Sarah Barnhart, Michael Vicent, Kellie Ventimilia

Preliminary Analysis Questions:

What criteria (e.g. technical specifications, design requirements) should the design team
use to determine the appropriateness and merit of each design brief it has been asked to
review?
The design team has to take numerous factors into consideration when determining the
appropriateness and merit of each design brief. It is important to look at who the target audience
is, in this case K-2 students in Australia, and determine the scope of the project.
First, the design team is limited by their contractors and must follow certain technological
limitations. Such restrictions as “simple animation, text, and audio” must be considered for file
size purposes. Therefore, simple graphics and limited wordiness will allow for easy usability.
Learning objective specifications and the suggested pedagogical approach should be reflected
in the design. The learning objectives will prepare the students for what they will gain from the
lesson. With regards to content delivery, the design team must be sure that the activities used to
deliver each learning objective are appropriate to the age group.
Next, a realistic design for target age groups should be met, in that, age-appropriate
material and interest should be carefully thought-out, with visuals and functional mechanics in
mind. For example, while working with younger students, the brief needs to take place in a
relatable setting, or contain a situation that has concrete meaning for younger students. The
students need to have experience with the content in the briefs, and should be able to apply
what they have learned directly into their lives. The client asks for real world scenarios that will
help the student gain experience in making appropriate choices to the scenario, which will also
allow the student to consider needs versus wants, investigative skills, and the effects their
choices have on others. For younger students, graphics should be simple, enticing, colorful, but
also easy to manipulate, such as an easy drag and drop design. Having complicated mechanics
will not only isolate intended students, but can also be inappropriate for their fine motor
development.
In addition, the situations presented in each design brief also needs to be able to be
applied in several different settings--small group, whole class, and individual. Therefore, each
design needs to be able to reach students appropriately in each of those situations--either
working together or alone. However, it should be noted that there should be time built in to every
one of these scenarios that allows for students to collaborate and talk to each other about their
answers. Students can deepen their understanding of the concepts by sharing information with
each other.
Given the constraints under which the design team is working, suggest specific ways
that it can move a draft brief from the form in which it is received (see Appendix 1-B) to
that which is required by the project brief (see Appendix 1-A).
The design team has three months to fulfill the client’s request, and therefore has stated
they will hold multiple meetings with both project teams throughout the process of completion,
which is a great strategy for completing the design by the deadline. Communication throughout
the process is very important due to multiple opinions and ideas that may ultimately change any
design that the design team originally develops.
Because the design team has the constraint of using a Constructivist approach to
pedagogy, they must select a topic that is relevant and meaningful to their K-2 student
audience. The design team should seek to work with their subject matter experts to ensure that
they are following the correct pedagogical approach as the original brief follows more a
behaviorist approach. This may mean modifying the existing brief and how instruction is carried
out blending computer-based learning with real world interaction with peers to provide feedback
and collaboration. They will need to work closely with their writing team to ensure that the
diction and sentence structure of the project is age appropriate in its final form for its target
audience.
A quick check that the design team can do to check their draft briefs, is to first look at the
intended age group of the brief, and check to see if the overall task is meaningful to those
students, and can be directly applied to their lives. For example, the Mission to Mars is
incredibly abstract to younger students, so it would be an inappropriate concept for them.
Another quick check that can be done by the design team is to make sure that the lessons are
interactive in some way, and allows for students to have more than one right answer, or explain
their thinking, either in the form of a class discussion, or a written response.
Apply the criteria, developed in response to question 1, to critique the two design ideas
presented in this case: Mission to Mars and Let’s Go Camping.
While the design team is discussing the first project brief, Penny explains that the
Mission to Mars design is too unrealistic for a real-life relatable scenario. She has a great point,
however, this particular project is targeted for ages K-2, and for the youngest of these age
groups, the Let’s Go Camping design may be too unmotivational and bland, as Tracy explains.
On one hand, the Mission to Mars brief provides a lack of relevant context for students
and is not something tangible that the students can experience or have experienced in the past.
The brief from its outset operates from a perspective that students may not understand or be
able to grasp at such a young age. This brief also follows a behavioral approach to learning as it
pre-designates which items are “right” and which are “wrong,” which is not what the client
desires. The students have no personal knowledge of going to Mars, nor do they really
understand the implications of leaving everything behind and going to outer space. Therefore,
the Mission to Mars idea would be immediately dismissed because it is such an abstract
concept for young students to understand.
The Let’s Go Camping brief, which is a modification of the Mission to Mars brief,
addresses the issue of relevance with regards to a relatable scenario as camping is something
that many children can or have experienced in the past. Unfortunately, the brief still suffers from
following a behaviorist approach to pedagogy by providing a feedback loop to students based
on their choices. However, the camping design could be better applied to older students, who
have a deeper knowledge base, and could apply experiences that they have had in similar
situations, like camping, to more abstract situations, like a trip to outer space. It is creating a
concrete situation which many students have experienced, so they can apply the knowledge
that they get directly into their lives. It also allows for students to go back during multiple times in
the design to change what they determine “needs” and “wants”.
 The simple mechanics of the module, as well as the option to have all questions read to
the students, will make it accessible and exciting for all students despite their literacy levels.
Outline the work flow among the three project teams by adding arrows to Figure 1-1.
Discuss the potential challenges that arise because of this configuration.

• Writing Team generates design briefs which were generated with help from experts in
pedagogy.
• Design Team chooses briefs
• Writing team preps content for briefs
• Design team develops a full design
• Subject matter and educational experts panel reviews design
• Feedback is returned to design team for revisions
• Final design specifications goes ot Steering Committee for signature prior to
development
• All communication goes through Project Manager (P.M.)
• Steering Committee approves design specs
• Development team takes over

The major issue with this workflow is that it is quite linear in nature. While it does have
many stages for revision by different teams or committees, it fails to take a holistic approach to
instructional design. This could lead to issues further in development as teams may have
differing opinions, viewpoints, or goals in mind that may not be conveyed to the other teams
involved in the processes. As Tracy mentions, the reiteration process could take quite a few
tries before the final product is ready. Because the design must go through the subject matter
and educational experts panel for any revisions, and then again to the Steering committee for
final review, the back and forth stages of revision could potentially take a very long time. This
can also lead to a deterioration of a clear goal to achieve and a lack of collaboration between
teams during the design processes.
Possibly the most challenging part of the whole workflow configuration is that the design
team is going to basically need to be in constant communication with both the writing and
design teams in order to create seamless modules that works for a wide variety of students.
Ideally, each of the three teams would be checking in with each other constantly to make sure
that they are all on the same page with create appropriate designs for the age group. All three of
those teams will also need to check in with the review panel to make sure that they are indeed
incorporating material that is appropriate for their different age groups (something that is often
overlooked). In reality, there should be multiple checks and reviews between all involved parties
to ensure that the finished product is truly what the client is looking for. Scheduling regular
check-ins between all parties is a necessity for this project.

Implication Questions:

What criteria, technical specifications, design requirements should the design team use
to determine the appropriateness and merit of each design brief it has been given to
review?
The design team must consider the preferred pedagogy that is indicated in the design
brief. All learning objective specifications should be reflective in the design. It is important to
consider the technological limitations that the design brief specifies, as well as making sure that
the design is realistic for the targeted age groups. It would be important to have an open
communication with a team that is knowledgeable about what is appropriate for the different at
groups.
Similarly, it’s necessary to ensure that the design scenario is one that is meaningful and
accessible for its intended age group. If a student can’t find meaning in the scenario, it won’t
benefit the student in any way, and the material will not be retained. This can be adapted slightly
for older students, as they have the capability to take firsthand experiences and adapt them to fit
situations that they may not have experience with (ex: going to mars).
Finally, the team should make sure that the game mechanics are simple, inviting, and
manageable for the intended age group. The clients may have limitations on what can and
cannot be used, and the designers need to keep those in mind while creating the learning
objects. That being said, the designers will need to find the balance between creating
something that is appealing to the students, but also within the realm of design possibility for
their clients.
Discuss the skills needed by project managers in order to facilitate effective interac-tion
among different teams (e.g., design, graphics, programming) working on an instructional
design project.
 In order to facilitate a successful interaction between departments, project managers
need to be proficient in a wide variety of skills including, but not limited to, clear communication,
creating a cohesive environment for all departments, time management, and a definitive end
goal for the project. Project Managers must have a clear idea of what objectives will be
accomplished as well as what expectations the client has with regard to the final product. They
must be able to coordinate with each team involved in the design process and set clear
expectations and timelines that need to be met. A Project Manager must also take into
consideration the ideas and input from not only his or hers respective team, but also the ideas
put forth from other teams so that all parties involved have a clear direction they are taking.
The design manager is the lead in the specified project and therefore should make sure
all ideas are meeting the overall goal and fulfilling the specifics listed in the client’s request. It is
the project manager’s responsibility to consider all ideas from each team, as well as help keep
each idea realistic within the constraints of the client’s requests. Frequent meetings are to be
facilitated, especially when there is a project deadline; the project manager should make sure all
teams are meeting in accordance to any changes or communication that may need to be
discussed during the project timeline.
Project managers also need to have a wide variety of knowledge about the project in
order to seamlessly fit all of the pieces of the different departments together. Finally, they should
have regular check-ins with the clientele to ensure that the product that they are producing is in
line with what the client wants.
Describe the core characteristics that define learning objects. What impact does each of
these characteristics have on the reusability of a learning object?
Learning objects are small lessons that will ideally engage learners in either an individual
or whole class setting. These lessons should be short, but also usable as the focal point of a
lesson. They may be used in conjunction with each other in order to create larger objects.
Because of their short and flexible nature, these lessons would be ideal for teachers to keep
their students engaged in the classroom. If designed in the same way over multiple subjects, it
could be great for learners to develop a routine understanding for the way that the objects work.
This would be especially beneficial for younger learners, or second language learners who have
a hard time with reading the given language. In this case, because of the simple nature of the
objects, in theory, they would be easy to adapt to new content for reusability.
As explained in our textbook, Robert Mager, who wrote Preparing Objectives for
Programmed Instruction, explained the importance of implementing learning objectives; he
includes “...how to describe objectives that include a description of desired learner behaviors,
the conditions under which the behaviors are to be performed, and the standards (criteria) by
which the behaviors are to be judged.” (Dempsey 13) Therefore, one key characteristic to define
learning objects is to specify the desired outcomes for learners, because with a goal set in place
prior to the lesson, the learner is likely to understand what knowledge should be gained from
using the learning object. The learning object should also contain a purpose and a description
for the learning activities (Ertmer 27). With a purpose and a description, the learner also
understands what the intended purpose for use is.
Learning objectives should be targeted towards a specific outcome and should be as
straightforward as possible; it should seek to engage learners and motivate them to learn. This
means the content needs to be relevant and immediately understood by the target audience and
must take into consideration the scope, time, and accessibility with regards to its target
audience as well as the instructor. Due to the targeted nature of a learning objective, it may not
be relevant to multiple audiences and thus not reusable because of differing contexts related to
age, ethnicity, social or political view, etc.
Discuss the challenges involved in applying constructivist pedagogical strategies (e.g.,
authentic tasks, social interaction, and negotiation) within computer-based learning
object environments.
A Constructivist approach to learning operates under the basis that the learner comes in
with pre-existing knowledge and uses this knowledge as a basis to construct and derive new
ideas. This instructor acts as a facilitator rather than the center of knowledge, and the learner
must construct new ideas and concepts often in a social setting to encourage the collaboration
of new ideas and perspectives. Because of this, using online learning may present difficulties
because online learning often requires direct feedback in order to inform the learner that they
are submitting a “correct” response with regards to the learning objectives. Without confirmation
from teacher-student interaction, the learner may stray from learner outcomes. Constructivism
often requires authentic and relevant material that can only be experienced in a real world
setting and can be hard to convey in a computer-based setting. Conveying authentic tasks may
be an issue because not all learners who are working with the computer-based learning objects
will have had the same life experiences; thus, the learning object may not fall on the same
spectrum of authenticity for all students.
Realistically, constructivist theory relies heavily on interaction with the environment, and
creating a meaningful learning experience for each individual. It also calls for meaningful
interactions with peers as well as the environment, a variety of ways to reach an end goal, and
the chance to collaborate with peers in order to extend learning through different meaningful
situations and perspectives. That being said, a computer-based learning system is not ideal for
these pedagogical strategies. It was discussed that in the older grades, students could write out
“short answers” for their reasoning, but even this solution is limited because that the students
would be unable to collaborate with each other. Therefore, any objects that are created should
allow for student communication with each other, either in group format or through partner talks,
to supplement the lack of that in computer-based programs. It should also be noted that while
the objects will call for students to participate in activities that are based on real-life situations,
there is no substitute for actually living in those situations, and having that experience in person.

References:
Dempsey, J. V. & Reiser, R. A. (2017). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and
Technology. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Ertmer, P. A., Glazewski, K. D., & Quinn, J. A. (2017). The ID Casebook - Case Studies in
Instructional Design (4th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.