Team Five: Case Study One Final Analysis

Colin Mcnee
George Martinez
James Cook
Julia Heatherwick
Case Summary:
Part 1
A small team gathered to discuss a design project to develop online resources for Australian
primary and secondary students. As they discussed the parameters of the project over a couple of
meetings, they consider the project scope and next steps.
The case study, Designing Learning Objects for Primary Learners, (Ertmer, 2013) illustrates the
initial stages of a project design team discussing how they will work together, what criteria they
will use to review each design brief, project constraints, and team workflow.

1) 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 following criteria were identified by the design team to review the appropriateness and
merit of each design brief:
• The learning objects must appeal to Kindergarten through Year 2 students and
adaptable for future use for Years 3 to 4 and Years 5 to 6.
• The learning objects should not just present content but engage learners through
activities.
• The learning objects must be small-scale resources a teacher can use with the whole
class or individual student work.
• 1 to 3 objectives
• Small file size (need to define file size maximum)
• The design must be more constructivist than prescriptive.
• The learning objects must be reusable within Australia.
• The learning object must use simple animation, text, audio, and avoid full-color
graphics and video.
• The learning objects must be developed in Flash and have consistent technical
requirements.
• The design must have a clean interface, large drag and drop areas, large font text,
audio instructions, and colorful, fun graphics.
• The design work must be developed within a 3-month timeline.
 The design team will review the 32 briefs using the following high-level criteria categories:
• Learner needs
• Teacher needs
• Institution needs
• Technology requirements
2) 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 Learning Object Design Brief (draft brief) mainly focuses on student learning
objectives, a description of what students experience as they navigate through the
learning activities, and some limited references to technical needs such as interface
design preferences. The Project Brief takes a wider look at the context of the project
which includes online content expectations, project objectives, and the learning
pedagogies that support the approach to creating each learning object. There are two
ways we suggest to move the Learning Object Design Brief (draft brief) to the required
Project Brief form. First, the design team could establish a set of criteria that is reflected
in the Project Brief and request the writing team incorporate the criteria into their briefs.
This way would require more in depth collaboration between the design team and the
writing team earlier on in the process of the project. The second way to move towards the
Project Brief form is for the design team to comb through the best fifteen briefs together.
In this scenario, the design team would rewrite each draft brief in the Project Brief form
while evaluating, discussing, and ranking which brief might most successfully meet the
objectives of the project. Although this second approach might seem more time intensive,
it also moves along the decision making process while helping the team to evaluate which
brief is most feasible.

3) 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.
Both the Mission to Mars and Let’s Go Camping proposals meet the teachers’ needs and
technology requirements criteria. The main issue with the way the team handled this was
that they misinterpreted what is meant by "real-world, case-based contexts" as they
pertain to a constructivist approach. The concepts need to be graspable in the
imagination, not necessarily graspable in their environment. As a result, their solution
fails to meet the learner's and the institution's need for a constructivist learning object.
There are several issues the team failed to take into consideration when creating the
camping trip scenario. Firstly, some children will never go camping; others go constantly.
There is a risk of marginalizing children of the former group while the latter become the
“experts” and dictate solutions to the others. They also underestimate the imaginative
capacity of the children. Children of the target age group can easily grasp the concept of
 The Mission to Mars. In this instance, having that fantasy element not only levels the
playing field (since there will be no experts) but more fully engages their imaginations.
Additionally, there is a gaming aspect that comes into play when there are consequences
for failure. Even though imaginary, the consequences of failing to plan for a Mars
mission are far more compelling for the learner than a failed camping trip.
They were correct in deciding to limit the scope of the learning object. The Mission to
Mars lesson was, in reality, two separate learning objects. The first was planning for the
trip to Mars and the second was the set-up of the colony. They right to abandon the
second phase even though it would make a compelling lesson is because the planet
settling phase would need to be a follow-on lesson and this conflicts with the requirement
for a stand-alone module that can be used in any part of a sequence.

4) Outline the workflow among the three project teams by adding arrows to Figure 1-1. Discuss
the potential challenges that arise because of this configuration.

1) The Writing Team provides the design team with 32 draft briefs.
2) The Design Team selects the 15 best briefs and returns them to the Writing Team to be
developed further.
3) The Writing Team revises the briefs and prepares the content needed then returns them
to the Design Team.
4) The Design Team develops the full design specifications and delivers them to the
Review Panel.
 5) Feedback from the Review Panel is given to the Design Team to be used as the basis
for revisions to the designs.
6) The final design specifications are given to the Project Steering Committee to be
signed off on before any development begins.
7) After the design specs are approved by the Project Steering Committee they are given
to the Development Team. At this point, the Design Team would no longer be involved.
The toughest challenge will be communication. Due to the division of labor and the back
and forth between the teams, everyone will need to be on the same page in order for this
to work. If the teams are waiting long periods of time to receive feedback and/or
revisions then the deadline might not be able to be met. Obtaining approval from the
steering committee and the review panel could also be a challenge. If this process is not
done efficiently then the whole project could be affected. Luckily it sounds like the
project manager (Gordon) will be on hand to help out with communication between the
parties.

Part 2
1) Discuss the skills needed by project managers in order to facilitate effective interaction among
different teams (e.g., design, graphics, programming) working on an instructional design project.
A project manager must possess personal, technical, and management skills to effectively
manage a team. According to Project Management: Best Practices for IT Professionals,
Murch (2001) project managers must create trust within a team quickly to navigate the
complexities of each project.
Project Managers must be able to motivate and sustain people. Project team members will
look to the project manager to solve problems and help with removing obstacles. Project
managers must be able to address and solve problems within the team, as well as those
that occur outside the team. There are numerous ways, both subtle and direct, in which
project managers can help team members. (Murch, 2001)
 The following skills are essential for effective project management:

• Communication
• Clarify team vision
• Ensure transparency
• Model and promote candor
• Gather team input
• Provide feedback with tact
• Build trust
• Facilitate discussion
• Technical competence
• Identify team capabilities and limitations
• Allocate resources appropriately
• Provide guidance if needed
• Project management
• Clarify and confirm project expectations and scope
• Set reasonable milestones
• Identify challenges
• Proactively solve problems
• Manage project timelines

2) Describe the core characteristics that define learning objects. What impact does each of these
characteristics have on the reusability of a learning object?
Reusability, in terms of learning objects, refers to the ability a well-designed Learning Object
has to fit a multitude of scenarios and circumstances. The core characteristics that define
learning objects and help to create reusability are listed below:
• Interoperability: Learning Objects can be used in a variety of software suites, across
platforms
• Manageability: Learning Objects need to be able to be tracked and updated
• Flexibility: Learning Objects must be adaptable to serve the needs of learners and
bring them closer to achieving their learning objectives
• Accessibility: This distinguishing factor relates to the fact that objects must be online,
searchable and well categorized to be true Learning Objects
• Durability: Within reason, Learning Objects must stand the test of time with regards
to their content and their delivery mechanism
• Scalability: It’s important for Learning Objects to be neither narrow in focus, nor too
large to be incorporated along with other objects, so designing with scalability in
mind is a must.
3) Discuss the challenges involved in applying constructivist pedagogical strategies (e.g.,
authentic tasks, social interaction, and negotiation) within computer-based learning object
environments.
In Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, Wilson (2018) identifies
some main features of constructivism:
Learning is an active process of meaning-making gained in and through our experience
and interactions with the world. Learning opportunities arise as people encounter
cognitive conflict or challenge, and through naturally occurring as well as planned
problem-solving activities. Learning is a social activity involving collaboration,
negotiation, and participation in authentic practices of community. (Wilson, 2018, p.61)
Constructivism holds that the environment and social interaction are crucial parts of the
learning experience. When we are in a computer-based learning environment, applying
constructivist pedagogical strategies may not seem like they work well outside of an in-
person classroom. As instructional designers we must ask ourselves, how can we create a
computer-based experience that includes social activities that involve problem solving
and contribute to student learning? Fortunately, we have web-based applications that
allow students to interact with each other in real time as well as asynchronously. Students
are now able to record video and audio in a way that can feel more personal than an
email. However, curating social interactions online versus in-person can be challenging
since it requires students to have an additional set of technical skills, which involves
using various software or websites that would not be necessary if students were in person,
but that does not mean it is impossible. In terms of authentic tasks and negotiation, if we
know our students, we can utilize realistic scenarios and give students an opportunity to
bargain with each other to successfully complete learning tasks. In order to facilitate a
learning experience that has these elements, we must not only thoroughly think through
the learning experience we are designing, but it is also important to offer students support
along the way. Ertmer and Newby (2013) acknowledge that a principle of constructivism
is, “Supporting the use of problem solving skills that allow learners to go ‘beyond the
information given’ [developing pattern-recognition skills, presenting alternative ways of
representing problems]” (p.58). Constructivism requires us to consider all the ways we
can engage and support students throughout their learning experience.
 References
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing
critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance improvement quarterly,
26(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143
Murch, Richard. Project Management: Best Practices for IT Professionals. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001. Harris Kern's Enterprise Computing Institute (Ser.). Web.
Wilson, B.G. (2018). Constructivism for active, authentic learning. In R. Reiser, & J. Dempsey
(Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.) (p. 61). New York,
NY: Pearson Education.