Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1. Background
Lord Fairfax Community College currently serves approximately 7,500 students every year.
This number does not include the 10,000 individuals who seek out professional development
courses related to business and industries. To date, LFCC has started the search to hire new
adjunct faculty for the fall 2014 semester. LFCC relies heavily on part time faculty to teach the
wide array of classes the school offers. There are currently 200 courses available online and 75
degree tracks offered in person.
The challenge brought to our design team includes training adjunct and new full time faculty
regarding the use of Blackboard, a learning management system. New part-time adjunct faculty
at LFCC currently does not receive training in the Blackboard system, which is vital for teaching
classes. In addition, not all aspects of Blackboard are fully utilized by full time staff at the
community college. Full time faculty also can use a streamlined training program regarding the
many uses of Blackboard. The main problem concerning adjunct professors is that teaching at
the community college is not their full time job. Many of these teachers have other full time jobs
and come from varying experiences, backgrounds and environments. Often times, they are
thrown into teaching a course without ever having formal training on the learning management
system used by the college/university. New faculty, pending experience with technology and the
learning management system, do not know how to upload a syllabus in PDF format. This lack of
experience with a learning management system can create a multitude of problems for the newly
hired professor, which can lead to their students becoming increasingly frustrated as the semester
progresses.
Dr. Karen Kellison is our client for the project. She would like to incorporate a training
module system for all new faculty hires at LFCC. The desired deliverable will consist of a series
of modules that will incorporate screencasts for new adjunct and full time faculty to view at their
own pace. We envision the modules to be non-linear in order to accommodate for all types of
schedules of the faculty. At the end of the screencast modules, there will be a link to a quiz given
in Blackboard in order to assess learning objectives and comprehension of the training material.
2. Needs Analysis
The entire faculty, full-time and part-time alike, is required to use Blackboard as the main
learning management system; yet, the level of familiarity with the system varies. The high
percentage of adjunct faculty in the Lord Fairfax Community College creates a greater
possibility that the faculty as a whole becomes less knowledgeable in the use of Blackboard as a
whole.
The goal of this project is to assess the level of competency in the use of the required
learning management system and then create a training program that closes the performance gap.
After the implementation of the training modules the adjunct faculty will be skilled in the use of
Blackboard and will be able to implement it into their curriculum.
3. Learner and Context Analysis
Target Audience
The target audience for the proposed instructional design project is the adjunct faculty at
Lord Fairfax Community College. This faculty is compiled of personas with different
educational backgrounds. These instructors are individuals who mostly have other full-time
commitments, like employment elsewhere or managing a family. Amongst the faculty, the
professors ages range from 25 to 65. With the diverse group, other factors such as technological
skills and educational levels may vary. By putting the special focus on explaining the fact that
skillful use of Blackboard will have the ability to enhance the educational experience for both
faculty and students; the training becomes relevant and, therefore, will be met with outmost
enthusiasm.
Target audience characteristics
Variety of Technological skill
Full-time or adjunct
levels
faculty
Variety of educational
Time constraints
backgrounds
Variety of ages
Prior Blackboard training
Environmental Characteristics
The Blackboard training course will be offered online through the network of Lord
Fairfax Community College. It will become a requirement for all of faculty to complete the
training prior to the beginning of the school year.
Persona Descriptions
Gary Grey
Age: 48
Job: Adjunct professor in Biology
Sam Smith
Age: 65
Job: Full-time Chemistry professor
4. Instructional Goal
New faculty adjunct instructors at Lord Fairfax Community College (LFCC) will understand
how to use Blackboard to ensure that their courses meet the LFCC Blackboard course
requirements. This will eliminate confusion, and allow new faculty instructors to be trained on
select Blackboard functionalities prior to teaching their courses.
5. Content Analysis
Behaviors/Content:
Use of computer
Use of Blackboard
Ability to convert document formats (from doc. to .pdf)
Technology Skills
Need to Know
Internet use-Navigation of
MyLFCC site to locate
Blackboard
Document conversion- Turning
word documents to .pdf
(Syllabi)
Posting to Blackboard announcements, syllabi,
instructor contact information,
and office hours create
Managing navigation linksCreating links for course,
making them viewable to
students, arranging them in
navigation, deleting unused
Nice To Know
Other Blackboard
functionalities such as:
Adding other
content to the
course (Course
Documents and
Assignments area)
Setting up Help &
Support links
Setting up a
Research tab hat
links to online
library resources.
Adding a Course
Evaluation link
links
Course management- making
course available by the first
day, making course unavailable
at the end of semester
Evaluation Task
Blackboard tracking statistics will show
if professors have logged in or not.
8. Evaluation Plan
Werner and DeSimone (2012), define evaluation, as it related to HRD, as the systemic
collection of descriptive and judgmental information necessary to make effective training
decisions related to the selection adoption, value, and modification of various instructional
activities, (Werner and DeSimone, 2012, p. 202). Whenever training, or another instructional
initiative is taken, it is imperative that it is evaluated to determine its usefulness, efficiency, and
in some cases, return on investment. As training initiatives vary, so do the models and
frameworks used to evaluate them. The most popular framework for evaluation was designed by
Donald Kirkpatrick and consists of four levels. In the following section, each section of
Kirkpatricks framework will be explained along with how it will be utilized for the Lord Fairfax
Blackboard Training modules.
Level 1: Reaction
In the first level of Kirkpatricks framework, the learners reaction is evaluated. Also
known as the smile test, learners are often asked if they liked the training and felt it was
valuable. To evaluate the learners reaction in the LFCC Blackboard modules, a survey was
created in Blackboard and Google Docs. The link for the survey is included, as well as a printout
attached in the appendix. The purpose of the survey was to receive feedback from learners on the
overall training module, its length, and its effectiveness.
Link to Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1zTbkn9sBSb4IfRK2VN6CEJVYrS84yz_NecqNLbcwgQ/viewform?usp=send_form
Level 2: Learning
10
The second level of Kirkpatricks framework deals with the actual learning that took place.
Training contains specific objectives and this level of evaluation asks the learner if theyve
acquired any new knowledge or skill as a result of training. To evaluate at this level, learners are
given a 5-question quiz that tests their skill upon completion of the video in each section of the
LFCC training module. The quizzes can be taken multiple times to ensure the learner has
complete mastery of the content presented in the training. Screenshots of each quiz are provided
in the following section.
Quiz Screenshots:
Level 3: Behavior
11
12
The third level of Kirkpatricks framework evaluates the learners behavior. If the
training is effective, and the learner acquires new skills or knowledge, this level of evaluation
serves to see if transfer occurs. If transfer occurs, the learners work is improved and the
performance gap that existed before training was implemented no longer exists. To evaluate this
level, a survey will be administered to the learners 6 months after the initial implementation of
training. Another way this could be evaluated would be to interview Dr. Kellison to see if any
new issuessuch as complaints from faculty regarding use of blackboard, or complaints from
students not being able to access course information on blackboardhave arisen at LFCC.
Level 4: Results
The fourth level of Kirkpatricks evaluation looks at the results. This level seeks to find
out the tangible outcomes that have come as a result of the training. Some examples of these
outcomes are increased production, reduced costs, or increased effectiveness of the organization.
The information collected from this level of evaluation often benefits the larger organization by
giving them evidence as to whether the training initiative was worth implementing. This level is
the hardest of the 4 to assess. To evaluate LFCC at this level, a survey could be administered to
students on their ability to access blackboard course information.
13
9. Instructional Guide
Uploading Syllabi in PDF format to Blackboard
Faculty will log into the Blackboard learning
management system with their specific
username and password.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
For our project, our subject matter experts are Dr. Karen Kellison and Erica Filep, ATC.
Since Erica created the Blackboard course for our project, she cannot act as an evaluator because
she created the content. Dr. Kellisons comments about the training module were that the training
objectives PowerPoint Show should be deleted. Her concerns were that the redundancies of the
objectives appearing in the main module and the information section were unnecessary. With her
recommendations, we deleted the objectives PowerPoint Show. Dr. Wilcox also noted that our
videos were too fast and did not match the narration. We re-recorded the screencast to align each
narration to the specific training module.
Instructional Design Expert Review
In this section of the feedback journal, our group handed out the pre-made Prototype Peer
Review form made by Dr. Wilcox. One of our peers from class, Amanda Leech, volunteered to
peer-review our Blackboard Training Module. Overall, she said our module meets all of the
criteria listed in the review form. The one major issue coming from her point of view was the
volume of the narrations in the video tutorials. This can be easily remedied in the editing process
and re-tested to check the volume levels of the narration. We went back into GarageBand,
iMovie and Windows Movie Maker to adjust the levels of the narration.
Beta Testing
Our group chose to beta test our training module with 7 people from class. These people
were selected after they responded to an interest email sent out to all students in the course. 4 out
of 7 peers returned the forms. The comments stemming from the beta test were similar to
Amanda Leechs concerns following her review. Each review stated that the volume level needs
to be adjusted in the video tutorials regarding the narration. Some other comments from the beta
27
test include the professional appearance of the module and ease of navigation. Again, we
adjusted the volume of the narrations after the feedback journal was collected. The videos have
been put back on YouTube with the pacing corrected and the volume levels adjusted.
28
References
Gagn, R. M. (1972). Domains of learning. Interchange, 3(1), 1-8.
Schunk, D. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson
Higher Ed.
Werner, J. & DeSimone, R. (2012). Human resource development. Mason, OH Andover: SouthWestern Cengage Learning Distributor.