Forum Discussion
Microsoft Copilot
Especially since the concepts of "needs analysis," "audience analysis," "functional requirements," and "instructional design" are SO overrated. Any schmoe with half a brain and the latest version of PowerPoint can crank out eLearning courses by the HUNDREDS, on par with or superior to the well-thought and well-crafted courses already out there, which were created the "old" way.
Loved your post!
We try to avoid Powerpoint conversions (a.k.a. content dumps) where I work.
I don't see how AI can create custom SL projects that require more than just regurgitating phrases from a PPT dump with multiple choice questions as a test. Perhaps more people should look at what Allen Interactions does and/or Cathy Moore's "Action Mapping" so they can learn about other approaches.I was working with Michael Allen's team in the 90s when they were still calling SAM "rapid prototyping" and we were developing courses in Macromedia Authorware. Back then, clients wanted to be able to dump classroom content straight to CD-ROM. Nevermind the interactive element, specifically the teacher INTERACTING with the learners, didn't translate. Michael focused on what the learner needed to be able to do, not know, to be successful.
Regurgitating facts and figures, answering True/False, Multiple-Guess and Fill-In-The-Blank assessments, or sitting through scores of slides packed with 10-point text, horrible clip art, and a droning narration track surprisingly didn't count. Demonstrating proficiency at a task meant performing (aka doing) the actual task or a reasonable facsimile.
Cathy Moore and Kinection put together an outstanding example of performance-based learning for the U.S. Army titled Connect with Haji Kamal. The goal was to help soldiers deploying to foreign countries develop the critical cultural skills that they need to better achieve their missions. Did Cathy Moore and Kinection rely on full-motion video, 24-bit graphics, CD-quality sound, VR, or Hollywood-level special effects? "No" to all of those. They used a flat, graphic-novel format of sepia-toned grayscale images, no animation, and simple narration. The power lay in how the learner interacted with the characters, and the repercussions of his/her actions.
I've seen that project. It's timeless.
Two other people working along the same lines are Kimberly Goh (some excellent information here: Kimberly Goh - YouTube) and Anna Sabramowicz. When I watched Kimberly's videos I also found the interview with Anna on interactive storytelling.
There's always more to learn, just not enough time.
I think people are missing the point. At my company we build interactive, interesting and visual courses for clients. But when clients get their hands on Copilot they will see the cost saving; why pay a company this much money to build you a course when we can do it internally for a fraction?
I feel like a lot of people in the eLearning industry seem to think we are in this perfect world where everyone wants this well thought out, well designed eLearning course.
I would love this, as I prefer making good stuff. I am well trained in eLearning course development and have been doing it for 12 years, I don't need to be taught how to such eggs.
It. Just. Isn't. This. Way.
Most clients look at cost first, pure and simple, and if you disagree, you haven't worked with enough clients.I have worked with enough clients, for some cost is the driver, for others the behaviour change is seen as the driver and cost is secondary, as the behaviour change should save money/time.
I have seen many tools appear Gomo, Elucidate, rise where companies think they can do it internally, but they often then end up employing external companies because they do not have the instructional design skills.
I would love to see some AI design tool and workflow improvements, don't see copilot as a threat.
