1

Multimedia Evaluation Report

A Paper Presented In Partial Fulfillment Of The MSc. In Instructional Design and Technology

Renneah M. Clarke - 20041154

University Of The West Indies Open Campus

EDID 6508 – Developing Instructional Media

Dr. Leroy Hill

December 12, 2020

 2

Introduction

The Dynamic Designers set out to create an immersive tertiary education online lesson

with the goal of improving learning while keeping the subject interesting and relatable. The

lesson entitled ‘How To Develop An eLearning Course’ was designed to target adult learners in

an online tertiary education environment.

Evaluators Overview

The project was designed knowing the importance of assessing the efficiency of

the software in order to satisfy the needs of the learners. The team selected four members from

other groups to perform the role of project evaluators in the event that someone asked was unable

to do so. They are all budding Instructional Designers in this Masters programme and have been

able to submit their results on the basis of their engagement with our multimedia project on

Articulate. The two evaluators I selected are Trevor Queeley (Evaluator 1) and Valerie King-

Roberts (Evaluator 2).

Evaluation Summary

Evaluator 1 pointed out that the groups effort was not bad overall. He stated that we used

a wide range of software features to enhance our instructional content and improve the lesson.

He also pointed out that there was a good use of space and that the text was clear for the most

part, although some areas could have been improved. Some work needs to be done on audio,

navigation and functionality.

Evaluator 2 noted that the group has a good idea to develop. She stated we made good

use of space, font colours, size and selection of graphics. The audio needs to be improved, since
 3

it is barely audible even though the volume was set to the loudest on both personal computer and

Mac systems. She also highlighted the problems of navigation and functionality.

What worked well

The evaluators pointed out some areas of the project that met the requirements of the evaluation

criteria:

 The choice of tool (Articulate) is compatible across devices.

 A wide range of software features were used to enhance the instructional content and

improve the lesson.

 Good clean design on the screens.

 Good use of space.

 Good incorporation of screen casting skills (summary video).

 Good use of font, colours and selection of graphics.

 Good use of original content (Navigating in Google Classroom).

 No copyright to be really concerned about.

What needs revising

Based on the evaluators reports on key areas that need to be reviewed, we appreciate their input

in order to make the following improvements:

 No storyboard was attached so parts of the rubric could not be completed and they were

not able to tell if it was in sequence and easy to follow, unlike the multimedia project

they assessed.
 4

 Links need to be checked to the adjacent slides. This is so the user will interact with

correct ones when they click next, since they seem out of sequence. This will have an

effect on how the learner responds to the lesson.

 Audio is too soft and appears to overlap. More than one type seems to be on one screen,

which can confuse the learner. It appears that two or more audio clips can be played

simultaneously.

 Issues with navigation buttons and functionality.

 Consistency of theme colours.

 Instructions needed on some of the quiz slides.

 Feedback needed for the quiz.

Resolving the Problems

Based on the feedback given, some recommended changes have been suggested to improve the

multimedia project:

 Storyboard – No storyboard was given to be evaluated. It would have been wise to

have it reviewed, but our group was behind, so no score was given.

 Organization of Content - There is much room for improvement with our organization

of content. A lot of information was given on Google Classroom, but it needed to be

utilized appropriately throughout the interactive lesson. Text or audio instructions should

have been included on the slides with quizzes, so learners would know what is required.

Videos could have been embedded for tutorials. The improved version of our project will

have the content organized with text or audio instructions on each slide to guide the

learner throughout the lesson and feedback will be given for quizzes in order to assist the

learner. Videos will also be embedded for tutorials.

 5

 Originality – Good use of original content was seen in a screencast on ‘Navigating in

Google Classroom’ and the group collaborated on a video to summarise the interactive

lesson. The improved version of our project will have the creation of real-life videos

instead of YouTube videos in order to boost the originality of the project.

 Copyright and Documentation – Not all of the images were appropriately cited on the

storyboard. The improved version of our project will have images from internet sources

that are properly cited according to APA style or from internet sources that will grant the

right to use their sources.

 Format and Platform Transferability - The choice of tool (Articulate) was compatible

across devices. However, the improved version of our project will be tested on various

web browsers (Google Chrome, Internet Explorer and Fire Fox) to view if it runs

smoothly.

 Graphic design – The use of two cartoon characters were used throughout the project.

However, the improved version of the project will ensure that when Anthony is

mentioned on the slides to complete a task, that a male voice is used for the audio or

automated voice narration is used instead. We can also think about creating the

characters ourselves.

 Screen Design – Changes will be made to ensure that there is consistency of theme colours

throughout the lesson in our improved project. The functionality of the navigation

buttons will be fixed and some of them will be removed.

 Use of enhancements – The audio issues can be fixed for the improved version of our

project. The use of headphones or the built-in voice recorder on our cell phone can be

used to capture the words at full volume and clearly before placing it on each slide.
 6

Appendix A

Dynamic Designers Group Project Peer Evaluation Sheet

Thank you for agreeing to be a reviewer for our group project. Please use the rubric below for
providing your feedback. Feel free to add any other comments. Thank you for your time and
participation.

Names: Trevor Queeley and Valerie King-Roberts

Project URL: https://360.articulate.com/review/content/4177eb8d-8484-4057-84db-

6cde73a01fd7/review

Category Maximum Score Peer Reviewer Peer Reviewer

Trevor Queeley Valerie King-
Roberts
Score 1
Score 2

Storyboard or 4 0 0
Planning Sheet

Organization of 4 2 3
Content

Originality 4 3 3

Copyright and 4 3 2
Documentation

Format and 4 3 4
Platform
Transferability

Subject Knowledge 4 3 3

Graphical Design 4 2 3

Mechanics 4 3 4

Screen Design 4 2 3

Use of 4 3 3
Enhancements

Total 40 24 28
7