Archive for the ‘Instructional Design’ Category

« Older Entries

Instructional Designers: Figuring out how many hours it takes to develop training

Thursday, January 26th, 2012

I get this question all the time and I give my students the ‘estimates’. These numbers are very useful when putting together a proposal and letting a client know just how much it is going to cost them. I have gathered these numbers from several sources which are posted at the end of this post. Now for the stats:

1.According to training magazine, money spent on training increased 13% in 2011 to $59.7 billion.

2. Average trainer (Instructional Designer) salary in 2011: $84,142 (elearning guild reports: $79,890)

3. Development times to create one-hour of e-learning (The eLearning Guild, 2002):

- Simple Asynchronous: (static HTML pages with text & graphics): 117 hours
- Simple Synchronous: (static HTML pages with text & graphics): 86 hour
- Average Asynchronous: (above plus Flash, JavaScript, animated GIF’s. etc): 191 hours
- Average Synchronous: (above plus Flash, JavaScript, animated GIF’s. etc): 147 hours
- Complex Asynchronous: (above plus audio, video, interactive simulations): 276 hours
- Complex Synchronous: (above plus audio, video, interactive simulations): 222 hours

4. Instructor presentation time of face to face courses:

Dugan Laird (1985), listed these instructor preparation times (based on U.S. Civil Service estimate):

- Course is five days or less, then 3 hours of preparation for each hour of training.
- Course is between five and ten days, then 2.5 hours of preparation for each hour of training.
- Course is over 10 days, then 2 hours of preparation for each hour of training.

5. Chart from ASTD 2009:

Type of Training per 1 hour

Low Hours

Per hour of Instruction

(2009)

High Hours

Per Hour of Instruction

(2009)

Low Hours

Per hour of Instruction

(2003)

High Hours

Per Hour of Instruction

(2003)

Stand-up training (classroom)

43

185

20

70

Self-instructional print

40

93

80

125

Instructor-led, Web-based training delivery (using software such as Centra, Adobe Connect, or WebEx-two-way live audio with PowerPoint)

49

89

30

80

E-learning Developed without a Template

 

 

 

 

Text-only; limited interactivity; no animations

93

152

100

150

Moderate interactivity; limited animations

122

186

250

400

High interactivity; multiple animations

154

243

400

600

E-learning Developed within a Template

 

 

 

 

Limited interactivity; no animations (using software such as Lectora, Captivate, ToolBook, TrainerSoft)

118

365

40

100

Moderate interactivity; limited animations (using software such as Lectora, Captivate, ToolBook, TrainerSoft)

90

240

150

200

High interactivity; multiple animations (using software such as Lectora, Captivate, ToolBook, TrainerSoft)

136

324

60

300

Limited interactivity; no animations (using software such as Articulate)

73

116

NA

NA

Moderate interactivity; limited animations (using software such as Articulate)

97

154

NA

NA

High interactivity; multiple animations (using software such as Articulate)

132

214

NA

NA

Simulations

 

 

 

 

Equipment or hardware (equipment emulation)

949

1743

600

1000

Softskills (sales, leadership, ethics, diversity, etc.)

320

731

NA

NA

 Source: http://www.astd.org/LC/2009/0809_kapp.htm

Sources:

http://www.trainingmag.com/article/2011-training-industry-report

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/trainsta.html

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/costs.html

http://www.trainingmag.com/article/training%E2%80%99s-2011-growth-spurt

From nwlink.com: The eLearning Guild. (2002). The e-Learning Development Time Ratio Survey. Retrieved October 27, 2007 from: http://www.elearningguild.com/pdf/1/time%20to%20develop%20Survey.pdf

From nwlink.com: Laird, Dugan (1985). Approaches To Training And Development (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

http://www.elearningguild.com/research/archives/index.cfm?id=148&action=viewonly

http://www.astd.org/LC/2009/0809_kapp.htm

Tags:
Posted in Corporate, Instructional Design, technology | No Comments »

Why you should not leave college without your own website

Wednesday, January 25th, 2012

I tell all of my undergraduate students that they should not leave college without their own website. I also tell all of my graduate instructional technology students that they MUST have their own website, they are in a technology based field for goodness sake!

Why have your own website? Well let me ask you to search for yourself on Google, what comes up on the first page? Anything about you? Do other people have your name? Does your facebook page come up? Well guess what, when you graduate and begin to interview your potential employer is going to search for you as well. So if your facebook page is coming up it’s time to make is private. So if you are going to be searched online, why not intentionally point people searching for you to a website that is designed to ‘show off’ your work? That’s right, send them to a site of your choosing on purpose. So, just as an example, search for me, ‘Ray Pastore’ and you will see that this website you are on comes up first. I WANT people to find this site.

Why else do you want a site? You can put it on your resume. Showing a potential employer that you have enough technical skills to build a website can help in almost any career. Plus if they choose to, they can go to the site and this is your chance to show them your portfolio. Show them sample writings, projects, as well as your philosophies toward your field.

Now if I buy and create a site is it automatically number one on search results? NO! You need to make it SEO friendly but that is for another post on this blog.

So how do you buy a website?

I always recommend Icdsoft.com because that is who I use. In fact, if you go through my link that I give my students, you can own a web address and build a site for $38.50 a year. Here is that link: http://icdsoft.com/promo-code/course359. And I do not get anything if you use that link, so don’t think I am trying to sell you something here. Another company I like is bluehost.com, however, they are more expensive, around $100 a year, which is usually out of a students price range. Godaddy tends to be another popular one however I have only had bad experiences with them, so I do not recommend them.

When you do buy a site, I recommend a .com address. You can choose from .net, .org, .info, etc.

How do I build my site?

Well that is also for another blog post. You can take classes, teach yourself online, etc. I would recommend taking a class though so that you are doing things correctly. Correctly means that your site will show up on all browsers, mobile phones, and be optimized to show up first in search engines.

Hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions:)

Tags:
Posted in Higher Ed, Instructional Design, Professional, technology | No Comments »

Instructional Design Competencies

Tuesday, January 24th, 2012

Many ask me if our field has competencies or standards. Yes we do. We do have competencies. They are defined by the International Board of Standards for Training, Performance, and Instruction. This board is comprised of faculty and working professionals in the field of instructional design and technology.

Personally, I feel the standards are a bit outdated and that they may be missing some. So I have taken it upon myself to do a research study on this topic. I am in the process of completing the competencies and will be sending out the survey shortly. Look for a post on this site.

Tags: ,
Posted in Instructional Design | No Comments »

UNCW – Master’s of Instructional Technology

Friday, January 20th, 2012

For those interested in a Master’s of Instructional Technology or Instructional Design, please check out the video that one of our graduate students at the University of North Carolina Wilmington made which highlights our program:

Tags: ,
Posted in Higher Ed, Instructional Design, technology | No Comments »

The effects of time-compressed instruction and redundancy on learning and learners’ perceptions of cognitive load

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

My recent article published in Computers and Education:

Abstract: Can increasing the speed of audio narration in multimedia instruction decrease training time and still maintain learning? The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of time-compressed instruction and redundancy on learning and learners’ perceptions of cognitive load. 154 university students were placed into conditions that consisted of time-compression (0%, 25%, or 50%) and redundancy (redundant text and narration or narration only). Participants were presented with multimedia instruction on the human heart and its parts then given factual and problem solving knowledge tests, a cognitive load measure, and a review behavior (back and replay buttons) measure. Results of the study indicated that participants who were presented 0% and 25% compression obtained similar scores on both the factual and problem solving measures. Additionally, they indicated similar levels of cognitive load. Participants who were presented redundant instruction were not able to perform as well as participants presented non-redundant instruction.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131511002351

Tags: ,
Posted in Instructional Design, multimedia, Research | No Comments »

Why choose Instructional Technology / Instructional Design as a career?

Thursday, January 12th, 2012

If you are unfamiliar with instructional technology/instructional design I will very briefly describe what our graduates do, however, this post more or less focuses on the ‘why’.

Instructional Design? How did it originate?

Instructional design as a field or job was created during WW1 and WW2. The government realized that ‘nuclear scientists’ while great at their jobs were not the best people to actually develop training materials and to deliver training sessions to new scientists. Essentially what they did is take experts who understood education theory, communication, education psychology, etc. and had them work with the ‘ subject matter experts’ on these sciences to develop sound effective training. Thus instructional design was born.

What does an instructional designer do?

- Can work in corporate, government, K-12, or higher ed settings
- Design curriculum, design training (anything from anti terrorism training, flying helicopters, corporate orientation, to developing curriculum for elementary school students).
- Develop/program training
- Front end analysis – what is wrong, why, how do we fix it? (think of the ‘bobs’ from office space)
- Evaluation – was this implementation effective?
- Recommend technology solutions for training needs

So why be an instruction designer?

- Great pay – graduates are starting just above 60k (with no experience). If you go into management from a general ISD position your salary can easily be over 100k in 5 or so years.
- Can have a bachelor degree in any field then get a Masters in ISD – You do need a masters degree to be an instructional designer.
- It’s a Masters degree – very easy to move up the corporate ladder with an MS
- Many jobs available – even during 2007 when the economy tanked our graduates had work. Every company needs trainers and training.
- Get to work in teams – usually always on project teams
- Easy transition into management. Very easy to get into a project management role within a few years. From there you can move up to partner/CEO positions assuming you are a super star employee (and a lot of luck)
- Mobility – instructional designers are needed everywhere. You can move to any state in the US and find a job fairly easily. Many international opportunities as well.
- Future – training is not going away. In fact, with each new technological advancement our field becomes more and more important and needed.

Tags:
Posted in Instructional Design | No Comments »

Future of game and training development for the designer

Saturday, January 7th, 2012

Games are becoming significantly easier to create. I say this because the most popular games on the market right now like Mass Effect 3 and SWTOR use off the shelf, free, game engines. Normally, games are developed using their own engines, which take a lot of time and money to develop. However, off the shelf engines are becoming just as good. The best part is that many of these off the shelf engines are free and opensource.

Now before I get into ease of development, these engines still require a significant amount of programming and are not really made for the novice. However, there is a trend to make these engines more designer friendly, meaning less programming and more ‘building’. Examples of this can be seen in Google App Inventor (now at MIT), Scratch, Squeak, Gamemaker etc. The reason that game engine designers want engines to entail less programming is that programmers are not game designers, they are programmers but at this point only the programmers can use the engines. They want and need designers to use their engines to build games, which will in turn make their engines more popular.

This trend is happening in training development as well. We are seeing a push to develop with software like Articulate, a program that does not take a lot if any programming experience to develop sound instruction. This makes the instructional designer also now a developer, and more marketable as programmers are not required to develop the instruction. This however, does take time away from the instructional designer thus someone still needs to develop whether it’s the programmer or designer.

Essentially the point of this post is that I see game and training development starting to fall into the hands of the designer more than it is. In fact, I would not be surprised if our field starts focusing on ‘building’ – that is understanding programming logic and constructing games and training, instead of actually having to program at all.

Tags:
Posted in Higher Ed, Instructional Design, technology | No Comments »

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Monday, December 19th, 2011

The following describes Bloom’s Taxonomy (I developed for a presentation a few years ago and have since lost the sources for it):

Knowledge – Recalls or recognizes information, ideas, and principles in the approximate form in which it was learned

Verbs: Define, label, listen, list, memorize, name, read, recall, record, relate, repeat, view, select, describe, recognize, identify, locate, recite, state

Methods of assessment: True/False, Matching, Questions, Multiple Choice, Short Answer, Essay, Fill in the Blank, Game, kwl chart, reflective log

Comprehension – Translates, comprehends, or interprets information based on prior learning

Verbs: Describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, locate, recognize, report, restate, review, solve, tell, match, paraphrase, rewrite, give, examples, illustrate, extend, defend, distinguish, summarize, interrelate, interpret

Methods of assessment: True/False, Matching Questions, Multiple Choice, Short Answer, Essay, Fill in the Blank, discussion, Game, Role Play, silent mapping, concept webbing, reflective log

Application – Selects, transfers, and uses data and principles to complete a problem or task with a minimum or direction

Verbs: Apply, demonstrate, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, practice, recognize, solve, use, organize, generalize, dramatize, prepare, choose, show

Methods of assessment: Multiple Choice, Short Answer, Essay, Discussion, Graphic Organizers, flow chart, case study, problem solving, game, role play, multimedia cbi, contracts, interviews

Analysis – Distinguishes, classifies, and relates the assumptions, hypotheses, evidence, or structure of a statement or question

Verbs: Analyze, appraise, break down, calculate, compare, contrast, debate, diagram, differentiate, examine, experiment, explain, inspect, inventory, question, relate, solve, classify, point out, distinguish, categorize, subdivide, infer, survey, select

Methods of assessment: Multiple Choice, Essay, Venn diagram, kwl chart, observation, presentation, journal, peer evaluation, discussion, simulation, game, role play, multimedia cbi, problem solving, case study, interviews

Synthesis – Originates, integrates, and combines ideas into a product, plan or proposal that is new to him or her

Verbs: Arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, write, originate, hypothesize, develop, combine, produce, invent

Methods of assessment: Essay, role play, observation, checklist, presentation, reflections, journal, peer evaluation, portfolio, discussion, simulation, game, role play, flow chart, contracts, interviews

Evaluation – Appraises, assesses, or critiques on a basis of specific standards and criteria

Verbs: Appraise, assess, choose, compare, estimate, evaluate, judge, predict, rate value, select, relate, weigh, criticize, support, consider, critique, recommend, summarize

Methods of assessment: Essay, observation, checklist, presentation, reflections, journal, peer evaluation, portfolio, simulation, game, performance, metric, role play, Interviews

Tags:
Posted in Instructional Design | No Comments »

What is Cognitive Load?

Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

Here is an explanation of cognitive load theory. This was taken from a recent publication of mine:

Pastore, R. (2012). The effects of time-compressed instruction and redundancy on learning and learners’ perceptions of cognitive load. Computers & Education, 58(1), 641-651.

Cognitive Load

Cognitive load refers to the informational load that is being processed in working memory (Van, Paas, & Sweller, 2010). Cognitive load theory explains that there is a certain amount of information that can be processed in working memory at one time without overloading processing capacity.  Thus, when cognitive load is increased beyond our working memory capacity, learning is depressed. Initial research on cognitive load stems from the information processing theory, which explains that we have a limited short term or working memory and an unlimited long-term memory (Brünken, Plass, & Leutner, 2003). Miller (1956) explains that the mind can store seven units of information, plus or minus two units depending on how meaningful they are to the learner, at one time in our working memory without exceeding processing capacity.

Cognitive load is comprised of three types of load that are referred to as extraneous, intrinsic, and germane (Sweller, 2010; see also Künsting, Wirth, & Paas, 2011). Each of these types affects learning separately. Extraneous cognitive load is affected by the design of the instruction. This type of load suggests that irrelevant information results in high cognitive processing. So reducing irrelevant activities will reduce cognitive load and increase comprehension. Intrinsic cognitive load is affected by high element interactivity, such that information that is hard for the learners to interpret increases cognitive load. Germane cognitive load refers to load that is generated by instructional activities that lead to schema development and automation (Mayer, 2005).

Tags:
Posted in Instructional Design, Research | 1 Comment »

What is Dual Coding?

Friday, December 9th, 2011

The following video describes dual coding theory as well as cognitive load. The point of the video is briefly explain the main concepts around this theory. For more in depth analysis I would suggest the literature and in fact I will post some that I have written. Also, here is the image I used in the video if anyone would like to use it (for educational purposes citing me of course).

dual coding

 

 

Tags:
Posted in Higher Ed, Instructional Design, multimedia, Research | No Comments »

« Older Entries