Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Final Project: Learning Module

Keith C. Quarles
EDU649: Technologies for Teaching & Learning (MKI529DS)
Dr. Dusty Clark \
08-24-2015

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Audience and Lesson

The users/audience now consists of the EDU 649 class members and Ashford University
in addition to the original users-the business associates. Because the research into Web 2.0 has
taken on new meaning in light of the extension of knowledge garnered from the course, the
previous 3 assignments will be incorporated along with the next learning activity to create a
practice/training module that will be copyrighted as a training manual on how to use Web 2.0 for
business training. Paul, T.V. (2014) stated, Andrews (2011) reviewed educational theories
relating to e-leaming, and Rao (2011) examined e-learning use globally in a phenomenological
study that surveyed e-learning and corporate training experts worldwide p.1). Thus, the next
assignment for the business associates will be designated as Final Project: Training Manual.
The audience which includes members of the EDU 649 course is taken from a discrete
population from which we will collect random samples of information. The EDU 649 audience
consists of graduate students and the four business associates a collegiate level with some
professional experience. All users/audiences are presumed to be computer literate and not
requiring the accommodation of assistive technology at the current time.
The lesson being taught involves directives that are pertinent to creating the training
manual. The directives include research, literature review, documentation, revision and
rewriting. The final product (manual) will be presented through Blogger with Adobe creative
software for graphic representation. You Tube will be researched for information on how to
create a training manual using Microsoft PowerPoint and Writing Objectively: Step-by-step
instructions followed by the grading rubric for the Final Project are available on the front page
of the Pb Works website at
http://edu651web20collaborations.pbworks.com/w/page/96903831/FrontPage.

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Purpose and Learning Objectives

The purpose of the Final Project learning activity is to provide real world connections
to the absorb-do activities in training modules one through four which was conceived as a
cooperative learning effort by instructor/learners primarily through the PbWorks website.
Specific learning objectives include the following:
1. After reviewing training modules 1-4 students will evaluate underlying concepts from modules
in order to create a Power Point presentation using Adobe Creative Suite software for
graphic/visual effects within a 20-slide business training manual production.
2: Learners will demonstrate ability to research Y0u Tube in order to research information
pertaining to the importance of literature review in instruction design and summarize findings
using Microsoft Office 2010 to create a 2 page paper in APA 6th format.
3. Learners will learn to objectively evaluate content through literature review and cooperative
learning in order to create business training manual from training modules 1-4 and refer to
objectiveness in special notes section in a t least 10 slides of Power Point presentation..
In the current learning activity (Final Project) technology is integrated in order to
promote collaboration and 21 century learning. Dennison, H. A. (2011) stated computerassisted learning has the potential to provide an effec-tive and safe learning environment that
offers the opportunity for non-expert nephrology nurses to increase their knowledge about a
particular problem and learn how to think criti-cally about the problem and its management(p.1) The use of the Web 2.0 technology has made it easier to network with peers and
associates in order to research/communicate/organize/evaluate the methods of training of the

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

business associates while allowing input from the learners in decision-making process on what
criteria is relevant to the purpose of the study..
Instructional Methods Rationale and Support
The collaborative learning and problem solving instructional methods proved to be
efficient for attacking the business problem. The collaborative learning takes place in cyberspace
with the aid of Web 2.0 tools. Throughout training modules (1-4) various form of technological
tools were at the crux of the assignments and presentation. The assessment of the learning
environment was characterized by a need for distance learning. Thus, online software from the
Web 2.0 platform such as Pb Works, Skype, Blogger, etc. was employed to meet the distance
learning needs. Newby and Stepich (2011) state, to fully participate in this world,
students need to be able to analyze problems, form tentative hypotheses,
collect and interpret data, and develop some type of logical approach to
solving the problem (p.110). The two instructional methods were somewhat interactive
as the collaboration was implemented in order to solve a business problem that involved the
learners.
The cooperative learning and problem-solving methods connected at the point where the
decision was made to document the instruction in a training manual. The idea was conceived
after training modules reflected a flow of progress towards the inaugural objective/purposetraining business associates with Web 2.0 tools. Chun Wah M., Eastwood, A. (2012) states, to
better prepare our learners, we decided to develop web-based learning modules. Compared to
traditional modalities, e-learning activities are easier to distribute, standardise and update. They
can encourage independent and active learning, and offer access flexibility (McKimm et al.
2003; Ruiz et al. 2006) to clinically based learners (p.1). In some cases, when one problem is

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

solved another develops; consequently, flexibility must be a condition governing the choice/array
of technological tools assembled for the project. Shimrit, Keith, and Dotsika (2014) state, in
employing a combination of user stories, a shared understanding of the different characteristics
of Web 2.0 technologies, and a shared understanding of the types of materials that were likely to
be shared, the firm was therefore able to ensure that the correct Web 2.0 tool was being utilised
dependent on the behaviour that the firm was seeking to encourage and the type of knowledge
being shared and/or created (p.1) .As an instruction designer, the encounter with the training of
the business associates to use Web 2.0 led to the question of which Web 2.0 technology to
employ. After collaboration by the business associates through Email, Skype and WikiSpaces,
PbWorks was chosen as the primary website for documenting information. Chun Wah M.,
Eastwood, A. (2012) states, the course consisting of five multimedia-rich, tutorial-like modules
was built without IT specialist assistance or specialised software. The web 2.0 services used were
free. The course can be accessed with a modern web browser (p.1079). Thus, the problem of
communicating over distance was resolved through cooperative learning (collaboration) by
virtue of the Web 2.0 tools that were inexpensive/free and easily accessible through the Internet.
Newby and Stepich (2011) state, the central idea is that cooperation and
interaction allow students to learn from several sources, not just the teacher,
while also providing each student opportunities to share their own abilities
and knowledge (p.408). Thus, cooperative learning is asserted to be an
efficient method of teacher/student collaboration which is exemplified
through the PbWorks web site created by the instructor and business
associates collectively.

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Evaluation Rubric Criteria

The assessment or evaluation rubric for the learner presentation of the business training
manual consists of 3 Criteria: and 3 Performance levels. Accuracy was chosen because the
strict liability for claims resulting from the commercialization of the training manual which
serves to connect learners with real world application that reflect on training and evaluating
initiatives of the project; thus, all authors of researched materials are evaluated for authenticity,
credibility and peer-review. Creativity was chosen because the learners must be able to create
interesting, informative and professional presentations with the use of technological tools that
create innovative disruption within the parameters of the learning objectives. Objectivity was
chosen because the topic of using Web 2.0 technology is broad and time-consuming research that
may be streamlined if tone of the content reflects the pursuit of learning objectives on a factual
basis. Objectives are clearly stated each learning activity and followed throughout the course of
creating the training manual in alignment with the purpose of its creation; thus, rendering an
unbiased, accurate and informative finished product (deliverable)-the training manual.
Accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency and coverage are described as questionable aspects
of literature reviewed. (Cornell University, 2010). Objectivity and Accuracy are the two aspects
that are stressed in this learning activity. Creativity is an added criterion for evaluation due to the
need to grade learners on multimedia/graphic/visual representation throughout the training
manual. Furthermore, the evaluation of the learners progress is aligned with the objectives of
the learning activity through a Grading Rubric table located at the bottom of the front page
at PbWorks site:

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

http://edu651web20collaborations.pbworks.com/w/page/96903831/FrontPage.for details of the

evaluation criteria.
References
Chun Wah M., Eastwood, A. (2012). Available, intuitive and free! Building elearning modules using web 2.0 services. Medical Teacher, 34(12), 1078-1080.
doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.731105 http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxylibrary.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5ff27a63-a056-4343-a369423148de35c
Cornell University Library (2010). Evaluating Web Pages: Questions to Consider: Categories
Retrieved
from http://guides.library.cornell.edu/c.php?g=32334&p=203767&preview=ad0bac
0490cf7ab0653096fe3b4a0fee
a%40sessionmgr111&vid=6&hid=112 2012; 34: 10781080
Dennison, H. A. (2011). Creating a computer-assisted learning module for the non-expert
nephrology nurse. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 38(1), 41-53
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
sid=5ff27a63-a056-4343-a369- %40sessionmgr111&vid=8&hid=112
Newby, T. J., Stepich, D. A., Lehman, J. D., Russell, J. D., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2011).
Educational technology for teaching and learning (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson
Education, Inc.

Running head: FINAL PROJECT

Paul, T. V. (2014). An evaluation of the effectiveness of E-learning, mobile learning, and I

nstructor-led training in organizational training and development. The Journal of
Human Resource and Adult Learning, 10(2), 1-13. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1658777488?accountid=32521
Shimrit, H. J., Keith, P., & Dotsika, F. (2014). Implementing a social intranet in a professional
services environment through web 2.0 technologies. The Learning Organization, 21(1),
26- doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TLO-11-2012-0068 http://search.proquest.com.proxylibrary.ashford.edu/docview/1476453770?accountid=32521