Capstone Analysis: HPL Field Studies Reimagined

This is a collaborative capstone analysis document by Jessica, Priyanka, and Yezi. Each of us assumed various roles including researchers and designers, and at each step of the process, we made decisions collaboratively.

Introduction

Our team worked on a project to reimagine and redesign the Field Studies in HPL (How People Learn). More specifically, we identified key aspects of the field studies that could be improved upon based on feedback from multiple stakeholders including TFs, students, and the HPL learning design team. Our time analyzing learner feedback directed our attention to three key places of change: improved interactivity, structure and onboarding of learners to field studies, and scaffolding learners to reflect and connect learning concepts to the field studies. Despite there being a time gap between when students took the course and our interviews, there are still broader themes across learner experiences that provided enough information for us to determine the three aspects that we wanted to reimagine in our design.

Objectives

In this design analysis, we want to walk through our design process and the various learning theories we looked at to help guide our decision-making process. We also reflect on what we learned from this process overall.

Design Overview

Our design process followed the ADDIE model (Kurt, S., 2018 (see Figure 1)). We began with an in-depth analysis of student interaction data with the course’s field studies supplemented by interviews with students, teaching fellows for the course, and the HPL learning design team. This step was crucial in helping us pinpoint themes across different learner personas. In the design stage, we focused on increasing interactivity to scaffold the connection between the “learning sequence” and the field study for the module. We also drafted example reflection questions that could be implemented throughout the mock-up of the field study in Articulate 360. Lastly, we reimagined the Canvas dashboard to provide a more seamless transition between learning sequence units and the field study by creating a new user interface that does not linearly display content. The user flow was also adjusted to fit this change to better orient users to how they should navigate the new dashboard - providing suggested learning pathways but also highlighting the various tools that are embedded within the page that learners should make use of.

Figure 1. ADDIE Model Description

The context - A statement of audience and approach.

How People Learn (HPL) is the first course taken by graduate students at HGSE and is an 8-week self-paced module that serves as a foundation for basic theoretical concepts of learning, development, and learning design. The Field Studies provided examples of real-world educational initiatives that bring to life the concepts learned in that module - asking students to connect the course concepts to existing initiatives to produce a document of recommendations in their problem of practice (PoP) assignment. This course happens before students move to campus, which means they are juggling multiple things at once. This context is extremely important in the design choices that we make for our redesign.

We first start by taking an overview of the course's audience. Given the ratio of international students at HGSE, students may not possess a comprehensive understanding of the US education context, its ecosystem, or the overall values and mission. Thus, it is important to remember that what is obvious to US-based students may not be applied to the greater incoming HGSE student population for HPL. Moreover, for many students, this might be their first experience with a graduate-level class or a US-styled course. Considering these factors, it is crucial for us to not only concentrate on the design within the course but also contemplate how it will influence their overall experience at HGSE.

The audience was a key part of our redesign, as we spent the majority of our time on user analysis. We interacted with current and past students, HPL Teaching Fellows, TLL Learning Designers, and Content Developers to better understand their experience interacting with HPL Field Studies. Given below is a summary of the key findings from user interviews/surveys and focus groups. These interviews provided us with a more nuanced understanding of learner experiences as we went on to plan the key elements of this redesign.

Exhibit A. Interview/Focus group themes

Design Decisions

The user analysis gave us a clear picture of the strengths, areas of development, and constraints concerning the current design. One of the key strengths of this design was the existing content, which was detailed and covered the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in the field study. Although there were various possible focus areas, we had to factor in some of the design constraints faced by the learning designer as well as the time available. We had to ensure that learners received the same amount of information to effectively tackle to Problem of Practice (PoP) and the redesign aimed to improve the existing content, enabling learners to effectively utilize the provided information. Based on this, the redesign of HPL Field Studies focuses on the following three key aspects:

a. Interactivity

How do we allow learners to interact with and engage with the content meaningfully? Without changing the amount of information, how do we increase opportunities for interactivity given the amount of text and information?

Design Solution:

Interactive content: To keep students engaged, we have incorporated interactive elements alongside the content of field studies using Articulate 360.

Reflection Questions and Checks for Understanding: To facilitate a more meaningful connection between student experience and content, we have designed reflection questions for each essential section within the field studies.

b. Onboarding Experience

How do we make the field study onboarding process clear and create more flexibility in the overall module structure?

Design Solutions:

Module Onboarding Video: To better orient students to the field study and the module in general, we used Synthesia.io to create a short 1-3 minute video that highlights the key learning objectives students are expected to understand by the end of the module and a suggested learning pathway for the module. The video also reminds students of the various interactive points that students can utilize to check their understanding and document their thinking in relation to themselves, the learning concepts, and the field study for their PoP assignment which is due at the end of the module.

Introduction to focus levels: One major theme from the interviews with students is confusion with the questions they are trying to answer for the PoP assignment. We attempt to mediate this by designing an interface that specifically focuses on the description of the different levels (learner, program, or system level) in which students can tackle the PoP assignment for the field study and their corresponding question(s). We add a reflection question (that they can return to) that captures their in-the-moment thinking when selecting a level.

c. Scaffolding

How do we create opportunities to help learners connect the field study to their own experience and concepts from the module?

Design Solutions:

Non-linear dashboard: Instead of ordering as a list, we redesigned the learning sequences in a non-linear manner - organizing sequences as cards in a quadrant manner. The dashboard is implemented on the landing page for every module of HPL which consists of the Module onboarding video, access to field studies, reflection journal, and PoP. Students will be able to design their own learning experiences by selecting the sequence they want to interact with. Recommended orders will be provided in case students need guidance on where to start.

Reflection questions: To facilitate a more meaningful connection between students and the content, we have designed reflection questions for each essential section within the field studies.

Design Elements

Module non-linear dashboard

Cognitive load theory states that the capacity of working memory is limited, and thus if several learning tasks require too much capacity, the learning process can be difficult (Chandler & Sweller, 1991). Cognitive load can be categorized into intrinsic cognitive load, extraneous cognitive load, and germane cognitive load. While the intrinsic cognitive load is related to the difficulty of the subject matter, extraneous cognitive load is caused by the complexity of instructional materials. The latter does not directly contribute to learning however it may be related to motivation and engagement. The original course has course content (field studies and learning modules) in the form of a list on a single page, creating challenges for students to navigate the course. Such designs increase the extraneous cognitive load for learners and make the learning process more challenging in an online environment. As a result, we decided to reimagine a non-linear dashboard that displays each learning sequence as a card in a quadrant format to enhance visualization and ease of access, thereby reducing extraneous cognitive load.

The decision to transform the list of learning sequences into a non-linear dashboard is also rooted in a constructionist framework. Constructionism emphasizes the active involvement of learners in the learning process, allowing them to construct their understanding of knowledge (Vygotsky). The original format, assuming a linear learning sequence, aligns more with behaviorism, where students passively follow a predetermined sequence based on assumed learner levels. However, recognizing the diverse backgrounds of HGSE students and acknowledging that individuals have their unique learning approaches, we opted to provide students with more agency in engaging with HPL learning content. Xie et. al’s research shows that more agency in an online learning environment can increase motivation - something students report struggling with throughout the 8 weeks due to a variety of reasons. We create the opportunity for them to make their own connections by viewing units in the order of their choice while also providing a suggested learning sequence to support students in navigating the module. This approach is grounded in cognitive theory, which emphasizes structuring and sequencing information to facilitate optimal processing.

Exhibit B. Non-linear dashboard mock-up using Figma

Introduction to Focus Levels

HPL introduces learners to the basic theoretical foundations of teaching and learning, and it does so by asking learners to analyze an authentic problem through a case study from the lens of different stakeholders within the problem ecosystem. Here, learners have the opportunity to choose between three levels of focus - Learner, Program, and System. In our conversation with learners, we realized that most students were unaware of the key questions in focus for each of these levels or had forgotten by the time they started working towards their PoP assignment, and hence unsure of how to go about picking the level of focus for their PoP. In the existing design, this information is lost due to the volume of text-based information provided and no opportunity to make connections between theory and the information presented in the field study.

Through our redesign, we have adopted a constructivist learning approach, where learners are encouraged to create meaning in the field studies to solve the problem of practice by making connections to their own experiences, learnings, and goals (Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J., 1993). We have implemented this as a video that is presented to learners once they have some context of the Field Study and compels them to choose the level of focus based on their prior experiences and future goals. Centered around the notion that “learning” is inseparable from “doing,” this framework was adopted so that learners could grasp the concepts and skills that are taught in the context in which they will be utilized (Brown et al., 1989; Collins et al., 1991).

Exhibit C. Snippet of the Introduction to Focus Levels Video

In the design of the video, we only present the key information on the screen, also known as signaling (Bandura, 1992). This is one of the principles of Mayer’s Principles of Multimedia Learning which helps to reduce extraneous cognitive load and enhances the germane load. (Walsh, Kelly., 2017) (Brame, C.J., 2015)

Exhibit D. Focus Levels Checkpoint

Reflection and Checks for Understanding

Reflection is another key component of our design, as the existing design provided learners with an enormous amount of information without opportunities for learners to critically engage with it, or draw their own perspectives into it. The current design provides learners with a chance to put down their reflections in an optional design journal at the end of the module. From the user research and our own experiences, we realized that most learners did not take advantage of this due to multiple constraints, thus our goal was to weave this throughout the field study.

In the redesign, we built in reflection questions relevant to the topic of the field study along with checks for understanding. These questions also scaffold their reflections as they go through the field study, towards the concepts in the module, and finally to the Problem of Practice (PoP). We have also attempted to store their responses from the Google Form in a design journal implemented as a Google Sheet. This allows them to refer to their responses later in the module as they complete their PoP or even their design proposal. These questions also scaffold their reflection on the problem of practice and allow them to critically examine each side of the argument.

Given below are two such examples of reflection questions, one at the beginning of the module, and one in the middle.

Example 1 - Beginning of Module Reflection

Exhibit E. Reflection Journal Example

Along with the constructivist theory of learning as mentioned in the previous section, this design also relates to the connectivist theory of learning which states that “learning takes place when learners make connections between ideas located throughout personal learning networks (e.g., other individuals, databases, social media, Internet, learning management systems)”. It also brings in the importance of leveraging technology and states that “learners need to distinguish between important and unimportant information, as well as valid information, since there is a continuous flow of new information” (Oyarzun, Beth, and Conklin, Sheri, 2021).

Interactive content design

Another essential problem users highlighted is the amount of content in the field studies and the lack of interactivity while reading the content. While the material (text, graphs, and videos) provides valuable information, the layout of the material is not designed in a way where students can interpret or remember the content easily. Instead of actively engaging with the information, students learn passively.

Based on memory mechanisms, we decided to incorporate several interactive elements in the field studies. For instance, graphics are originally followed by several explanatory paragraphs. We've created in-graph explanations to foster better connections between the visual and textual information. Students can click and access detailed text related to a specific point on the graph. Doing so allows us to direct students’ attention and encourage them to actively explore interesting aspects of the graph.

Exhibit E. An interactive graph on Articulate 360

Additionally, we integrated multiple-choice questions following essential graphics. We transformed the original descriptive text into a question that prompted students to find out the answer by interpreting the graphs. This not only helps to sustain students' attention but also reinforces their understanding of key information, allowing students to monitor their own learning (agency).

Exhibit F. Check for Understanding

Media

AI-generated videos

Both the module overview video and the focus levels video were generated using an AI tool known as Synthesia. We fed the script into the tool and added design elements after which the tool generated an AI Character along with audio and captions. The decision to use this tool was made based on the fact that we had limited time and resources to produce a high-quality video, and this proved to be an ideal scenario to augment Artificial intelligence with human efforts. (Dede, C. Etemadi, A., & Forshaw, T., 2021)

Google Forms

A challenge that we faced while attempting to implement a design journal was finding a tool or method that allows learners to store and retrieve their responses throughout the module. To address this, we decided to use Google Forms, which enabled learners to store and access their responses on a cloud-based sheet throughout HPL. Nevertheless, a potential challenge here is to implement this as individual Google Sheets for each learner in the course. One potential possibility is to create a small app within Microsoft Powerapps which could be embedded directly into the interface of an LMS system like Canvas.

Platform

As we moved on to the ‘develop’ phase of the project, we had a clear idea of what we wanted to achieve through the redesign, and we picked platforms that would best help us showcase our design process while allowing learners to experience it themselves. Based on this, we chose the following two platforms to prototype our designs.

Figma

Figma is a popular prototyping tool used by UI/UX Designers and we used Figma to prototype our non-linear dashboard. Initially, we considered using Canvas to implement the same but soon realized that it would require us to hard-code the designs. Figma provided the flexibility to creatively reimagine the module dashboard, incorporating small design elements that might have proven challenging to implement with our limited coding knowledge in Canvas. Additionally, Figma's capability to create interactive prototypes seamlessly made it an excellent choice for our short-term project.

Articulate 360

Articulate 360 is a popular course-authoring tool that provides several applications within it. It facilitates rapid course development through pre-built templates, enabling us to efficiently create high-quality content. One of our major goals with the redesign was to improve user engagement and interactivity, and Articulate provides a wide variety of interactive elements. We specifically made use of Rise 360 (a cloud-based web application provided by articulate) to prototype the redesigned Field Study. We made use of multiple interactive elements like MCQs, reflective questions, interactive images, visual graphs, check-in interactives, etc., however, we did recognize some limitations in Articulate's Rise 360 pre-built templates. For example, while exploring the option of embedding survey forms to collect students' reflection responses, we found that there was no opportunity for us to embed with an iframe code to facilitate this design decision.

Exhibit G. Example of an interactive graph on Rise 360

Feedback and Iteration

We displayed and presented our prototypes at the end-of-course Gallery Walk where individuals from the HGSE community explored the various deliverables created by students in the class. During the Gallery Walk, we received valuable feedback from various people including learning designers, instructors, and students. A common theme with the feedback we received was regarding the drastic decrease in textual information. Testers enjoyed the interactive moments and the break from large blocks of text. Some students expressed their hope that more courses with the issue of extended textual information could do something similar as it becomes demotivating when they see an extensive amount of text in one page.

The non-linear dashboard was a fresh look from the standard linear model in Canvas. There are both positives and questions from our testers. Testers liked the new look of the dashboard with the cards for each learning sequence. There were questions regarding where they should start which we adopted into our final iteration - providing a suggested learning sequence but highlighting that students are encouraged to go through the module as they see fit because there is no right way to go through the module.

Finally, our testers expressed interest in the reflection questions. It provides them with a place to take guided notes and document their in-the-moment thinking. This could be helpful for completing their assignments and as a final review when working on the design proposal at the end of the course. Students also shared that they did not remember or was not aware of the design journal in the original course. The visible and easily accessible reflection questions and journal will encourage students to make use of the tool more. We hope that this design choice can help guide students in making connections between problems of practice and learning sequences within the module and across the course.

Conclusion

We redesigned HPL Field Studies by following the learning experience design framework and prioritizing an active learning, learner-centered approach. Our design process was guided by the ADDIE model. Within our design, we strategically addressed three key issues - interactivity, onboarding experience, and scaffolding. To develop our prototype, we predominantly made use of two platforms - Articulate 360 and Figma. Our design elements included reflection questions, onboarding videos, and a non-linear dashboard. These design decisions were heavily based on user research and backed by various learning theories including cognitivism, connectionism, and constructivism. To improve upon our current “final” iteration, we suggest more exploration into the possibilities of an embedded reflection journal - what tools could be embedded and save the content across the course while still allowing students to easily organize their reflections for review. Additionally, we would be interested to see the effectiveness of the onboarding videos and if they are able to better situate learners to their problem of practice. In conclusion, our experience working on this project helped us better understand what it means to take a learner-centered approach to learning design.