Reminds me of the technology acceptance model

Sounds like how we critique too

I wonder how regularly industry folks make assumptions because they don't have training on creating personas or access to users' for interviews

Makes sense but an important point worth emphasizing

How can their intended use be more clear? Is it because learners are not involved as co-designers or providing input at any stage?

Interestingly, I found emotion was rarely discussed during an analysis of teacher prep courses

I also wonder if learners begin to feel emotions associated with colors (red=angry)

I can imagine readers being frustrated if a font was not as accessible as it could be

How is proper amount defined in this case?

This makes me think of how almost everyone considers themself a visual learning

I think of this as aesthetically pleasing text objects too. For some reason, I find 2 column publications "more inviting" than 3 columns.

During which event do you leverage their emotion to keep them motivated?

This reminds me of how social media clips have gotten so short and appeal to the viewer's emotion to keep them watching. Social media or content learning material may use emotion to hook learnings right away.

It leads to the question - Do I even want to read/watch/etc this?

I wonder if anyone has built on Lyons' work to say what this type of guidance may look like

I wonder how much certifications have changed as a result of the influence of virtual learning over the last few years

I always thought of this as the difference between a project and program.

It seems many design projects typically have a forced end. If time and other resources were not an issue then projects could likely continue to be refined.

especially problematic when investing a lot of resources into a design idea

who decides who the leader is? Is it company hierarchical organization?

Interesting distinction between a successful product and building successfully

How do they define small vs large in this context?

spoilers...

Allows them to fail fast

Interesting - I'm curious how the client defined the problem and if it's aligned with any of the 10

I'm glad this was mentioned - so important

Reminds me of the Ford quote - "“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Users don't necessary know what is possible in terms of capacity, vision, or limitations

Is this considered coding?

So the information cannot be collected via open ended questions in a survey?

Potential obstacle to "walking in their shoes"

Do they have to be?

and who defines "ethical use"?

I recently learned that when some visually impaired users use a screenreader on websites, it may not inform them whether opening a link will open in the same tab or a new window. This is problematic because if it is a new tab or window then the user loses the "back" feature to the previous page. In addition to does the user have access, I think the definition of accessible extends further.

Some colleagues and I worked with teachers in a workshop over the summer. Despite working with middle schoolers, we were shocked to find out that students were not aware of how to create a new file. It is just one aspect that we did not plan that teachers would have to educate students on prior to implementing the content.

How do you plan for this with something like a MOOC or other learning environments where the degree to which the prior knowledge may vary tremendously?

This is also especially important because it's not just about having the tools to access but also the skills and self-efficacy.

I think it's also important to note that this means they may have misconceptions on whatever topic involved in the learning experience you are designing.

I like this question to continue to frame the designing process

Part of the process is using a data collection method to inform your persona development

I think this goes back to an earlier annotation. If designers are going to reach out to the target audience anyway, why not use them in the place of personas or their information when constructing the personas?

How can we define a regular interview for the sake of a design project?

Note to self: Key components of personas

Are part of the reason personas are constructed to save money? In class, it was mentioned that industries do not want to spare any expense by hosting focus groups or interviews if they don't have to do so. Is there another motivation besides money for designers to use constructed people rather than real people? Wouldn't designers be more likely to meet users' needs if we consulted real people?

I'm highlighting this definition as it seems like it will be valuable as we develop our own personas for this class

I'm curious what the research says about the appropriate number of personas.

MOOCs seem like they would be a unique challenge to design for. As I understand them, they are created to reach a tremendous audience in order to make learning more accessible. When designing a learning experience to that scale, I imagine it would be more difficult to "know" the learner.

From a designer perspective, I like this line. From our experience with the learning experience canvas, this idea of putting ourselves in their shoes lends itself well to much of the criteria in the canvas. For example, all aspects of the environment category would make more sense. Although one may not be able to fully immerse themselves in another culture in this case, being more aware of the factors will help create a better learning experience.