E-Learning for Beginners: Back to the Basics
(First in a periodic series)
People say all the time that our world is constantly changing. Yes, obviously. I see it when my grandparents whip out the iPads at dinner and show me what they’re learning in their Apple classes. Or when my parents check their e-mail on their iPhone and joke about having to keep up with the younger generation. No kidding our world is changing! And we have to continue learning just to keep up with it.
And that’s where it gets interesting. Learning is changing too. And quickly. Learning no longer takes place in a classroom. Learning is not restricted to formal education. Today there is another frontier of learning. It all begins when an “e” in front of the word.
E-Learning.
That “e” represents the entire ELECTRONIC world.
That one letter has HUGE implications – including the evolution of learning itself.
So for those of you who are new to the e-Learning world or for those of you who are experts and want to help welcome others in, let’s set out to clarify a few things. First, we must begin with a basic, working definition of learning. With that foundation, we can build an understanding of e-Learning.
Learning 101
According to the trustworthy Merriam Webster, learning is “the acquisition of knowledge or skills through experience, practice, study, or by being taught.” Agreed. So learning is the result of the intake of new concepts or ideas. This gained understanding leads to application. In short, learning transforms – either habits, knowledge, actions, or beliefs.
Sourced from Big Dog & Little Dog Performance Juxtaposition
Practically, what does learning look like? Consider just a few different outlets – online courses, in-class teaching, reading in a library, being coached on a football field, etc. Learning has so many faces!
At the same time, it is important to understand learning as a complete concept. According to Marc Rosenberg in his book E-Learning, learning is most commonly associated with training. But to see training and learning as the same misses the mark.
Rosenberg states that “training [is] used when it is necessary to shape learning in a specific direction – to support learners in acquiring a new specific skill or to utilize new knowledge in a specific way or a specific level of proficiency, perhaps within a specific time frame” (Rosenberg 5). 
The distinction lies in this: training is one form of learning, but there are also other forms of learning. In other words, all training is learning, but not all learning is training. Learning is bigger than simply learning how to do something mechanically or to a specific end. It changes thinking. Learning is the broader acquiring of knowledge and skills that have transformative effects.
Looking holistically at the concept of learning, it makes sense that the field and process of learning is itself being transformed, especially as we acquire new skills and knowledge about learning and technology. So not only is the world changing and not only do we need to learn new things to keep up, but the ways in which we learn are also changing. We are learning new ways of learning at the same time that we invent even newer ways of learning.
This is the SEISMIC shift. Have you noticed it?
Rosenberg says that learning is changing in the following ways:
- From training to performance
- From classroom to anytime, anywhere
- From paper to online
- From physical facilities to network facilities
- From cycle time to real time
The element of ELECTRONICS as it applies to learning is changing everything. In our next post, we’ll explore these shifts more and consider the value of learning in our technology-driven culture. But for now…what are your thoughts? We can all learn from each other…
Rosenberg, Marc J. E-Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001. Print.
“Knowledge.” Big Dog & Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition. 13 July 1995. Big Dog, Little Dog and Knowledge Jump Production. Web. 20 Jan 2012. http://nwlink.com/~donclark/knowledge/knowledge.html
Changing the Accessible eLearning Perception
We understand the need for “alternative versions” of courses when their purpose is addressing different learning styles or assisting those with particular disabilities. However, creating an “alternative version” of a course for the sole purpose of achieving ADA/Section 508 compliance just doesn’t make sense to us. At the very best, it’s a duplication of effort. At the very worst, it wastes money and produces a flat, monotone course of questionable equivalence to the original.
That is, in our opinion, what an “alternative version” of a course often is – one or more .pdf’s or a vanilla html version with no interactions, videos or knowledge checks. Compared to, for instance, the Flash-based course used by the majority of folks, these “alternative versions” are legal (maybe) – yet boring – substitutes.
We’ve observed that developers often create “alternative versions” of courses for two reasons:
1. Often, “alternative versions” are created because the developer has a comfort level with an authoring tool that simply cannot produce accessible eLearning. Frequently, developers are unaware that the way their authoring tool “achieves compliance” is by “having the developer create an alternative version.” Unbelievable, yet true.
2. Another common reason eLearning developers don’t create a single accessible course: a pre-existing preference for an instructional design that makes producing accessible content difficult.
For example: in one case a developer insisted on using a drag and drop interaction in an assessment. Making drag and drop accessible is possible but was beyond the developer’s know-how; therefore by including this one interaction the entire course was rendered non-compliant. This mandated the creation of the “alternative version” of the course that was ADA/Section 508 compliant.
Two courses were created and maintained when only one was needed. Most companies struggle with keeping one course up to date, let alone two versions of a single course. Is drag and drop really that important?
The good news for fellow accessible eLearning advocates is that the two reasons discussed above are not worth clinging to. They’re based on perception, and most people are glad to change a misguided perception when presented with clear, true alternatives.
That’s what we’re trying to do at CourseAvenue. We’re showing eLearning developers that a course can be interactive and engaging using a single platform that ensures the course is useable for all. We’ve seen firsthand that when provided with instructional design, technical know-how, and an authoring tool that embraces accessibility, developers are open to having one course for all.
We’ve all got to focus on making accessibility so understandable that developers would need a good reason not to create only one course. We need to encourage a paradigm shift within the industry.
Accessible eLearning — One Version for All
Is the eLearning community saying to those with disabilities: “We give up?”
I spend most of my days reviewing eLearning courses and talking with eLearning designers and developers struggling with “Accessibility Issues” (e.g. making them Section 508/ADA compliant). To my dismay, I’ve seen a large number of developers (people and organizations) simply give up. They either:
1) Rely on “not getting caught.” They produce eLearning with complete disregard to accessibility, banking on their ability to whip up accessible versions if needed, or –
2) Produce an engaging (inaccessible) version for most learners and “an alternative version” for those with disabilities.
I believe both strategies are unacceptable.
The first one is obviously illegal, and as the growing number of eLearning accessibility lawsuits prove, “not getting caught” isn’t a viable option for any organization.
The second strategy, in my opinion, is misguided. People with disabilities arguably have the most to gain by eLearning, yet they are increasingly slighted. If the “alternative version” of the content is truly providing the same learning experience, why not give that version to everyone? When I ask an eLearning developer this simple question the response usually trails off quickly: “Well, it really isn’t that…you know…”
Yes. I’m afraid I do know.
We created the Accessible eLearning Leadership Awards to show people there is no need to create alternative versions of eLearning. Interested in seeing what fully accessible eLearning can look like? Here is a screen image of one set of courses by Boost eLearning:
Want to see more?
Take a look at what was built for returning Veterans at http://bit.ly/vaelearning.
My message to the eLearning community: Don’t give up! You can create fully accessible eLearning that is useable by all. It’s the legal — and right –thing to do.
eLearning and Elevators
We think they have quite a bit in common. Yes, they can both raise a person to new heights, but we’re looking at a commonality that’s a bit more grounded.
Both eLearning and elevators must comply with accessibility laws. This compliance is not a one-step process: eLearning providers should no more depend on a “make accessible” button than a building owner should depend on a verbal assurance an elevator is ADA compliant. Building architects don’t leave designing accessible elevators, stairs, and restroom facilities to chance. We can’t say that eLearning designers take the same care.
When the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990, the learning curve was high. Lawsuits involving lack of handicapped parking and non-accessible elevators abounded. Businesses scrambled to meet the learning curve and understand the specifics of accessibility.
Now, the legal tide is changing direction. We’ve recently seen a surge of lawsuits against organizations that are not providing accessible eLearning. As with any law, ignorance of Section 508/ADA regulations is no excuse.
Accessibility for both eLearning and elevators has many layers. For example, you may believe if an elevator uses Braille signage, it’s ADA compliant. Not so. There are many components to an ADA compliant elevator, starting with the height and location of the call button sign and ending with proper handrails. If one piece is missing, it’s not legally ADA compliant.
It’s the same with eLearning. Accessibility starts at your web site, continues with your LMS and travels to your eLearning content. If one layer is missing, your eLearning is not accessible to all.
CourseAvenue provides eLearning solutions that are Section 508/ADA compliant. We can’t help you with your elevators, but we can guarantee your eLearning will be accessible to everyone.
The Surging Accessibility Lawsuit Tidal Wave
We’re not trying to be “scare mongers,” but we certainly feel compelled to point out real-world ramifications of poor eLearning design and technology. The tidal wave is coming, and recently hit the higher education arena once again. No institution or organization can afford to ignore its danger.
We predicted this in our September 2010 blog post ADA and Section 508 Lawsuit Tsunami. Since then, the 508/ADA lawsuit tidal wave has only increased in size. What is it? Who is threatened by it? And how can it be avoided?
Section 508/ADA is a type of civil rights legislation designed to protect people with disabilities. We’ve seen its effects in things we now consider mainstream: handicapped parking spaces and wheelchair ramps, for example. What is not yet mainstream: accessible and useable eLearning, which is just as vital to the disabled as handrails.
Organizations and institutions failing to provide accessible and useable eLearning for everyone are beginning to drown in lawsuits, payouts and remediation.
Accessibility begins with your organization’s website, continues through your Learning Management System (LMS) and travels to your custom eLearning content. While LMS accessibility is largely the responsibility of the LMS vendor, your custom eLearning is your responsibility. Is it accessible to those with disabilities? Are you relying on a simple “make accessible” check box on your desktop authoring tool? If so, you could join the ranks of major corporations and the VA Administration, who have all faced legal challenges due to website accessibility issues.
CourseAvenue can protect your custom eLearning development from the surging tidal wave of 508/ADA compliance lawsuits. We provide eLearning development software that has Section 508 and ADA compliance built into the technology. With CourseAvenue, there’s no guess work and no risk. We’ll keep the tidal wave from reaching your shores.
Accessible eLearning Leadership Awards
While participating in this year’s Interagency Disability Educational Awareness Showcase (IDEAS) conference, CourseAvenue announced the winners of the 2010 Accessible eLearning Leadership Awards. These awards recognize those organizations that are producing true accessible e-Learning courses – courses that serve both learners who use assistive technologies and those who do not, without the need to create multiple versions of each course. Awards were given in Government, Commercial and Not-for-Profit categories. These industry leaders have demonstrated how the intelligent use of instructional design and technology can produce e-Learning titles in the true spirit of complying with both the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1974.
Producing accessible e-Learning has been an elusive goal for many. Although the ADA and Section 508 are federal law, too often compliance is either non-existent or an afterthought. And while those who use assistive technologies arguably have the most to gain from online education, compliance often means, at best, a “plain HTML” or “PDF” version of an e-Learning course. These award winners clearly show that the days of creating separate or limited e-Learning courses to achieve ADA and Section 508 compliance are over.
Congratulations to the recognized leaders for 2010. A donation to Spectrios Institute for Low Vision will be made on behalf of each of the winners.
Government Category
PSI, Inc. – Planned Systems International
“Veterans Affairs’ My Recovery Plan®”
Not-for-profit Category
ILRU – Independent Living Research Utilization
“Foundations of Independent Living”
Commercial Category
Boost eLearning
“Google Search & Gmail”
About the Accessible eLearning Leadership Award
The Accessible e-Learning Leadership Awards recognizes organizations in Commercial, Not-for-profit, and Government categories that demonstrate dedication to advancing the field of Accessible eLearning through successful development and deployment of education materials that meet or exceed the standards defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1974. For more information, visit http://www.CourseAvenue.com/Award
As part of recognizing these leading organizations, a donation will be made on their behalf to the Spectrios Institute for Low Vision (www.spectrios.org) – an organization that provides comprehensive visual rehabilitation programs that includes a low vision evaluation, counseling, and teaching the skills of daily living and the use of technology.
SCORM Crippled By Java Security Update
Oracle recently released a patch to a security hole in Java. The patch addresses 58 security vulnerabilities and is described by Oracle as critical. How does this relate to eLearning you ask? Well, if your Learning Management System (LMS) or your eLearning course player use Java, they will return an error and be unable to function. Given the critical nature of the security issues, many organizations have no choice but to install the Java patch.
My eLearning Course Won’t Run
The CourseAvenue Player does not use Java and is therefore unaffected by the Java patch. However, many an LMS do use Java-based SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model) as a way to connect to the eLearning course player. As a result, trying to launch the player will result in an error that basically tells the user the SCORM (Java) connection can’t be found. The security patch effectively disabled the SCORM interface. Of course, CourseAvenue’s player does not need an LMS to function as it can work independently. However, any bookmarks, etc. that would normally be saved to SCORM would be inoperative.
AICC To The Rescue
If your LMS is set to use SCORM and has been disabled by the Java patch, try setting the LMS to use AICC instead. AICC does not rely on Java and should allow your LMS/eLearning player to function as usual. One of our customers found discovered the issue when a majority of the learners appeared not to have completed their course. Upon closer inspection it was discovered that all had installed the Java security patch and where being informed by the CourseAvenue player that the connection to SCORM could not be established – a smoking gun that a Java issue in the LMS was involved. After a quick call to CourseAvenue, they reset the LMS to use AICC and the issue was resolved.
SCORM vs. AICC in eLearning
Which to use seems to be one of those arguments that hinge on personal preference. But as the Java security patch issue illustrates, AICC clearly has at least one advantage in that it does not rely on Java.
GSA eLearning Section 508 Compliance Panel Discussion
I’m pleased to report that the US General Services Administration will be holding a panel discussion on accessibility in eLearning at the GSA’s Section 508 Coordinators Annual Conference this November, 2010, in Gettysburg, PA. Attendees will learn of the requirements, challenges, myths, and best methods for creation of courses that are also fully Section 508 compliant. It is my hope that the attendees will find this information useful in pursuing active validation of eLearning compliance under Section 508.
Section 508 eLearning Compliance Discussion
The panel will include experienced personnel from the USDA, the Department of Education, and other agencies and will be moderated by Joe Gorup of CourseAvenue. They will examine examples of compliant and non-compliant eLearning, and discuss a range of issues, obstacles, and solutions that apply to eLearning under Section 508 accessibility compliance such as
- The causes that contribute to uneven compliance to Section 508, including the wide range of compliance processes between agencies.
- Examples of non-eLearning eLearning such as pure .pdf files; a maze of HTML links; and a .PPT with a play button will be looked at in comparison to examples of what most people agree is truly self-paced eLearning.
- The role of active validation of Section 508 compliance vs relying on standard and guidelines, VPAT’s and the like.
- The effect active validation has on rejection rates for Section 508 compliant eLearning and the downsides of non-compliance will also be examined.
Agencies Take The Lead On Accessibility
It’s good to see these agencies taking an active lead in eLearning accessibility. The acknowledgment of the need for accessibility in eLearning certainly seems to be moving in the right direction, even if slower than I’d like. As authoring platforms become available that allow a single, media rich course to be used for all learners–including those with disabilities–the old excuses of “it can’t be done” become harder (and more costly) to maintain.
ADA and Section 508 Lawsuit Tsunami
A tsunami of lawsuits may hit businesses, government agencies, and educational institutions. The targets are websites and elearning. The advance lawsuit storm waves have already hit Target, the VA, Arizona State University and others. Your website or elearning courses may be next.
The New Definition of Facilities
Though providing equal access to buildings, restrooms, elevators, and the like has become common and expected, until recently equal access to an organization’s “digital” facilities” has often been more of an afterthought—if thought about at all. The ADA and Section 508 are essentially civil rights legislation aimed at ensuring equal access to people with a disability. Though the acts were initially aimed at access to physical facilities, with the pervasive rise of the internet, wheelchair ramps and wide restroom stalls are not enough. As a result, the ADA and Section 508 now encompass the accessibility (or lack thereof) of websites and elearning.
But I Don’t Have Blind Employees
It’s a common misunderstanding that the ADA and Section 508 only apply if the organization has a blind employee. Wrong. The acts apply to a wide range of disabilities including color blindness, reduced vision, hearing disabilities, and physical disabilities such as the inability to use a mouse or keyboard. In addition, the acts are not restricted to employees but include those in the general public who might use your facilities. Finally, if you operate a business open to the public, or have accepted federal funds, or are a local, state or federal government agency, you are subject to the equal access requirements regardless of whether you have employees with a disability. Again, failure to provide equal access is a civil rights violation and a losing hand in a lawsuit.
Inaccessible Website Costs $6 Million
In brief, Target does business with the public and its website was not fully accessible to people with disabilities. Target paid $6 million and corrected their website. The VA had training courses it’s employees were required to complete. However, the courses were not accessible to employees with disabilities. The VA lost the lawsuit. The list goes on.
Accessible vs. Usable
Faced with the daunting obstacles of creating an accessible course— whether to avoid a lawsuit or to simply provide users an accessible elearning experience—several common methods are used. Unfortunately, many may simply be providing a false sense of security. Creating an accessible course is often not as simple as checking a “make accessible” box; adding some alt text; saving a PDF; or creating a Flash file. These methods may be little defense against the ADA/Section 508 lawsuit tsunami. For example, a “Make Accessible” check box in an elearning authoring tool does not say “Make Section 508 Compliant”! Adding alt text only addresses some elearning accessibility issues, and a PDF or Flash file may be technically accessible but practically unusable. What is meant by “practically unusable”? A 45 degree wheelchair ramp may be a ramp, but the steepness makes it unusable by someone in a wheel chair and an expensive lawsuit would likely result.
Separate But Not Equal is Expensive
Besides the extra cost and maintenance issues inherent in creating a separate “accessible” version of an elearning course, many simply do not provide the same rich learning experience of the “standard” course it is based on. Then there is the issue of lack of SCORM and AICC conformance. The solution to accessibility as well as usability is to create one course, usable by everyone. Sounds easy, but up until now that meant hand coding by a team of very skilled (and expensive) programmers. Coordinating the complexity of a two-way learning experience to accommodate assistive technology such as screen readers and voice control, while correctly building in appropriate navigation focus, a glossary, table of contents, and assessment questions is not for the inexperienced or those on a tight budget.
A New Approach
Until now, many organizations were caught between the looming lawsuit tsunami and the expense and time required to achieve ADA and Section 508 compliance. However, there is a new approach that is both affordable and more efficient than maintaining separate course versions. It also enables staff to create courses, rather than a team of expensive programmers. By starting with an authoring platform that has accessibility built in (and is independently certified), your staff can shorten development time while delivering media rich elearning courses that are both accessible and usable by everyone. Better to do the job right the first time and avoid separate course versions that are expensive, hard to maintain, and often an easy target for a lawsuit.
e-Learning Lessons for Electric Car Development
We are beginning to see something new in automotive mass manufacturing: electric cars. Sure, there have been electric cars before. But this time it’s on a different scale. Many automotive manufactures have at least one electric car coming to market. Many more are in testing. Tesla is selling high-end electric cars to the rich and famous, GM is delivering the unique Chevy Volt starting in November of 2010, and Nissan’s Leaf all electric car is due in December, 2010.
Chevy Volt’s Range Extender
Unlike other electric cars, the Chevy Volt is an all electric vehicle with a gasoline powered “range extending generator”. Drive around town powered by cheap electricity stored in high tech batteries that recharge overnight from a standard wall outlet, or drive cross country with electricity generated by the quiet, fuel-efficient gasoline engine. Because 75-78% of cars are driven less than 40 miles a day, many Chevy Volt drivers will never need gasoline for daily errands around town or going to work. Electricity is about 66% less expensive per mile than $2.50/gal. gasoline. For longer trips, the range extender insures a steady supply of electricity no matter the distance. Very innovative.
The Sounds of Silence
Besides the sports car handling and powerful torque reported by test drivers, the Chevy Volt is quiet. Very quiet. A trait it shares with other electric vehicles. While drivers remark favorably about this, others have noted that ultra quite cars are potentially dangerous to pedestrians and particularly the blind. As a way of alerting pedestrians, the car manufacturers have now agreed on standards for electric cars to actually create some sound at low speeds. The Nissan Leaf sounds a bit like a quieter version of the Jetson’s flying car. But adding exterior sound to a quiet car has created heated controversy.
Accommodating the Blind and Others
I was surprised by the tone of some online discussions about this accommodation for the visually impaired, children, elderly, and others. Many comments derided the idea of using sound to prevent injury to pedestrians. Some seemed to feel it was exclusively the pedestrian’s problem and responsibility, blind or not. Some felt the electric car was being unfairly singled out compared to traditional cars or even bicycles. Of course it’s easy to overlook or minimize obstacles that you or someone you know have not faced. This battle has been fought before when the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed.
Accessible e-Learning Shows the Way
Prior to the ADA, people with a disability where often confronted with barriers to entry, etc. Of course, the need for equal access is not limited to the physical world. As many know, Section 508 of the ADA applies to e-Learning accessibility. In many ways, e-Learning has traveled along a similar path to eliminating barriers for those with a hearing, sight, or physical disability.
Despite much progress, today there are still many e-Learning courses that give little or no thought to those with disabilities, or do so more as an afterthought. Thankfully, there is an increasing movement toward using state-of-the-art e-Learning course development platforms that generate courses accessible to everyone, handicapped or not. A SCORM compliant “one course everyone can use” approach that saves time, eliminates update issues, and enables compliance with Section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The richer learning environment provided by these “accessible by everyone” courses benefits all learners, not just those with hearing, sight, or physical disabilities. Now that the capability exists to easily create a single course that everyone can use, old legacy courses can be converted as well. As a result, letting learners with a disability “fend for themselves” is no longer justifiable even from a technology standpoint.
Woof!
Like many other things originally designed to address the needs of people with a disability, an electric car that “advertises” its presence at low speeds will likewise benefit not just the blind, but other pedestrians too. No word yet on what car chasing dogs will make of a visit from the Jetson’s!
