I am an architect of instructional and informational content for performance-based systems to enable performance competence at all levels of an enterprise.
In my PACT Logic – the data logic of my ISD “processes” – the 3 levels of Design in PACT – I have made some arbitrary decisions that had to be made.
I divided all types of content (Instruction & Information) into 5 types and created my conceptual storage structure, framework, inventory around that. Click on the first graphic for a look at “what analysis data” feeds which level in the 5-Tier Inventory Structure – which is central to the concepts/ models of the ECA – Enterprise Content Architecture.
That structure would “hold” all of the modular elements – not necessarily the modules – which for most mean the “final product” and in my use I mean “a component” of a final product. Those “moduleal elements” from the bottom for me – to the top – are:
T&D Instructional Activities
These are Infos or Demos or Appos (Application Exercises) within a Lesson. The Lesson is the wrapper for IAs.
They are also tagged as going to a level of depth of: Awareness, Knowledge, Skill. Because if your create your content “right” you should be able to create the Instructional Activity of XYZ (Skill/Info) and have not-inadvertently also created the Instructional Activity of XYZ (Awareness/Info) as well as Instructional Activity of XYZ (Knowledge/Info) all in one effort.
Because – aren’t they building blocks anyway? Then why doesn’t your “design concepts and models” accommodate that. Then if the need includes taking an audience to skill, and some to knowledge, and others to awareness, you are able to more efficiently.
Instructional Activities are the basic Lego-like building block – unless you wish to go to individual pictures and/or paragraphs of text. I can. But most might prefer me not to.
These are the wrappers for Instructional Activities. This is where the “analysis data” is first dumped in the Design Team Meeting and organized by the assembled Master Performers (from the Analysis Team) so that it makes sense in terms of sequence, length, intended depth-of-coverage level (awareness, knowledge or skill) and even title. Following the Truth in Titling Format of PACT of course.
Events are the final product in PACT. Also known as courses, modules, workshops, sessions, classes, video, CBT, elearning course, reading assignment, task assignment, project assignment, etc. My rule is “it is at the Event level” where we track sign ups, completions, etc. I would sign up for an Event. In a modular (not module) approach to design there are layers underneath. In PACT it’s the Lessons and their Instructional Activities (and then the additional layers down below that depending on your needs to control those too). If Events were books the Lessons would be chapters – and if chapters were divided they would be Instructional Activities.
If Events are books, then Paths are the reading list.
Paths are created for a specific job title or job family. Sometimes they are menus instead of paths. They are “as rigid as required and as flexible as feasible.” Which means they ultimately have flex, but can be tightened up. I do that by having the PST designate which Events on the Path are M-Mandatory, or HR- Highly Recommended, or E-Elective. They like exerting that kind of control on what’s critically important and what’s less so. It’s all needed by a performer – it’s just that some of them may show up with some of this anyway. Why waste shareholder equity on that?
Here is the T&D Path for a Supervisor. The Path has always been a marketing poster to be used in the PST GRM at the end of the design phase. I put them over the coffee pot so as to get every one’s attention before the meeting starts. I let a lot of these meetings start late if the PST members have congregated around the coffee pot. Click on this next graphic and take a good look…
The Path began in the Design Meeting as a 3-parter, now it’s 4. Originally it was Beginning-Middle-End, 3-parts. But as the Design Team is empowered – within limits – they eventually do as I suggest when I tell them “I own the process. You own the content.” Once they take control of that, within my process, they end up owning it. Right where I wanted them.
Then this next Path is a building block…a continuation of the path…at the next level…for the Zone Manager who is the boss of the Supervisor. These were both produced in the same CAD project, in 2003 for the Production organization of the US Navy’s Norfolk Naval Shipyard.
If someone came in to the Zone Manager job from a job “other than” the Supervisor – there would be some formal and informal learning to pick up from the prior path – the Supervisor’s Path. As always, that depends – on the incoming skills and experiences of the new Zone Manager.
And the Zone Manager’s boss would have to figure that out either on their own – or using some tool built to help facilitate that. It’s what I would have built in the CAD effort’s Phase 3 Design as a tool for my getting the Project Steering Team (PST) to actually test the Curriculum Architecture Design in the end-of-phase Gate Review Meeting (GRM). The GRM is where we facilitated the PST in an “acid test” of our own design – that client’s always felt adequate for them to bend and try to break the output.
How well did it do in their personal tests was always key to getting their blessings, but more importantly getting their real attention and excitement. This was always the first deliverable that they could “use.”
lean-ISD is my 1999 book that covers the PACT Processes for T&D, Learning/ Knowledge Management.
The book is available as a free 404-page PDF at http://www.eppic.biz/
# # #