Home > Company > News > eNewsletter > Educator's Voice

Educator's Voice

Volume 3, Issue 7
July 16, 2002

What Comes Around Goes Around: Recycling Design?

In the eLearning world - in academia and IT, too - there is much discussion (as well as debate) about Reusable Learning Objects. An eCollege sales representative recently distributed a tutorial by Michael Feldstein, CEO of Feldstein & Associates, entitled How to Design Recyclable Learning Objects. The tutorial got my attention at first just because of its topic on Learning Objects, in general, and then the idea of recycling those objects. At eCollege, this is something we've been interested in and have been researching for some time now - both on the academic and product levels. The topic raises the following questions: How effective can these be, learning-wise? How can we create learning objects and a content library and incorporate these into a useful product?

But, what struck me the most about the article is that Mr. Feldstein talks about reusable or recyclable concepts, more than objects of content.

While I had been thinking of learning objects as just that: objects of learning, the article brings up the idea that the most effective reusable learning objects aren't really things at all, they're concepts and structures containing things.

We, the Instructional Design team at eCollege, have been creating and thinking of this for awhile, just in different terms - "templates," "course skeletons" - those types of things. And, certainly, templates are recyclable. So, maybe it's just a difference in semantics, not ideas.

To this extent, Mr. Feldstein says:

"Rather than aiming to create seamlessly and instantly reusable learning objects, I try to think about which pieces of my e-learning courses are likely to be useful in other courses and whether I can invest a little extra time in the design now in exchange for saving a little more time later. I'm not thinking about reusing my unaltered work so much as I am thinking about recycling it. …

"You may have noticed already that I referred to recycling 'work' and not 'content.' My experience has been that the content, i.e., the specific words, pictures, and other representations of particular ideas, is cheaper to create and more expensive to recycle than the instructional design and programming which presents the content in a learnable way."

My colleagues and I do this all the time: give instructors/developers ideas on structuring their courses; reusing tasks and ideas from unit to unit - and even from class to class or school program to program. Is this not recycling at its finest?

I would have liked to think of Reusable Learning Objects more as content objects, though. Drag and drop exercises, for instance. We could tailor the subject matter, but the exercise, the object, could be recycled from course to course. But, if this is the case, and it's so easy, why don't we see more of it? Truth is, it's not that easy to reuse those objects. The content, the goals, the direction from subject to subject and teacher to teacher within those subjects can be radically different. While we may recycle the template for a drag and drop exercise, from one class to another, very rarely can we reuse that exact exercise. The content is too different.

This is also the case for overall course structures, then. While, of course, the content will be different from course to course, the structure, the tasks, etc. can be recycled to serve a variety of objectives and learning goals. For instance, we find ourselves repeatedly recommending certain items in an online Syllabus ("Email Policies," for instance). We encourage instructors to utilize the Threaded Discussion feature in the eCollege platform on a regular basis as well.

We have been involved in rather ambitious projects with some of our schools where each course had roughly the same structure, even though the subject matter varied anywhere from "Teaching Literacy" to "Grading Mathematical Rubrics." The Syllabus had the same elements; each unit had the same objective/goal set-up; and within each topic section/unit, there were a number of like Content Items, or subsections (Introduction, Lecture, Webquest, Discussion, Journal, etc.). The content was then "plugged in" to this recycled design. We called them "templates." That was the only difference.

So, what do I think about this? I have to admit that I'm a bit wary of the term "templates," and even of the concept of recycling instructional design. I think freedom in the way instructors approach their subjects and their individual teaching styles is vital to a course's success. But, I also know that people often want something just to get them started, especially if they're developing and teaching an online course for the first time. And in that respect, a given template, or recycled design concept, to get started with is a great idea. Instructors have the ability to add to and delete from any structure laid out before them. I would rather we call this a "strategic course planner" or "exemplary course structure." It's the same thing, though, as "recycling learning objects." And, in the end, I've decided that I agree with Mr. Feldstein in that structure can be more easily recycled than content.

       -- Errin Klein, MA

Reference
Feldstein, Michael. Do You Really Need Reusability? eLearning Magazine. July 2002. http://www.elearnmag.org/

TIP

Simple Steps Towards Good Course Design: The Table

A recent Tip, Educator's Voice, June 19, 2002, suggested using the Horizontal Rule to increase usability and enhance the readability of content pages in an online course. This Tip continues in the same vein, by focusing on the problem of "too much material filling up the field of vision by spreading from left margin border to right margin border on the content page." There is a simple, effective technique that you can employ to make your content pages more "user friendly," while enhancing the "look and feel" of your online course.

The suggestion - try using tables! You'll like the result and, more to the point, so will the course participants. The table will give you a margin on the left and right page borders - a look that mimics a book's text pages. Within the table you can insert text material, graphics, links, etc. There are a few variables to consider in setting up a table on a content page. Do you want a border, a background color, or none of the previous options?

Here are the steps in the eCollege platform:

1. Add a text content item (text page) to a Unit.
2. Create (insert) a table on the page using the toolbar.
3. Construct a 1x1 table - one (1) column and one (1) row.
4. Select a border color and a background color, if you choose to use them.
5. Click OK.
6. On the Text Content Item page, center the table using the toolbar.

Now, modify the table using some easy-to-use HTML code. Don't worry, you don't need to know HTML to make these minor modifications to your table. It's really quite easy to accomplish. Just follow these steps.

7. On the Text Content Item page, click on Author View.
8. In Author View, click on the HTML button to go to HTML code view page. (The HTML and Design buttons allow you to toggle back and forth between the HTML code page and the view that you most likely use when creating your content item pages).
9. The HTML code that appears at the top of the page will look like the following: <P align=center><TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=1 width="50%" border=1 >
10. Change the HTML code to read
    • Cell padding = 10
    • Width = 90%
11. Click on the Design button to return to the standard authoring view.

Start with the standard table presented above, and then you can alter the cellPadding and width to achieve the table that meets your needs. The cellPadding refers to the margin between your table border and the material inserted within the table. The Width refers to the width of the table on the page and the margin outside the table.

Don't be afraid to play with the tables to achieve the "look and feel" you want for a course. For example, you might want a lightly colored border and/or background for the table on the Unit Homepages to distinguish the homepage. And, you might want no border or background on content pages. Experiment and have fun!

       - Ken Switzer, Ph.D.