I am working with a particularly difficulty client. I have a PPT slide with two lists on it. The Six Principles of Depression Care and the Four Pillars of Depression Care. There are no speaker notes and no additional content. Initially, they wanted the lists to appear as is. Now, I have a request to "make it interactive." None of the pre-built interactions in Storyline seem appropriate.
Do you have any suggestions? I cannot come up with anything.
Have you ever seen Tom Kuhlmann's version of Dump the Drone? Tom used great content from Cathy Moore to demonstrate some standard bullet point alternatives.
If there is no additional content to each point I think it's fair to ask the client if they just want the user to click more frequently OR if they are actually interested in an interactive learning experience, some additional content will be needed. Perhaps that request would make the client less interested in clicking for clicking's sake.
Thanks, Natalia. I have explained that any interactivity would be purely for the sake of making them click and would not be meaningful. They don't care. LOL
If the original slide had the two lists side-by-side, was it done that way to compare them, or was it done to fill up the page? If it's the former, then maybe a drag-and-drop exercise where you have a pile of statements that the student has to sort between the two types: Principles and Pillars.
If it's the latter, then maybe create a visual scene(s) with hot spots over areas that illustrate the various points. Do the pillars support the principles? Then maybe a graphic with a bottom and top section. Check out the "Learning Map" example (towards the bottom right) from this Periodic Table of Visualizations. http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html
James, when you click the link, go to the address bar and remove the %20 at the end and then the link will work.
I love the Learning Map example, in fact that whole page was great, thank you, Minh-Triet!
Helen, thank you for the example. As soon as I am at my desk, I will check it out.
Personally, I don't think this is appropriate for interactivity of any kind. It seems to be a case of making them click for the sake of making them click and really serves no purpose. But, sometimes you have to do what the client wants even if you don't like it.
James, when you click the link, go to the address bar and remove the %20 at the end and then the link will work.
I love the Learning Map example, in fact that whole page was great, thank you, Minh-Triet!
Helen, thank you for the example. As soon as I am at my desk, I will check it out.
Personally, I don't think this is appropriate for interactivity of any kind. It seems to be a case of making them click for the sake of making them click and really serves no purpose. But, sometimes you have to do what the client wants even if you don't like it.
I had a look at Helen's example and do not see any problem with it. It is simplistic but it chunks information into manageable portions, it allows the user to progress at their own pace, ensures that they are not overwhelmed with information at the offset and also gives the user the feeling that they have some semblance of control.
Thanks, Natalia. I have explained that any interactivity would be purely for the sake of making them click and would not be meaningful. They don't care. LOL
Alex,
I think that you may be being a little "precious" about the word, and purpose of interactivity.
I work with some clients who think that pressing a "Next" button on a screen is "interactive" - believe me, they think that (compared to their current crop of corporate blah blah) that any movement is interesting. Simple animations (which similarly perhaps in your interpretation...?) serve no real "purpose" have won them a major learning award in their industry.
I do appreciate the whole "click to make them click..." debate, however...
Agreed - Helen's example would make perfect sense with extra content, (an explanatory v/o or titles that chunked the content), but your job/our job is to advise them, listen to them, and then if they disagree - often just do what they want.
It hurts sometimes as an ID to have to do this, but in a pragmatic world - sometimes simplicity is completely correct.
@ Helen - I hope you did not take my comment to Alex as a comment on your example. I was just agreeing with the idea that clicking for the sake of clicking might not be the best idea because it slows the learner down. But having said that I add this type of "interactivity" into my stuff all the time because - like Bruce says - people seem to like it.
I also agree with Phil in that this type of interactivity is a good way to chunk information into logical groups and it allows the learner to pick what they want to review.
10 Replies
Hi Alex!
Have you ever seen Tom Kuhlmann's version of Dump the Drone? Tom used great content from Cathy Moore to demonstrate some standard bullet point alternatives.
If there is no additional content to each point I think it's fair to ask the client if they just want the user to click more frequently OR if they are actually interested in an interactive learning experience, some additional content will be needed. Perhaps that request would make the client less interested in clicking for clicking's sake.
Thanks, Natalia. I have explained that any interactivity would be purely for the sake of making them click and would not be meaningful. They don't care. LOL
I would be really interested to see that presentation, Natalia, but the link posted doesn't seem to work.
I can only find Cathy's original version online.
If the original slide had the two lists side-by-side, was it done that way to compare them, or was it done to fill up the page? If it's the former, then maybe a drag-and-drop exercise where you have a pile of statements that the student has to sort between the two types: Principles and Pillars.
If it's the latter, then maybe create a visual scene(s) with hot spots over areas that illustrate the various points. Do the pillars support the principles? Then maybe a graphic with a bottom and top section. Check out the "Learning Map" example (towards the bottom right) from this Periodic Table of Visualizations. http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html
Hi Alex
The example is a bit rough and ready but how about this as an idea:
Regards
Helen
James, when you click the link, go to the address bar and remove the %20 at the end and then the link will work.
I love the Learning Map example, in fact that whole page was great, thank you, Minh-Triet!
Helen, thank you for the example. As soon as I am at my desk, I will check it out.
Personally, I don't think this is appropriate for interactivity of any kind. It seems to be a case of making them click for the sake of making them click and really serves no purpose. But, sometimes you have to do what the client wants even if you don't like it.
I really appreciate everyone's help!
Alex, you are right about this.
I had a look at Helen's example and do not see any problem with it. It is simplistic but it chunks information into manageable portions, it allows the user to progress at their own pace, ensures that they are not overwhelmed with information at the offset and also gives the user the feeling that they have some semblance of control.
Alex,
I think that you may be being a little "precious" about the word, and purpose of interactivity.
I work with some clients who think that pressing a "Next" button on a screen is "interactive" - believe me, they think that (compared to their current crop of corporate blah blah) that any movement is interesting. Simple animations (which similarly perhaps in your interpretation...?) serve no real "purpose" have won them a major learning award in their industry.
I do appreciate the whole "click to make them click..." debate, however...
Agreed - Helen's example would make perfect sense with extra content, (an explanatory v/o or titles that chunked the content), but your job/our job is to advise them, listen to them, and then if they disagree - often just do what they want.
It hurts sometimes as an ID to have to do this, but in a pragmatic world - sometimes simplicity is completely correct.
Bruce
@ Helen - I hope you did not take my comment to Alex as a comment on your example. I was just agreeing with the idea that clicking for the sake of clicking might not be the best idea because it slows the learner down. But having said that I add this type of "interactivity" into my stuff all the time because - like Bruce says - people seem to like it.
I also agree with Phil in that this type of interactivity is a good way to chunk information into logical groups and it allows the learner to pick what they want to review.
This discussion is closed. You can start a new discussion or contact Articulate Support.