I'm creating a program to check learner's knowledge for using a website - I have 5 sections/topcs.
The general idea behind the storyline is that the learner is the "expert" and their job is to mentor a new user in using the tool to prove their expertise. That being said, I'm not sure if they should be "mentoring" 1 person throughout the entire course, or if it would be more interesting for them to mentor a different learner per section.
You know best on this. My thought is that it really depends. If the tool has things that it is important for EVERY person in the job to know, then allowing them to "form" a relationship with one character is a good thing. But, there might be things that would be more relevant to one character than another. In those cases, of course, introducing a new character is fine. If you have the development time, its always a fun thing to allow the user to CHOOSE the character as well
Oooooh choosing a character to follow... I like the sound of that. Given the time (and resources) for development, that's not going to happen this time around...but I like that idea...
I've done these both ways. One reason to select a different character is the ability to authentically traverse an expertise gradient or present a different set of skill challenges. Each scenario is short so it allows for focused and relevant association. I'd agree with Robert, though. It really does depend. If you're talking about different sets of complexity or task focus, multiple characters (though I never use more than 2 focal characters at a time) makes alot more sense.
3 Replies
You know best on this. My thought is that it really depends. If the tool has things that it is important for EVERY person in the job to know, then allowing them to "form" a relationship with one character is a good thing. But, there might be things that would be more relevant to one character than another. In those cases, of course, introducing a new character is fine. If you have the development time, its always a fun thing to allow the user to CHOOSE the character as well
Oooooh choosing a character to follow... I like the sound of that. Given the time (and resources) for development, that's not going to happen this time around...but I like that idea...
I've done these both ways. One reason to select a different character is the ability to authentically traverse an expertise gradient or present a different set of skill challenges. Each scenario is short so it allows for focused and relevant association. I'd agree with Robert, though. It really does depend. If you're talking about different sets of complexity or task focus, multiple characters (though I never use more than 2 focal characters at a time) makes alot more sense.
This discussion is closed. You can start a new discussion or contact Articulate Support.