Changing the Accessible eLearning Perception

CourseAvenue — Thu, 12 May 2011 22:49:20 +0000

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.

Why is Collaboration Important When Building eLearning Content?

CourseAvenue — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:58:31 +0000

Development of eLearning is clearly a collaborative process between instructional designers, subject matter experts, graphic developers, and others. Let’s take a look at how we can manage the efforts of this diverse group of people.

For the vast majority of organizations, this collaborative process is often inefficient. The process usually involves many emails, chat sessions and conference calls, and eventually results in one person, often the instructional designer, left to manage the production task.

Unfortunately, many tools on the market focus solely on the production task or the creation of the final product and are not built around the true development process. Installing authoring software on desktops is certainly not a scaleable solution. The act of turning the content into a course is a small percentage of the overall cost of development. The real cost involves the upfront work of uniting the input from the different parties into something that can be produced.

To manage these efforts efficiently, one needs a true collaborative, or shared environment that everyone involved in the development process can partake. This collaborative environment can take different forms but is certainly more formal than the desktop-based, email, and chat anarchy that have been around for a long time. An ideal environment would allow each of the parties involved to directly contribute to the development process. For example, a subject matter expert could directly add their know-how into the course structure as defined by the instructional designer. As opposed to forcing a subject matter expert into becoming an author, he or she should be able to contribute to the process by adding content directly into the shared course development environment using basic computer skills.

Management is only possible when there is control over the process. Given the multitude of people involved in the courseware creation process, a collaborative environment is required to establish such control before true management can take place. The ability to assign permissions in the online environment provides this management capability.

Take a look at how CourseAvenue’s clients work together in a collaborative authoring environment at http://www.courseavenue.com/studio.aspx.

Courseavenue's Word on the Street » Uncategorized

Changing the Accessible eLearning Perception

Why is Collaboration Important When Building eLearning Content?