Self-Evaluation

The experience I gained as a consultant in ID is useful, to be sure. but I sensed there were some gaps in my knowledge. Part of the reason I wanted to complete this degree was to fill in gaps in the theory behind my experience, as well as expand on competencies I already have.

I expected IDE 767 to be the course I was weakest in, as I have often tried to avoid project management duties while staffed on SAP implementations. I did indeed learn a few new tools and insights into human performance behavior. However…the biggest eye-opener for me in terms of courses was IDE 641. Coming into this program, I had some ideas for doctoral research revolving around evaluation in a certain learner population. I still want to do that, but the simplest yet most important concept I got out of that class was that assessment is not evaluation. Turns out the idea I had is actually an assessment project, not an evaluation project per se. I am interested in learner outcomes among a specific population, probably on a specific topic to be determined when I am actually in a degree program. Evaluation, both formative and summative, will no doubt be a vital part of that project when I actually embark on it, but at its heart it’s an assessment project I have in mind. Virtual reality will, I hope, also play a part in my research.

When I return to the workforce later this year, my role will be that of an instructional developer. The courses I designed for Company H (Honeywell) are live and in use now, and no other design work is planned for me. I will be utilized primarily as a developer of desktop assistant documents for SAP transactions. The tool I’ll be using, WalkMe, was one of the tools I featured in my deliverables for IDE 552. However, should new courses become necessary, I’m ready to go back into “design mode” and use some of the new or refreshed concepts I took from IDE 631 and 632. One of the most important concepts in 631, which I admit to being a bit careless with in the past, is the notion of alignment: instructional goals, objectives, strategies, tools and technologies, learning activities, and assessments should all align with one another. It sounds like an obvious feature as I type it out, but often I have seen one or more of those components be out of alignment with the others, or for the end product to be misaligned with the original course design. Sometimes an ID, myself as guilty as anyone, will include a standard procedure in a course even though the client isn’t using that procedure in the business, or vice versa, omitting a vital procedure or feature the client is using simply because it’s not standard. Assessments are another component that can easily become un-aligned: Kirkpatrick level 2 questions in a quiz or validation test may have nothing to do with the course, or were covered in another course and those questions should be on the quiz for that course. If I’m constantly reminding myself that all components of instruction need to be aligned, I’m in a position to convey that concept to my fellow instructional designers as well.

Another valuable concept I am taking from the whole curriculum, especially IDE 621 and 737, is various methods of prompting learners to learn. Mnemonics, self-regulation, reflective questioning (which I have used in the past), summarizing notetaking, and mental associations, among others are all techniques I can incorporate into SAP and other training courses. I look forward to using these and other techniques when I return to full-time instructional design consulting.