Forum Discussion
Are We Designing for Learning or Just Adding More Clicks? ๐ค
I've been thinking a lot lately about how we approach interactivity in e-learning, especially with all the amazing tools and features available to us in Rise and Storyline.
As instructional designers, we have so many creative ways to engage learners, but I sometimes wonder if we're making things interactive because they genuinely support learning or simply because we can.
For me, the goal has always been to move beyond presenting information and create experiences that help learners actually apply what they've learned. Sometimes that means a scenario, a decision-making activity, or an opportunity to practice (I would love to hear ideas about how you do this one). I'd love to hear how others approach this.
What's your personal rule of thumb for deciding whether an interaction truly adds value to a learning experience?
And even better, have you ever removed or simplified an interaction and found that the learning experience actually improved? I'd love to hear your experiences, examples, and lessons learned. One of my favorite things about this community is how much we can learn from each other's approaches!
2 Replies
I explored this idea in my post on ๐๐ฒ๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐๐ ๐ก๐ผ๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฏ๐ผ๐๐ ๐๐ผ๐ป๐๐ฒ๐ป๐, ๐ฏ๐๐ ๐๐ฏ๐ผ๐๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ป๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐๐ ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ.
My rule of thumb is this: Does the interaction turn the user into a learner by engaging their brain in meaningful thinking?
For me, meaningful interaction should help learners:
- Understand concepts more deeply
- Retain what they have learned
- Apply that knowledge in real work situations
And the design thinking doesn't stop once we decide an interaction is needed. Even when choosing between interaction types, I consider what kind of thinking I want learners to engage in and which interaction best supports it.
For example, a click and a drag-and-drop activity may serve very different purposes depending on the cognitive process we want to support. The choice isn't about making the course more interactive. It's about designing the right experience for the intended learning.
It's not about adding more interactions. It's about creating opportunities for meaningful thinking and learning.
Dr. Michael Allen once said something like this:
Alternate navigation is not interaction.
In other words, someone clicking the screen just to reveal additional text isn't an interaction. It's still a one-way information transfer.
A true interaction involves the 3 Cs: a context (here's a situation), a challenge (what would you do at this point?), and a consequence (feedback based on the choice). As you mentioned, this includes scenarios, decision-making activities, and any other ways to practice what the learner needs to be able to do.
Of course, most folks do refer to click-and-tells as interactions. And I think those are still useful, because they can help divide the info into more easily digestible chunks and/or indicate connections.
I think one thing that gets overlooked when building any kind of "interaction" is what happens when the user revisits/reviews the content. For example, I've seen elaborate slides with layers connecting to other layers yet with no way to return to the info on a previous layer. That kind of interaction definitely needs simplification.
