I have to admit that I am always a little sceptical about content, and try (as much as I can) to try and check sources, and generally learn about/validate the content I am sent. Do you see this as part of your role as an Instructional Designer?
I always question content and ask for the "official" documentation from the organization. Too often you get information that is littered with the SMEs opinion on the way things should be vs. what they really are. Not that this information isn't important, but it can be the cause of misinformation.
One is when the standard operating procedures of a piece of equipment don 't match up with the manufacturer's manual. In this situation I get someone with the proper authority (Director, Engineer, VP) to sign off that the operation doesn't comply with the manual and that the company's procedures are safe and reasonable.
The second is when practices don't comply with Health and Safety regulations. This Ione I go to the safety department and to senior management about. Practices that don't comply with OHS/OSHA are a serious matter and must change.
When I worked within the Defence sector, I always cross-referenced my SME input with the technical pubs, but it was more of a verification process. However, unless the client is paying me to vet their SME's content with additional research, I take the SME content for what it's worth, even if it seems questionable, and rely on the SME picking up their mistakes in the initial review.
I have some very strong opinions about this topic but the short version is that I always vet everything and often rewrite it as well. I never work under the assumption that I am being told the right stuff.
I will revise for grammar and basic English, but I won't change the meaning of any of the content. Mistyping a torquing value for an aircraft maintenance course could mean life or death, so unless specifically asked, I definitely exercise my right to copy/paste SME provided content.
I've run into SME's who don't follow the torque values. "This is the way we have always done it", type attitude. I've also had SME's, and entire departments, misuse air monitors, putting people at risk. At the time I was developing training while working within the safety department so I had to make sure that people were doing things safely, and we were trying to change the safety culture of the company.
Lots of great discussion here. In your post, Bruce, you call into question the primary colors. And the answer is - it depends:) Red, blue, and yellow are primary for additive applications. Cyan, magenta, and yellow (most of the time it's CMYK, with black) is for subtractive applications. This means that each color will subtract from white on the print medium.
So both answers are right, though RBY is more typical in traditional applications (paint, for example). Been around a lot longer than CMY.
I like to validate stuff through multiple sources, especially if it's setting off my this doesn't make sense(s). Most of the time the SMEs I've dealt with know their stuff. Sometimes too well. It helps to ask clarifying questions - to "why the crap out of it" and to validate the answer.
I stand corrected, and hoisted by my own proverbial petard!
So, basically, I made a post/blog article about some things not being factually correct before checking that my facts were, in fact, factually correct. They appear to be incorrect. I think.
I am now going to lie down for a rest.., (but I still recommend checking content!)
9 Replies
I always question content and ask for the "official" documentation from the organization. Too often you get information that is littered with the SMEs opinion on the way things should be vs. what they really are. Not that this information isn't important, but it can be the cause of misinformation.
I've seen a couple of things that make me pause.
One is when the standard operating procedures of a piece of equipment don 't match up with the manufacturer's manual. In this situation I get someone with the proper authority (Director, Engineer, VP) to sign off that the operation doesn't comply with the manual and that the company's procedures are safe and reasonable.
The second is when practices don't comply with Health and Safety regulations. This Ione I go to the safety department and to senior management about. Practices that don't comply with OHS/OSHA are a serious matter and must change.
When I worked within the Defence sector, I always cross-referenced my SME input with the technical pubs, but it was more of a verification process. However, unless the client is paying me to vet their SME's content with additional research, I take the SME content for what it's worth, even if it seems questionable, and rely on the SME picking up their mistakes in the initial review.
I have some very strong opinions about this topic but the short version is that I always vet everything and often rewrite it as well. I never work under the assumption that I am being told the right stuff.
I will revise for grammar and basic English, but I won't change the meaning of any of the content. Mistyping a torquing value for an aircraft maintenance course could mean life or death, so unless specifically asked, I definitely exercise my right to copy/paste SME provided content.
I've run into SME's who don't follow the torque values. "This is the way we have always done it", type attitude. I've also had SME's, and entire departments, misuse air monitors, putting people at risk. At the time I was developing training while working within the safety department so I had to make sure that people were doing things safely, and we were trying to change the safety culture of the company.
Lots of great discussion here. In your post, Bruce, you call into question the primary colors. And the answer is - it depends:) Red, blue, and yellow are primary for additive applications. Cyan, magenta, and yellow (most of the time it's CMYK, with black) is for subtractive applications. This means that each color will subtract from white on the print medium.
So both answers are right, though RBY is more typical in traditional applications (paint, for example). Been around a lot longer than CMY.
I like to validate stuff through multiple sources, especially if it's setting off my this doesn't make sense(s). Most of the time the SMEs I've dealt with know their stuff. Sometimes too well. It helps to ask clarifying questions - to "why the crap out of it" and to validate the answer.
Steve :)
I stand corrected, and hoisted by my own proverbial petard!
So, basically, I made a post/blog article about some things not being factually correct before checking that my facts were, in fact, factually correct. They appear to be incorrect. I think.
I am now going to lie down for a rest.., (but I still recommend checking content!)
Thanks for clarifying Matthew. Your approach makes sense to me.
This discussion is closed. You can start a new discussion or contact Articulate Support.