ACM Logo  An ACM Publication  |  CONTRIBUTE  |  FOLLOW    

Better Design Doesn't Take Longer!

By Clark Quinn / May 2010

Print Email
Comments (8) Instapaper

Error 526 Ray ID: 5377355a6f5df025 • 2019-11-18 04:30:19 UTC

Invalid SSL certificate








What happened?

The origin web server does not have a valid SSL certificate.

What can I do?

If you're a visitor of this website:

Please try again in a few minutes.

If you're the owner of this website:

The SSL certificate presented by the server did not pass validation. This could indicate an expired SSL certificate or a certificate that does not include the requested domain name. Please contact your hosting provider to ensure that an up-to-date and valid SSL certificate issued by a Certificate Authority is configured for this domain name on the origin server. Additional troubleshooting information here.


  • Mon, 04 Oct 2010
    Post by Ryan Tracey

    Behaviorism? Isn't that, like, so old? :oP

    Thank you Julie for re-deploying some classical knowledge and making it relevant in the modern world.

    I'm glad to see not everyone throws the baby out with the bath water!

  • Thu, 30 Sep 2010
    Post by Dr. Guy Bruce

    I was so pleased to read this article on how to design more efficient learning programs. The author clearly makes the point that internet technology, while offering the opportunity for more efficient learning,requires a "Technology of Teaching" (the product of a scientific and engineering approach to human behavior)for that opportunity to be realized!

  • Wed, 29 Sep 2010
    Post by Jason West

    Thanks for this article. I think you are spot on about instructional procedures online lagging behind the technology. Key to making the tools we have work for us more efficently, for example in my field which is improving English skills, is to create processes that mimic and support the natural learning processes of the brain.

    Our recent case studies, published in entirety on our free podcast, show that focused and comprehensible conversation between a learner and an expert (native or fluent speaker) can recreate the natural learning behavior of an infant and its mother (motherese). The difference is that the second language learner usually has a large amount of latent (inactive or non speech-forming) linguistic knowledge of the target language as a result of previous years of conventional study or exposure (as well as some acquired psychological pathologies about speaking in public or to a native or fluent speaker). This makes periods of structured and supportive one to one conversation with fluent and native speakers highly effective learning experiences.

    Our results (achieved with some PDF lesson plans, MP3s, Facebook (to meet friendly English speakers online) and Skype to talk to them and record your conversations for re-listening) are stunning and have drawn a comment on our podcast from Professor Stephen Krashen who called them 'Remarkable' and 'a major contribution to what we know works'.

    Our offer of help was randomly selected (she applied to a forum post)by an adult Chinese English learner but to get our assitance she had to agree to do what we asked her to do and agree to having it all recorded.

    The student, 27, had been stuying English formally for 16 years but still spoke like a beginner (clip 1.). After 18 hours of using our materials (13-15 hours) and 3-4 hours of online speaking practice based upon those materials she sounded completely different and could converse comfortably at what most English teachers would call 'intermediate' level (clip 2.).

    The process, i.e. the behaviour of the learner is crucial and that can be guided by materials that work with widely and freely available technologies.

    If anyone is interested to learn more you should look for us online as English Out There. I will be happy to answer questions.

    So behavioural processes and instant adaptation to the comprehension level of the student seem to be crucial.

  • Wed, 02 Jun 2010
    Post by Clark Quinn

    Anna, you point out a couple of the barriers people encounter: time pressures, mistaken beliefs about what adds value. Yet people who take time for reflection are more productive than those who don't, and content wiithout meaningful practice is worthless. We just have to keep fighting the good fight! Thanks for the feedback.

  • Tue, 01 Jun 2010
    Post by Anna Sabramowicz

    Hello Dr. Quinn! I agree with the fact that we can go minimalist and meaningful and it would get us a lot farther than we are with a lot of courses today. It is difficult to change your habits and when under pressure most of us fall into the trap of doing what we are comfortable with, even though in the back of our minds we know it is poor design. The worst part is that you almost never have time to innovate and create those new checklists, you are just keeping your head above the water with the workload. I think a lot of clients these days still feel their courses need a lot of "pulp" to be meaningful and are totally uneducated about the immense benefits of practice and feedback. The funny thing is that you don't have to be so creative anymore, there are a lot of people out there that have figured it out, have designed some fantastic activities and are sharing them. You, as a designer, instructional or otherwise, just have to provide the opportunity for those pieces to have a chance to "live" in your course. Thank you for the great read and the breakdown... that plain table you created is proof that simple visualization is key to helping learners digest information.

    Take care, Anna

  • Thu, 13 May 2010
    Post by Clark Quinn

    Thanks for the feedback. I'm not talking about designing more at the expense of development. And I *am* saying that the creativity doesn't take more time after it becomes habit. I believe (and my personal experience has been) that once you get your mind around the content (which you have to do in either case), the practice of thinking towards meaningful application and model-based exposition, etc ends up being no more time or work than thinking about rote recitation and knowledge presentation, etc.

    I would agree that the nuances between well-designed and typical elearning are subtle: you have the same elements, it's just how they're put together, and the client may not know or care (I recall a situation where the client's boss complained until I walked him through the underlying rationale, and then he was singing the hallelujah chorus).

    Visual design is a part of it, but to me it's more core about designing the cognitive and emotional experience. I still think that, with practice, that becomes as easy as regular design, but there is that initial investment. I posit that if you incorporate minimalism, engagement, meaningful practice, and model-based thinking, you have a chance to take no more time to design and develop really effective learning.

  • Wed, 12 May 2010
    Post by Kevin

    I agree with both of you on different levels. Referring to the same Learning Solutions conference, I attended a session by Ellen Wagner and Cammy Bean about the ID process. They presented a concept of the big "D" and the little "d" (not sure if this is a new concept though as I had not heard of it before then). The big "D" refers to the Instructional Design in your improved process of less writing. However, the little "d" requires creativity in the presentation of the big "D" - of for lack of a better phrase: Visual Communication.

    As Simon points out, there is no argument that we 'want' to design better. Better quality; less risk. In your table where you show Practice, the Traditional method is to provide a collection of simple knowledge questions. In the Improved method you suggest providing a few scenarios applying the knowledge to a problem. Less writing, and perhaps less development time, but it does take more creativity. A rare skill in my opinion. Again to Simon's point, clients don't much care about the overall experience as they do the 'deadline.'

    We need to change that! I'm a design guy and whether its instructional or visual, I think a big gap in this area starts at the academic level where ID grad students are being taught everything there is to know about "Instructional" design but zero in "Visual" design. If we can get ID's to think more creatively about instruction, perhaps that creativity will carry over to the visual presentation and how to communicate with less words altogether.

    Good read, Clark!

  • Tue, 11 May 2010
    Post by Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen

    As far as I can read this basically boil down to what I would label pre-production (that is well-known in most games development although also often suffering cuts), namely to prepare your project. I think it is fairly obvious that this will lead to better quality. However, I think the article misses the problem in reality - we all want to 'design' more. However, usually we are faced with tight deadlines, clients in a hurry and a desire to 'show' something.

    Also, I think that the problem with 'designing' more is that it requires a lot of skill from the developer if you are not to be sucked into the abyss. You can spend endless amounts of time. Especially with clients with little experience and high expectations.

    I think basically 'designing' more will improve quality and reduce risk, but extend deadlines. This will cost at a limited extra development cost. I also think that sometimes clients may not appreciate that they get better quality and lower risk but merely 'focus' on the deadlines being pushed.