Learner Analyses

 

Learner Analyses

We often assume that we know the learners, especially if we are very experienced in teaching. We stop asking questions or trying to know more. Learning is a process and not an end. Hence true instruction designers would be lifelong learners (Harper, n.d.). Hence, each time we design an instruction model, we need to analyze the learners as if it the first time. We need to examine them for (a) their knowledge, (b) characteristics and (c) previous experience with the topic. This is Learner Analyses or Target Audience Analyses. We need to answer, ‘Who is the learner?’ with as much specifics as possible. Empathy to the learner is deepened and that, in turn, makes the model more learner friendly (DeBell, 2020).

My set of learners is a set of one hundred teachers who are teaching math online to kids of grades 1 to 8 across four continents namely, Asia, USA, Australia and UK. They work as per the time zones of the residents using lesson plans prepared by our content team. The lesson plans cover the core needs of the kids but the teachers are expected to adapt the content to personalize the teaching process. The set of teachers is mixed, some being fresh and others experienced. I cannot take anything for granted.

Instructional Design Model

Keeping the end user in mind is the key to learner analysis (Brown & Green, 2016, pp.77). But it can be very wide as is evident from the 9 goals given by (Brown & Green, 2016, pp.84) pertaining to the participants, namely, (1) intended audience, (2) common traits (3) differences, (4) range of ability, (5) motivation, (6) non-instructional needs, (7) appeal, (8) accommodation and (9) evaluation strategies. The question, ‘Which one do I choose?’ is dependent on my Instructional Design model. The design I find that works here is the User Centric Design (Brown & Green, 2016, pp.77). This is because this is the only model that believes that designing never ends for analysis is an ongoing activity throughout the process of designing and developing (Brown & Green, 2016, pp.77).

User Centric Design or UX works on a five step process namely (a) Empathize, (b) Define, (c) Ideate, (d) Prototype, and (e) Test (DeBell, 2020). However we don’t stop at testing for during testing there are observers and with their feedback, one is back to the step of analyses with greater empathy and redesign. The process continues till one has a minimal viable design. However, one does not rest and is ever vigilant to see the outcome of the design and is ready to change. Hence, this is a process centric approach where the designer’s views his or her task in the context of human learning and that is the zone of an educator as an instruction designer.

My Choice

My audience are teachers, completely human centric individuals. Hence I feel confident of my choice of model as I am not sure if one can ever encase the process of teaching into a static framework. We would need to keep testing and then coming back to ideation or redefining the goals or analysing the audience for Instructional Designing can begin at any stage (Kurt, 2017). Keeping empathy at the heart of my engagement with the audience, the three goals of my choice are:

1. What motivates the group?

As per the ARCS model (Keller, 2012), gaining Attention of the audience is the first step. As per ARCS again, the second step is ‘Relevance’ and that also adds to the attentive motivation that I am looking for.

For these teachers, the motivation is an improvement in their teaching style that leads them to be better global teachers. That, in turn would generate more students for them and an improvement in the social and economic status. Hence, in our pre read to the group, I would share the relevance of the sessions to their work as teachers in the edtech industry. To gain and retain their attention, I would have varied byte size sessions in the course of the time that they are with me, followed by short reflective assessments. These sessions would also use multiple presentation styles such as group discussions, role plays, case studies and task analyses. 

2. What is the success metric?

The third part of ARCS is confidence. The teachers need to feel an improvement in their confidence at the end of the session. I would do it in two ways, (a) creating space for them to share their success stories, and (b) offering them one or two very practical strategies that will work for the kind of space they are working in, namely, our tech platform.

For example, I will give them a task, ‘A child did not know the basics of the topic you are to teach. What would you do in this situation?’ I will then invite pairs of teachers as volunteers to showcase how they’d handle it using a role play or a micro teaching session. This would give them a boost as I would notice specifically the strong points of their strategy and invite the audience too to share their observations on the strengths and growth points of the strategies. This is to boost their confidence in their own abilities.

Further, I will share with them a video showcasing a think-pair-share session (Yulianingsih, (2019) and invite them to share their reflections on the same. The objective would be to offer a strategy whereby they can use the presence of other students in the class to ensure that all students are at the same level before the new topic is introduced.

3. What are their non-instructional needs?

The fourth part of ARCS is satisfaction. Satisfaction is not just generated when we create something relevant, as we showed in point two, but also when we know that our needs are met. The teachers teach across multiple time zones for 5 to 6 hours a day, including weekends. They get tired and they also get de-motivated at times if they are unable to generate enough monthly income for themselves or if their skill building is not taken care of.

Hence their needs are physical, emotional and mental. It would be easy for me to connect to them as being an ex-teacher, I can relate to them. I’ll be myself and not adopt the corporate face. I’ll give them the choice of having camera off or on so they can relax and attend the session. Tea, coffee or food would be welcome during the online session. I would also have at least 1 breakout session where they can converse freely with their peers. There would be space for them to share their agonies in the classroom and we would brainstorm for the solutions. I would also invite them to share their feedback and suggestions pertaining to our platform and curriculum. Hence, satisfaction would be generated by ensuring that they feel cared for and recognized.

Conclusion

When we are using a user centric model, you instruction design is never complete. For learners’ needs can only be solved through research, design, validation, and iteration. Iteration is the key to a learner centric design for we keep coming back to the original steps with a greater clarity and understanding about the learners. Hence instructional designers should consider crafting a holistic learning experience that truly has the human at the center of design (DeBell, 2020)

References

Brown, A. H. & Green, T. D. (2016). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and practice. https://ikhsanaira.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/the-essential-of-instructional-design.pdf

DeBell, A. (2020). UX for Learning: Crafting Human-centered instructional experiences. UX Booth. https://www.uxbooth.com/articles/ux-for-learning-crafting-human-centered-instructional-experiences/

Harper, C. (n.d.). What is a learner analysis for instructional design and Elearning? What is a Learner Analysis for Instructional Design and eLearning? https://www.eteachonline.com/blog/understandlearners

Keller J.M. (2012) ARCS Model of Motivation. In: Seel N.M. (eds) Encyclopaedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_217

Kurt, S. (2017, October 7). Definitions of instructional design. Educational Technology.  https://educationaltechnology.net/definitions-instructional-design

Yulianingsih, L. (2019, July 19). Think-Pair-Share. https://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/interactive/tpshare.html