The Goals of Curriculum Architecture
– which is accomplished in my models and writings at 3 levels or places – happen to also be a “3” –
- 1- the Enterprise level of “all in” content, and
- 2- at the Individual Job Title level to provide guidance to the Performer with a Learning Path that is as “rigorous as necessary and as flexible as feasible” along with a planning guide that still needs to be customized by the supervisor to create an actual plan, and
- 3- the level of the modular Content (Event) to increase “by design” flexibility in easily swapping out descriptions, examples and exercises to insure that the content is authentic enough to actually change performance for the good.
My PACT Processes for T&D/ Learning/ Knowledge Management applications are an engineering/architectural approach to modular curriculum architectures for Enterprise Learning (versus Educational Learning or Personal Learning).
I have not liked the approach to reuse using the RLO approach. I believe that if you really maximized your use of RLOs across the Enterprise you would have created a huge negative Return on Investment.
Why? Active Listening is different in different job applications.
And Research shows that only about 15% of people can learn something out of context and then can apply it into another context – say, in their jobs – so 85% of all in costs are a waste. That 15% better pay off mightily, for you to remain in good standing in the Good Stewardship club.
Active Listening is different for your in-bound sales call centers, your customer complaints call centers, your sales staff, your sales managers, your IT technicians and systems administrators, etc., etc. It is different for the different jobs in your own department.
And the Content that is authentic enough will impact the learners in the job performance – so how can one take a generic Active Listening Skills course and make it authentic enough? You’ll only know through Pilot-Testing or just rolling it out and rolling with the punches. To make it authentic enough means to swap out the descriptions, examples and exercises – especially the exercises – with ones more appropriate to the learners performance context.
If it is not authentic enough – it simply will not work.
Curriculum Architecture at 3 Levels/Places/Spaces/Perspectives
1- the Enterprise level of “all in” content needs to be managed. All courses or their equivalent. Event the Informal learning things that are deemed needing to be tracked.
2- at the Individual Job Title level to provide guidance to the Performer with a Learning Path that is as “rigorous as necessary and as flexible as feasible” – I use 3′ by 4′ wall posters to present the Path in a very visual way – and have an associated Individual Planning Guide – that still needs to be customized by the supervisor and learners/Performers to create an actual plan, and one that meets their needs given their jobs assignments needs and one that accommodates their incoming knowledge/skills too.
3- the level of the modular Content (Event) to increase “by design” flexibility in easily swapping out descriptions, examples and exercises to insure that the content is authentic enough to actually change performance for the good. PACT does that within the Instructional Activity level of design/development. From the bottom up: each IA is a component of a Lesson. And a Lesson is a component of an Event. From the top down: each Event has one or more Lessons. And each Lesson has one or more Instructional Activities. And it’s at this level of design that the descriptions, examples and exercises can be designed for greater adaptability.
And all of this requires that your approach to ReUse includes the use of Content “AI- As Is” and “AM- After Modification” and have an authoring tool and administrative system that allows you to track and keep all Content parents (originals) and all children (derivatives).
# # #