Blog Entry
Most people can tell a 1970s movie by its design, the soundtrack, the generational jokes, the hairstyles, the fashions, and the video technologies. In the same way, dated multimedia and curricular materials may be identifiable by their styling…and their lack of direct and applied relevance.
One method for cost savings in instructional design is to pursue designs for curriculum which are “sustainable.” Another term for this is “future-proofing,” which is a little high-minded and not totally possible. Still, the hope is a positive one, of having a sufficiently solid design that can stand the test of “some” time.
The reason this is a “fool’s errand” (of sorts) is that the future is essentially unknown and has too many moving parts to be predictable. Learners, cultures, language, technologies, and various other aspects are all changing. Learning domains are changing. No part of this model really is static.
What are non-negotiables in terms of enhancing sustainability in a curriculum? Some descriptors would be relevance, accuracy, and usability. Risks would be the opposites—irrelevance, inaccuracies, and lack of usability. Learners may still find value in digital learning objects if they have relevant information there and no other alternative. However, it’s easy for a learning object to become irrelevant any time a different resource can teach the same materials more effectively, accurately, or glamorously. The more efficiently concepts may be taught, the more popular the particular learning object.
Sustainability strategies involve teaching what is transferable and not dated. These would be principles and concepts. Specific examples would be dated, so learners may be sent off-site or to differently packaged examples so as not to age-out the main learning object. The learning should be culturally neutral; it should be non-contextual; it should not be focused on a particular audience (a slice of gender, a slice of age, a cultural demographic)…but be more generalist in application. The language should not be “fashionable” or slang or jargon-y but should be accessible simple English. Logic shouldn’t go out of style, so it would be helpful to have a logical infrastructure to the writing and the design.
Very powerful works have “legs.” They are so powerful that no one else in the field seems to feel a need to replace that work. There are profound ideas and principles that have marked the field. There is a 16-year-old whitepaper (online) about digital learning objects that is still state-of-the-art and applicable. There are theories that are many decades old that have direct relevance to online learning today. These digital artifacts are powered not by fancy technologies but the strength of conceptualizations and ideas.
Maybe the other solution is to create disposable contents in a quick build for those that will just date out. But somehow, that doesn’t seem like an optimal solution.
Comments
Tony Sinclair 1 month ago
Thanks for all the valuable information. Especially the cost savings in instructional designs is really wonderful.
robert bisheguin 1 month ago
I don't really think you can create a curriculum that is sustainable in the long term. As mentioned here the future is unpredictable and has a lot of moving parts. I think people should focus on making the current curriculum as good as possible and not worry about future events. Live in the now sort of philosophy.
Eruditio Loginquitas 4 weeks, 1 day ago
Hello, Robert B.: I think the "live in the moment" approach also works with some curriculums that are constantly changing. Some domain fields change so quickly that it's hard to define the fundamentals...I'm thinking of technology-based curriculums, to a degree. I'm also thinking of some sciences.
Post a comment