Comments on: Best Practices in E-Learning http://pipwerks.com/2009/10/21/best-practices-in-e-learning/ E-Learning and Web Development Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:29:09 +0000 hourly 1 By: pete http://pipwerks.com/2009/10/21/best-practices-in-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-1632 pete Sun, 27 Dec 2009 02:43:33 +0000 http://pipwerks.com/?p=695#comment-1632 Let's not forget the "learning" part of e-learning. There's just too much basic stuff that seem to get overlooked when we're bending over backwards to meet technical standards. What about "context" "storylines" "relevance" instructionally sound objectives." Let’s not forget the “learning” part of e-learning. There’s just too much basic stuff that seem to get overlooked when we’re bending over backwards to meet technical standards. What about “context” “storylines” “relevance” instructionally sound objectives.”

]]> By: Greg Younger http://pipwerks.com/2009/10/21/best-practices-in-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-1626 Greg Younger Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:17:37 +0000 http://pipwerks.com/?p=695#comment-1626 I'm writing a blog this week about justification for using or not using video in e-learning, and ran across your excellent post. Marc, that's been exactly our experience at <a href="http://www.GCPLearning.com" rel="nofollow">GCPLearning</a>. All the engaging interactive elements we designed and took time to develop to reinforce learning were impossible to replicate in any kind of 508-compliant courseware. So we created a <a href="http://www.gcplearning.com/training_products/508_accessible.html" rel="nofollow">second set of the same titles</a>. We replaced drag-and-drop and other mouse-intensive exercises with simpler multi-choice text-based knowledge checks, re-did screens that referred to "the thing to the left of that other thing," and then double- and triple checked everything with several screen readers and had several friends with various disabilities check everything out and sign off that it was accessible. In the end, however, we only have control over our content and not over the LMSs that our clients use - and many that claim to be 508-compliant are still a chore to navigate! I’m writing a blog this week about justification for using or not using video in e-learning, and ran across your excellent post.

Marc, that’s been exactly our experience at GCPLearning. All the engaging interactive elements we designed and took time to develop to reinforce learning were impossible to replicate in any kind of 508-compliant courseware. So we created a second set of the same titles. We replaced drag-and-drop and other mouse-intensive exercises with simpler multi-choice text-based knowledge checks, re-did screens that referred to “the thing to the left of that other thing,” and then double- and triple checked everything with several screen readers and had several friends with various disabilities check everything out and sign off that it was accessible.

In the end, however, we only have control over our content and not over the LMSs that our clients use – and many that claim to be 508-compliant are still a chore to navigate!

]]> By: Marc http://pipwerks.com/2009/10/21/best-practices-in-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-1487 Marc Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:40:33 +0000 http://pipwerks.com/?p=695#comment-1487 Great post Philip. I have been following your blog for quite a while now, it has been very helpful for my work and I finally decided to add my 2 cents. Accessibilty is a best practice for web development in general. But when it comes to e-learning, Even if I code everything using standards with accessibility in mind (mostly for visually impared learners), in my opinion, it is an overkill. Here are a few reasons: - Most LMS say they are 508 compliant, and most of the time, on the coding side it is, but in most cases, learners have problems navigating through the site with a screen reader. So I can pass hours developping a SCORM compliant accessible course, with all the alternative contents, and when the user loads the course, if he can get there, it loads in a SCORM player. This player usually contains multiples framesets around the content, wich cause problems with most screen readers. - Some users with disabilities don't use javascript, if that is the case nothing works. - I develop language training courses, and a screen reader really is not the best thing to learn a second language. - You have to level down the technology you use and activity types (i.e: drag and drops, map interactions...) that are not accessible. In the end, you end up loosing the quality in the over all product and learning experience because you are trying to built a "ne size fits all solution" when in many cases, it would be better to either hire a personal tutor for a learner with disabilities or provide them with alternate contents such as brail or digital text books. The best solution i found so far to please everyone is to build one accessible version of the course, and another version with more interactivity instead of trying to fit everything in the same course. However, this doesn't fix accessibility issues inside the LMS, will the learner be able to find the course, register and lauch it? That's a whole other story. It would be great to have an LMS with an alternative accessible version. When a user logs into this accessible portal, it would only show accessible courses in the content repository. So far, I haven't seen an LMS that offers this. Do you know if this kind of functionnality exists in an LMS? Great post Philip. I have been following your blog for quite a while now, it has been very helpful for my work and I finally decided to add my 2 cents.

Accessibilty is a best practice for web development in general. But when it comes to e-learning, Even if I code everything using standards with accessibility in mind (mostly for visually impared learners), in my opinion, it is an overkill. Here are a few reasons:

– Most LMS say they are 508 compliant, and most of the time, on the coding side it is, but in most cases, learners have problems navigating through the site with a screen reader. So I can pass hours developping a SCORM compliant accessible course, with all the alternative contents, and when the user loads the course, if he can get there, it loads in a SCORM player. This player usually contains multiples framesets around the content, wich cause problems with most screen readers.
- Some users with disabilities don’t use javascript, if that is the case nothing works.
- I develop language training courses, and a screen reader really is not the best thing to learn a second language.
- You have to level down the technology you use and activity types (i.e: drag and drops, map interactions…) that are not accessible. In the end, you end up loosing the quality in the over all product and learning experience because you are trying to built a “ne size fits all solution” when in many cases, it would be better to either hire a personal tutor for a learner with disabilities or provide them with alternate contents such as brail or digital text books.

The best solution i found so far to please everyone is to build one accessible version of the course, and another version with more interactivity instead of trying to fit everything in the same course. However, this doesn’t fix accessibility issues inside the LMS, will the learner be able to find the course, register and lauch it? That’s a whole other story.

It would be great to have an LMS with an alternative accessible version. When a user logs into this accessible portal, it would only show accessible courses in the content repository. So far, I haven’t seen an LMS that offers this. Do you know if this kind of functionnality exists in an LMS?

]]>