Evaluating Multimedia
So youve made the decision to use multimedia as part of your overall
training strategy. You can take the low cost route and purchase generic
off-the-shelf products, or you can expend more of your training budget
on your own development. But do you know how to tell the difference
between high quality multimedia and multimedia that is substandard (it
may do the job but not as well)?
What Does Research Tell Us?
Studies have shown that students using multimedia have higher achievement/performance
ratings, higher retention, are given more consistent content, and they
do it all in less time. The reasons given for these improvements
include:
Multi-sensory input
-
Self-paced learner control over the educational process
-
One-on-one individualized training support
-
Immediate interaction and feedback
-
Constant, highly effective reinforcement of concepts and content
-
Better researched, organized, and more succinctly presented content
-
Greater attention to accuracy, detail, and completeness of content
-
Learner mastery of content before continuing to next unit/level
-
Accessibility to, and repeated interaction with, material
-
More opportunity to apply what has been learned
What Do the Professionals Think?
Professionals in the field of training look at a number of different
characteristics to determine if a multimedia training product will be effective
or not. Criteria for evaluating multimedia or Internet-based training
are shown in the table below.
Table 1. Criteria for Evaluating Multimedia Used by Professionals.
| 1.
|
Is the course easy to install, set
up, or access on an Internet or Intranet server using standard Internet
or network protocols? Does it run properly?
|
|
| 2.
|
Does the program include a sufficient amount
and quality of information?
|
|
| 3.
|
Does the program educate, inform, and provide insight to the viewer?
|
|
| 4.
|
Is the content technically and factually accurate
for the subject, discipline, or industry to which it is related?
|
|
| 5.
|
Are scenarios, simulations, or exercises realistic
to the actual job tasks or conditions?
|
|
| 6.
|
Does the program enhance the instruction/delivery
of the subject matter?
|
|
| 7.
|
Do the direction, sound, editing, and photography work together and
work consistently with the information to engage the viewer completely
in the program?
|
|
| 8.
|
Does the course present students with an overview
that describes the purpose of the course, who will benefit from taking
the course, and provide tips on how to successfully use the courseware?
|
|
| 9.
|
Does the course address an overview, outline,
and learning objectives for its various segments?
|
|
| 10.
|
Is the course designed in such a way that ensures
users will learn?
|
|
| 11.
|
Does the course present core competencies, performance
standards, learning objectives, learning activities and assessment activities
to students in an easy-to-use, intuitive interface?
|
|
| 12.
|
Are learning activities student-friendly and directly related
to the core competencies, performance standards and learning objectives
of the courseware?
|
|
| 13.
|
Are learning assessments student-friendly
and directly related to the core competencies, performance standards-expectations
(competencies), learning objectives and learning activities of the courseware?
Are students shown the relationship between performance and the learning
objectives?
|
|
| 14.
|
Does the course present syllabus information
such as: grading/certification policy, expectations for participation,
due dates for assessments, and protocol for interaction between instructor/
facilitator and students (and students and other students)?
|
|
| 15.
|
Does the course provide for instructor/facilitator/mentor
feedback to student (and student-to-student feedback)?
|
|
| 16.
|
Does the program capture the viewers interest
and spark discussion?
|
|
| 17.
|
Does the program engage the student through novelty,
humor, gaming, testing/quizzing, discovery-adventure, and unique or surprise
elements?
|
|
| 18.
|
Does the program effectively and appropriately
use media such as video, animation, music, narration, sound effects, and
special visual effects?
|
|
| 19.
|
Is the program designed for the intended audience?
|
|
| 20.
|
Does it avoid being condescending, trite, pedantic,
or too "cute"e;?
|
|
| 21.
|
Are the reading and educational levels appropriate
to the audience?
|
|
| 22.
|
Do course materials communicate directly and
consistently with the student, using the second person?
|
|
| 23.
|
Is the program attractive and appealing to the
eye and ear?
|
|
| 24.
|
Are there large variations in volume between
sound elements?
|
|
| 25.
|
Are there large variations in quality between
the various graphics, animations, or motion video elements?
|
|
| 26.
|
Does the user have ample opportunity to engage
program elements through their own input?
|
|
| 27.
|
Does the program encourage just-in-time learning,
question-answer, and problem-solution problem solving?
|
|
| 28.
|
Does the course include and support learning
activities that teach students, not just test them ("discovery learning")?
|
|
| 29.
|
Does the course include a significant amount
of practice activities for students?
|
|
| 30.
|
Does the course include interactive learning
aids, such as glossary and performance checklist tools?
|
|
| 31.
|
Can users determine their own path through the
program?
|
|
| 32.
|
Does the course present clear, user-friendly
instructions to the student regarding navigation in the multimedia learning
environment?
|
|
| 33.
|
Is there appropriate use of icons and/or clear
labels so that users dont have to read excessively or take tutorials to
determine program options?
|
|
| 34.
|
Is some type of evaluation used?
|
|
| 35.
|
Does the course include performance assessment
tasks with a supporting scoring guide?
|
|
| 36.
|
Is mastery of each sections content advised
before student proceeds to the next sections?
|
|
| 37.
|
Does the course use section quizzes (student
self-checks or progress reviews) with appropriate feedback?
|
|
| 38.
|
Is there a pre-test and/or final exam?
|
|
| 39.
|
Is demonstrated performance required?
|
|
| 40.
|
Does the student get a different assessment experience
if the activities are repeated? (That is, are assessments programmed to
randomize, or vary based on performance?)
|
|
| 41.
|
Are student performance data recorded, such as
time to complete, question analysis, and final scores?
|
|
| 42.
|
Is the data forwarded to the course manager automatically?
|
|
| 43.
|
Are report printouts available?
|
|
| 44.
|
Is information delivered in a clear, interesting,
and/or innovative way?
|
|
| 45.
|
Does the course include a variety of learning
media, such as text, graphic organizers, diagrams, graphics, charts, job
aids, video and audio clips?
|
|
| 46.
|
Does the course provide for innovative approaches
to teaching and learning?
|
|
A Word about Games
Many people make the mistake of evaluating multimedia training as they
would a multimedia game. To compare multimedia training to a game
is like comparing apples to oranges. Theyre both fruit (I mean multimedia),
but thats where the comparison ends. Here are some of the criteria
used for evaluating games.
- Can the user easily understand the goal of the game?
- Do you compete for points, against time, to uncover facts, or for something
else?
- Are the images used (graphics, motion video, animations) realistic and
true to life?
- If the game is based on a real life activity, is it realistic and accurate
to the activity?
- v
Is the games user interface intuitive and easy to use without an instruction
manual?
-
Does it use facts, statistics, reference material, or tools that are used
in the actual activity?
-
Does functionality (the way the game works) change relative to adjustments
made by the user? For example, adjustments made to game settings
from statistics, reference material, or tools.
-
Is the basic plot or premise of the game sophisticated enough to maintain
user interest, but not too complicated to play and enjoy?
-
Can progress in the game be saved and continued at a later date?
Can it be played over time?
-
Is it a game played by an individual, against/with other players, or both?
Multimedia training is often slighted for not being as exciting
and as fun to play as games. But the outcome of multimedia training
is to take, not play, a program that will enable the user to do something
new or do something correctly. Games, on the other hand, have only
to entertain with no requirement to train or teach. Some of the other
notable differences are shown in the table below.
Table 2. Multimedia Training-Game Comparison.
| Category |
Multimedia Training
|
Multimedia Game
|
| Purpose |
To teach/train/educate to specific learning objectives
|
To entertain with or without a goal
|
| Basis |
Usually based on real-life tasks or conditions
|
May be based on real life or fantasy
|
| Desired Outcome |
Tries to change behavior; show learning gain
|
Tries to entertain and let the user have fun
|
| Orientation |
Logically outlines and arranges content; Uses
interconnected linear segments
|
Often uses free-play ; Usually non-linear in
structure
|
| Image Quality |
Places less value in realism of graphics, animations,
video
|
Places extremely high value in realism of graphics,
animations, video
|
| User Interface |
Takes less liberty with program icons and navigation
|
Takes much more liberty with program icons and
navigation
|
| Use of Competition |
Less use of negative reinforcement and punishment;
Greater use of feedback to shape desired behavior
|
Greater use of negative reinforcement and punishment;
Greater use of win or lose model
|
| Reliance on Accuracy |
Has a greater requirement for content to be technically
accurate
|
Less of a need or requirement for technical accuracy
of content; Greater need for an accurate "look and feel" of play
|
What should you look for?
Evaluators should keep two important considerations in mind when evaluating
a multimedia training product. First, even though we would all like
to make the learning experience as entertaining, fun, and painless as possible,
our primary goal is to teach individuals to perform a job, task, or activities
properly and safely. Second, all multimedia training is not created
equal. Some products are more effective than others. The following
checklist provides questions to ask when evaluating a multimedia training
product. The more questions that you can answer yes to, the higher
the quality of the product.
Table 3. Multimedia Training Evaluation Checklist.
| CATEGORY
|
|
CRITERIA
|
|
| Installation
|
1.
|
Is the course easy to install and set up?
|
|
| Content
|
|
|
|
| Treatment of the Subject Matter |
2.
|
Does the program include a sufficient amount
and quality of information to educate, inform, and provide insight to the
learner? Does it enhance the instruction/delivery of the subject
matter?
|
|
| Technical Accuracy |
3.
|
Is the content technically and factually accurate
for the subject or discipline to which it is related?
|
|
| Technical Quality |
4.
|
Do the direction, sound, editing, and photography
work together and work consistently with the information?
|
|
| Instructional Principles
|
|
|
|
| Audience Identification |
5.
|
Does the program describe who will benefit from
taking the course and provide tips on how to successfully use the courseware?
|
|
| Performance Objectives |
6.
|
Does the course present an overview that describes
the purpose of the course, the course outline, and learning objectives?
|
|
| Instructional Strategies |
7.
|
Does the course present core competencies, performance
standards, learning objectives, learning activities and assessment activities
to students in an easy-to-use, clear interface?
|
|
| |
8.
|
Are learning activities easy to understand, and
do they teach what the learning objectives say they will teach?
|
|
| |
9.
|
Are course questions, quizzes, and tests easy
to understand, and do they test what the learning objectives say they will
tests?
|
|
| Support Aids |
10.
|
Does the course present summary information such
as grading/certification policy, expectations for participants, due dates
for assessments, and protocol for interaction between instructor/facilitator/mentor
and students, and between students and other students?
|
|
| Motivation
|
11.
|
Does the program capture interest and engage
the student through novelty, humor, gaming, testing/quizzing, and discovery-adventure
elements?
|
|
| Use of Media
|
12.
|
Is the media selected for the program - video,
animation, music, narration, sound effects, and special visual effects
- effectively and appropriately used?
|
|
| Tone
|
13.
|
Do course materials communicate directly and
consistently with the student? Does it avoid being condescending,
trite, bookish, and too cutesy?
|
|
| |
14.
|
Is the program properly designed for the intended
audience? Is the reading grade and educational level appropriate
for the audience?
|
|
| Aesthetics
|
15.
|
Is the program attractive and appealing to the
eye and ear? (Or are there large variations among similar media types,
i.e., volume differences between sound elements or quality differences
between graphics, animations, or motion videos?)
|
|
| Interactivity
|
16.
|
Does the user have ample opportunity to engage
program elements through their own input?
|
|
| |
17.
|
Does the program encourage just-in-time learning,
question-answer problem solving, and learning activities that teach by
questioning students, not just by questioning for evaluation?
|
|
| |
18.
|
Does the course include a significant amount
of practice activities for the student?
|
|
| |
19.
|
Does the course include interactive learning
aids such as glossary, word search and performance checklist tools?
|
|
| Navigation
|
20.
|
Can students determine their own course through
the program?
|
|
| |
21.
|
Does the program present clear, user-friendly
instructions to students regarding navigation in the program? Is
there an appropriate use of icons and/or clear labels so that learners
dont have to read excessively or take tutorials to determine program options?
|
|
| Performance Assessment/ Evaluation
|
22.
|
Are section quiz, pre-test and final exam evaluations
with appropriate feedback used? Is demonstrated performance required?
|
|
| |
23.
|
Is mastery of each sections content advised
before proceeding to the next section(s)?
|
|
| |
24.
|
Does the student get a different assessment experience
if the activities are repeated? (Does the user get different questions/exercises
presented in different ways each time?)
|
|
| Record Keeping
|
25.
|
Are student performance data recorded and printable?
|
|
| Creativity
|
26.
|
Is information delivered in a clear, interesting,
and/or innovative way? Are innovative approaches to teaching and
learning used?
|
|
| |
27.
|
Does the course include a variety of learning
media, such as text, graphic organizers, diagrams, graphics, charts, job
aids, video and audio clips?
|
|
Multimedia training should embody the principles of how adults learn.
Although many of the principles and techniques from classroom instruction
are appropriate for multimedia training, many are not, and should be replaced
by more effective methods that better fit the adult learner and the interactive
computer environment.
Dr. Terrell Perry has taught CBT developer courses for industry and
academia. He has developed more than 246 CBT/WBT courses, covering basic
and master scuba diving and responsible hunting curricula, among others.
He has also created several major projects for the United States Navy.
|
|