A first-timers experience with formal Instructional Design
Despite this being my third term in OPWL, and my creating professional pieces of training for my employer in the past. I have always held a double role as acting as both subject matter expert and instructional designer. This group project with the Merdian Canine Rescue is my first time gathering information from an outside SME and building out training resources using external input.
My team of four OPWL Instructional Design students works with Jessica, the Executive Director of Meridan Canine Rescue. We are designing training resources with a Job Aid for Green Team Training. The Green Team is made up of volunteers who meet certain requirements to interact with green level dogs. Working with Jessica reminds me of my current professional role. Jessica is very knowledgeable about all aspects of Meridan Canine Rescue. As the rescue has a small staff of three, Jessica is both the SME and the client. Stakeholder participation is one of Rothwell’s protocol factors. He asks the questions, “How essential is it to obtain permission from a few key individuals before conducting a formative evaluation? If essential, who are they? How is their permission secured? How much time should be allowed for obtaining the permissions?” (Rothwell, 243). The answer to these questions? In a word, Jessica. From a skills development perspective, I wish that our team had access to new or recently onboarded volunteers. From a practical perspective, I understand why it might be difficult to coordinate with a volunteer. According to Rothwell, Jessica is the only essential person and therefore a user study can be completed with just her.
My fears of only having one SME for creating the Task Analysis were quickly laid to rest once we conducted a walk through of the task. Working with an experienced SME who has worked with Instructional Designer before lightened our load. “The decision makers’ experience with formative evaluation is the first factor influencing protocol… If decision makers have had experience with formative evaluation, determine what mistakes (if any) were made in previous evaluative efforts so repeating them can be avoided” (Rothwell, 242). Jessica knows her volunteers very well. When we began with the assumption that users are extremely technophobic, she would guide us to the correct levels of hand-holding for her users. Working with her, while doing a live demo of the ASPCA Pro account was my Ah-ha moment. Not only was it my first process/client walkthrough but it showed me the value of an experienced SME. For example, when we were creating the Task Analysis, Jessica explicitly called out that her user would become confused during the “print to PDF” process and to spend extra time explaining that portion.
The process of creating an ASPCA Pro account, taking the “Encouraging Positive Behavior in Shelter Dogs” training and completing the Green Level training is all completed remotely. The volunteers have completed a few in-person kennel cleaning shifts at the Rescue yet the actual training must be completed on a computer. Merrill’s fourth principle is application or “diminishing coaching”. The idea behind diminishing coaching is that learning needs more correction early in the process and coaching is deserted the more they learn (OPWL 537 Course Instructors). This was my oh no moment. How do you decrease coaching in a fully remote learning environment? Hopefully, my team can strike the right coaching balance in our job aide.
OPWL 537 Course Instructors (2020). Instructional Design Course Handbook. Boise, ID: Boise State Department of Organizational Performance and Workplace Learning.
Rothwell, William J., et al. Mastering the Instructional Design Process: A Systematic Approach, Center for Creative Leadership, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/boisestate/detail.action?docID=4205818.
