles. Will our students have access? Is the article in one of our databases  or available through our library? If not, can we get copyright clearance or electronic  reserve?
• Films; Video and Audio Clips. Do they provide current, valuable information? Can we  link for free, and are the links stable? Can we purchase a license? Are they accessible  (with closed-captioning, transcription)?

Productive Collaboration (Phase 2)

Phase 2 of our development process is based on meaningful collaboration. We conduct that  collaboration through Google sites and Google docs, where live documents exist in the cloud  for team members to view, critique, and improve upon. In the cloud we encourage experts  (both staff and consultants) of diverse backgrounds and skills to equally collaborate on  content, outcome achievement, and assessment strategies.

Our use of the cloud  for collaboration  embodies our belief in a culture  of thoughtful experimentation  that encourages  (rather than stifles)  creativity while maintaining project  accountability.

Our use of Google sites and Google docs represents more than a means to an end,  however. Our use of the cloud for collaboration embodies our belief in a culture of thoughtful  experimentation that encourages (rather than stifles) creativity while maintaining project  accountability.

Phase 2, focused on content creation, completes the structure envisioned by the Basic  Course Outline (Phase 1). The SME adds content, including helpful resources in a variety  of formats (video clips, podcasts, articles, web pages). The SME also fleshes out engaging  discussions and assignments that reinforce concepts and assess mastery. An instructional  technologist and/or member of the media team joins the process to suggest enhanced ways  for conveying content.

Throughout Phase 2, we focus on creating courses that are:

• Rigorous. All content is aligned with the learning outcomes and course level; the  coursework is appropriate for the assigned number of credit hours.
• Economical. Courses are concise and free of unnecessary distractions.
• Clear. Course material is well structured and well written.

To this end, every new online course goes through a stage of quality control similar to the copyediting stage for published books. A professional copy editor examines every course  for clarity, accuracy, consistency, and freedom from errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar,  style, and usage.

Design for Engagement

Our learning management system leverages real-time collaboration technologies, such as  Edison Live, Google Apps, and social media, along with asynchronous elements such as  discussion boards. Learners are expected to engage both with the material and with each  other through:

• Discussions
• Team projects
• Wikis
• Blogs
• Presentations, including podcasts and video posts via Kaltura
• Synchronous events via Edison Live!

Announcements, communication with the mentor, and messaging between students provide  additional ways to build and maintain the online community.

Using Intelligent Technology

In the CLT we avoid utilizing technology for its own sake. Rather, we seek out technology  focused on addressing our varied students where they are in ways that are accessible and  suited to them.

• In course delivery, we focus on conventional consumer technologies and universally recommended services for a course experience that is both portable and accessible.
• We design the integration points between technology systems so that they are both  seamless and robust.
• We minimize the need for multiple passwords and accounts when traversing Thomas  Edison State University systems.
• We focus on developing a learning system that embraces relevant UX (user experience)  design and embraces the best practices in web design, accessibility, and streamlining of  student workflows.
• We encourage instructional innovation in the course experience, including unique  assessment methodologies, educational technologies, and transformational programs.
• We avoid vendor partnerships that restrict future technology opportunities and  advancements.
• We focus on tangible technology adoptions, allowing the CLT to retain the flexibility it  needs to respond to new market conditions and technology variables.

In the CLT we avoid  utilizing technology  for its own sake.  Rather, we seek out  technology focused  on addressing our  varied students  where they are  in ways that are  accessible and  suited to them.

Attention to Accessibility

Movies reach out to the largest possible audience through closed-captioning for people  with hearing impairments, audio description for those with visual impairments, amplification  devices, and accessible seating in theaters. We want to try at least this hard. Our students are  diverse, and we believe our courses should meet that diversity.

Every course goes through an ADA check to make sure that it is, for example, compatible  with screen-reader technology. Whenever possible, we use closed-captioning or provide  transcripts of audio materials.

It’s a Wrap! Course Delivery and Facilitation

“It’s a wrap!” is the phrase traditionally used  to indicate that production on a film is done.  But the wrap isn’t the end: all the hard work  that precedes this moment is pointless if the filmmakers have no plan for making the  movie available to their audience.

At the CLT, after Phase 2 we work on  getting our courses out to the largest  possible number of interested adult  learners. Fortunately, we’ve been preparing  for this moment throughout the course  development process.

What do we try to accomplish as we make  our courses available to students?

But the wrap isn’t the end: all the hard  work that precedes this moment is  pointless if the filmmakers have no plan  for making the movie available to their  audience.

Consistency and Flexibility: Tailored to our Learners

We strive for both consistency and flexibility in our design. By consistency we mean  a sense of familiarity and user-friendliness; we want our returning students to feel  comfortable in a new course because it is set up like their last course in terms of  navigation and basic flow. They’ll know where to look for things. At the same time, we  design each course to present the needed information in the most logical way.

When we take a step back from the individual learner to our learners at large, we focus  on the principle of flexibility. Our students come to us in different ways and with different  needs and different backgrounds (single working parents, older adults, members of the  military, traditional students). We offer flexible delivery modes for our courses that meet  the needs of our varied adult learners.

These include:

• Online Courses. Courses are offered fully online with asynchronous (and  sometimes synchronous) interactive elements.
• Guided Study Courses. Courses are offered for learners who do not have access to  a regular and dependable Internet connection. Courses are delivered online but can  be completed offline.
• ePack Courses. Courses are characterized by a series of formative chapter- or  module-level quizzes delivered online, allowing learners to earn credit through the  comprehensive examination.
• TECEP (Thomas Edison Credit-by-Exam Program). Learners can earn credit by  passing a final exam without taking a course.
• PLA (Prior Learning Assessment). PLA offers learners the opportunity to earn  credit for knowledge acquired through work; corporate, military, or industry training;  workforce development programs; in-depth professional research; and other learning  experiences.

Course Sustainability and Continuous Improvement

You sometimes hear people say: “It ain’t over till it’s over!” The way we look at it, it ain’t over  even when it’s over! Why? Because nothing stays the same—not our resource materials, not  our students, not the subject matter of our courses, and not the world at large. We want our courses to remain valuable and fresh and relevant from semester to semester and year to  year.

The way we look  at it, it ain’t over  even when it’s over!  Why? Because  nothing stays the  same—not our resource materials,  not our students,  not the subject matter of our courses, and not  the world at large.

That’s why we have an arm of the CLT dedicated to examining our courses on a continuous  basis to make sure that resources are up-to-date and new subject matter has been  incorporated. In addition, we collect data on how well our learners achieve the outcomes we  targeted at the beginning of this process; when necessary, we go back to courses and revise  or rewrite them to ensure that learners have what they need to be successful.

We gather information from many different places:

• Mentor feedback: There is a form on every course site that the mentor can complete to  indicate a problem or question or the need for revision.
• Student feedback: This feedback comes through the mentor, via email, or through some  other department of the University.
• Automated data collection from our scoring rubrics
• Data analysis from midterm and final examinations
• Course evaluations
• Various surveys (graduate survey, mentor survey)

We maintain an up-to-date course master for each of our course offerings and delivery  modes. These master sites are continuously maintained and updated by the CLT staff.  Before each new semester, individual sections are made from this master. In this way every  facilitating mentor has a ready-to-use section of the course that includes everything she  or he needs to facilitate learners but that is free from vestiges of any previous classes or  facilitators.

All of our mentor-facilitators have the required subject-area knowledge for the courses they  facilitate. In addition, they reflect the principles of the University in terms of communicating  regularly through announcements, providing assignment and discussion post feedback, and  being fully present in the course.

Serving the Whole University

The CLT serves the needs of the University  by adapting our typical formats and  presentations to satisfy particular needs  and fulfill special niches in University  offerings. Such courses may fall outside our  typical 12- or 8-week framework or have an  unusual credit load (1-credit, 2 credits, or no  credit). We also try to accommodate special  requests that grow out of collaborative  projects with other educational institutions.

Most courses fit into a progressive course  of study that allows learners to achieve  the outcomes of their program. However,  certain specialty courses—capstones,  practicums, lab courses, and cornerstone  courses, for example—are idiosyncratic  in that they span more than one area of  study, occupy a fixed place in the program  (beginning or end), or distinctively apply  learning (labs or practicums). Courses like  these often fit into larger University-wide  goals or initiatives and thus may follow a  special path.

The CLT serves the needs of the  University by adapting our typical  formats and presentations to satisfy  particular needs and fulfill special niches in University offerings.

The CLT also coordinates with University  goals on social media. The CLT has  a presence through the University’s  main blog. CLT-generated blog content  communicates updates to students and the  University community about online course  design, integration of new technology, and  implementation of new multimedia tools.  CLT blog posts also explain academic  strategies aligned with General Education  Outcomes. For example, relating to our  written communication outcome, we have  posted on how to write a scholarly paper,  how to compose an engaging discussion  forum post, and how to create an effective  exam essay. The CLT also coordinates  with the University’s social media team  in scheduled live Q&A sessions; these  allow students to chat with assessment  developers or instructional designers on  Facebook and get a glimpse of how courses  are designed and tests are developed. The  CLT also maintains a Best Practices blog  and a Testing Resources blog, where we  host various links and posts that students  can access anytime.

The Audience and the Reviews: Assessments and Outcomes

So our movie has been conceived, planned out, produced, and distributed. It’s out there.  Then, it either gets great reviews or it doesn’t; it makes a lot of money or it doesn’t; it  gets its point across or it doesn’t. In short: it achieves its purpose—whatever that purpose  is—or not. How this is measured depends on what the filmmakers wanted to accomplish in  the first place.

The similarity to instructional design is this: a well-designed course also has a way to  measure success, and that measure involves figuring out whether the course prepares the  student to achieve the stated outcomes. The assessment part of course design helps us to  plan for that outcome and then to measure it.

Each of these  tools allows us to  access and act  on our “reviews,”  the feedback that  reveals whether  we’ve done what  we set out to do.

Most of this process has already been discussed, because it’s happening all along. We’ve  begun with course outcomes and aligned our course and module objectives with those  outcomes. Individual activities and exam questions have been aligned with objectives. Our  embedded rubrics give us a way to collect data on those elements. Each set of course files  includes a document called a backmap that shows how every assignment, discussion, and  assessment aligns with objectives and outcomes and how course resources align with these  assignments. The backmap is not primarily student-centered; rather, its greatest usefulness is for the CLT staff and the schools.

Each of these tools allows us to access and act on our “reviews,” the feedback that reveals  whether we’ve done what we set out to do. We always hope to find that we have. But when  we’re not quite there, our processes and procedures point us to areas of weakness and light  the way for informed improvement of the course.