Trainers Talk Tech

On July 11th, 2007 the term Crapid eLearning was introduced by Tom Kuhlmann from Articulate. He introduced the term in his blog post Myth 1: Rapid eLearning is Crapid eLearning. I love this article because it defends the tools and attacks the design. This is one my Thomas mantras - focus on the LEARNING part of eLearning. It also gave me a great new word I could use in casual conversations with my team!

For me, Crapid also means visually barren. Sure, you can have a great eLearning design doc, great objectives and some cool interactions and simulations, but if it looks unprofessional or amateurish, then you have some usability issues to overcome. Now, there are lots of folks who may disagree with me, but out of the box templates, buttons, ready made flash "interactions" all fall short of what a professional graphic designer can create. They may help you quickly put together a program, but the user may view the content in a bad light if the interface and visuals are shoddy. They may have a hard time seeing the diamond in the rough. Visuals must be stimulating and professional looking until they fade into the background and the content takes over. Think of it as a first impression - it takes a long time to get past a bad first impression, just like it may take a user a while to get past an ugly, awkward interface.

I've created Crapid eLearning. I've also created bad eLearning projects. Because clients want what they want and paid me to deliver it. I've worked hard to talk people out of design decisions or instructional choices that I didn't agree with, but because they are the client, I build it to match THEIR vision, not mine. I've also done Crapid work because the client just wanted to check a box and push the project off their to-do list.

In this blog, a little more than a year ago, I predicted an eLearning regression and others agreed with me. Now, a year later, using my own observations and interviews with participants at the ASTD TK 10, my clients and others in the industry, I believe it came to pass. eLearning software development companies are selling the heck out their software and upgrades are popping out like crazy. Instructional designers who don't know a thing about graphic design or coding are whipping out SCORM compliant programs with ease. Template sites and pre-coded sample bundles are popping up (yes...mine are coming too) on the web and people are buying them like beanie babies. It's now easier than ever before to develop eLearning and non-tech, non-graphic and non-programmers are doing it using these tools.

Now...here's my ethical dilemma. I've had it before in June of 09, but its back with a vengeance. At that time, I called it "Should I advertise the tools" and I was wondering if I should advertise that I develop in Lectora, Captivate and others. I received lots of interesting feedback on that one, and today I have the answer.

Yes. I should. And here's why: My clients now own them. My clients like them. It provides me with an edge. I can now offer high-end completely custom, partial custom or templated eLearning.

Just this week, I have two clients with real money who want me to develop within Captivate and within Unison.

My ethical dilemma: I don't want to develop Crapid eLearning because I will be using these tools. I have to convince my clients to create custom Flash elements they can drop into these tools. They have to allow me to take the time to create unique templates and interfaces and buttons and other elements to make it look custom even though its using an eLearning tool. In Captivate, I can be extremely creative with the tool. In Unison, I can, but I have to do some serious code cracking to bring it up to my level of what a "professional" eLearning program looks like. I need to take these tools to new levels. I need to push the envelope regarding software capabilities and be creative within the limitations of the tools so that I don't just quickly schlop the project together.

Or, I could just develop Crapid.

The opposite of professional eLearning is Crapid eLearning. However, as you read this, you or your company may have these tools installed. They may be installed on the very machines you are using to read this blog. My challenge to you is this: Follow my lead and don't create Crapid. Look at the work you admire and instead of saying "I could never do that with my tool" or "You have to be a good graphic person to do that" or "I can only do that with Flash" go out and LEARN to do those things. Take it to the next level. Don't settle on mediocre or Crapid. Maximize what you know about the tool. Call the software developers and get into the weeds to bend the software to YOUR will. Buy a good book on graphic design like The Non-Designer's Design Book or Graphic Design School so you can learn what makes graphics, fonts, colors and other elements look nice on the screen.

Even though I am now adding these tools to my professional designers toolbox (and kind of feel like a sell out), I am going to keep my head high and not lower my standards. I don't want to ever turn down business, but I don't want to damage my reputation as a designer by producing Crapid. I'll post samples to this blog as I develop so you can tell me if you think they are awesome or if I fell into the Crapid crack.

I was doing some work for a client and had to load in some .swf files generated by a 3rd party program. I admit it - I LOVE text effects. I like fades, but when the text can bounce or flip or swirl in, sometimes it adds a bit of snazz to the eLearning project. As long as you don't overdo it, I think the learner's get a kick out of the occasional bits of visual eye candy.

On my Mac, I use a program called Text-Osterone, from a company called Vertical Moon. The software allows you to create a bunch of editable special effects you can apply to text. The current version only seems to export to an AS 2.0 version .fla, so I export the file to a .swf and then dynamically load it in. (I am working ever so hard to leave AS 2.0 behind me...)

Of course, in AS 3.0, it requires a bunch of code lines to load the external .swf, but my solution below pares it down to the bare basics.

First, make sure the .swf you want to load is in the same directory as the .swf loading it. You can play with paths if you like, but for this code, just keep the whole shebang together.

When you want to load the .swf, add a key frame and then add the following code:

var swfRequest:URLRequest = new URLRequest("connect.swf");
var swfLoader:Loader = new Loader(); 

The first line sets up a variable called swfRequest and it points to the .swf you want to load. In my example, the .swf I want to load is called "connect.swf". The second line preps a variable called swfLoader to...well...initiate a load...(insert random inappropriate comment here)...

Next lines:

swfLoader.load(swfRequest);
addChild(swfLoader); 

This next line loads the connect.swf into the variable swfLoader. The addChild line plops the .swf onto the stage. That's it. Sure, its a lot more work than the old LoadMovie(); AS 2.0 command, but it does the job.

Now, if you want to place the .swf in a particular location on the stage, you can manipulate it's coordinates once its been loaded into your main .swf.

swfLoader.x=10;
swfLoader.y=120;

This sets the X and Y placement of the .swf after its been loaded in. Of course, you can place it wherever you want. Remember, that the X and Y coordinates are relative to the main timeline (if this is where you dropped this code) or relative to the coordinates INSIDE a movie symbol (if you drop this code into a movie symbol.) The final code looks like this (with comments added):

// Load the SWF into the Variable swfRequest
var swfRequest:URLRequest = new URLRequest("connect.swf");
var swfLoader:Loader = new Loader();

// Bring the SWF into the SWF
swfLoader.load(swfRequest);
addChild(swfLoader);

//Position the SWF
swfLoader.x=10;
swfLoader.y=120;

There are some other tutorials online, but I am a big fan of keeping things simple. If you need to load a .swf and position it on the stage, this ActionScript 3.0 code sample will work every time. Have fun!

I'm having such a dilemma and its driving me crazy. Here is what I'm struggling with: lately, several of my customers have asked me to create or bid on projects where they expect to be able to go in and edit the content, images and layout of the project after the launch. They want to be able to tweak every aspect of the project once its complete. However, they have no technical background and are not interested in learning the tech. As a result, I'm being asked to over-complicate the programming for ease of use later.

First example - a local area church has asked me to develop a web site for them that they can edit themselves. They don't want a CMS (even the free ones), they want to be hand coded. No problemo - I build it in CSS at a fixed width and height per the design from their team. After its built out and they want to start adding content, their editor (who picked up Dreamweaver specifically for this purpose), can't get the WYSIWYG screen to work with my hand coded CSS. Sometimes Dreamweaver, especially older versions, have a hard time rendering the CSS correctly in the WYSIWYG view. The code is solid and displays wonderfully in all browsers, but the client hates it and hates me because it isn't easy to edit in Dreamweaver. After a week of no luck with tutorials and phone assistance, I rebuilt it from scratch using old table code and layout techniques from 2005. They love it. It stretches how they want, its easy to add the content they want and they are super excited about their site again.

I, however, hate it and will not be adding it to my portfolio. It's filled with nested table tags, bloated JavaScript and is "old school" code that I rarely write anymore. However, the client LOVES it and loves me for making their lives easier. I have overcomplicated the "behind the scenes" so the WYSIWYG view works. What!!?

Case number two: I'm bidding on an eLearning project where the client wants all images but the interface to load dynamically and be stored outside the project, all video and audio to load dynamically and be stored outside the project, and all text and headers to be in XML and load dynamically at run time. OK...this is not rocket science, but in an effort to make their lives easier (they won't have to learn Flash to make edits), they are making it much more complicated to develop. It's so much easier to just dump it all into flash, export to .swf and deliver an HTML file and a .swf file and be done with it.

In an effort to avoid learning code or learning Flash, customers seem to be asking for "do it yourself" solutions, when I'm thinking that they should pick up a copy of Dreamweaver or Flash and learn it. It's much more complicated to dynamically load XML text than it is to type the text in the Flash interface. Now, there are very good reasons for using XML for text (I have another client who is going to offer multiple languages and wants to use the same .swf but load the different language XML which is cool), but for simple projects, why make it so complicated?

Couple thoughts:

1) They don't want to pay me to edit the files
2) They don't want to take the chance of me going away and not being around in 3 years when the files have to be edited
3) They expect lots of changes to the files
4) They expect to have to make changes in a speedy, real time fashion

I'm all about teaching a man to fish, but this kind of falls into the "just cause we can, we will." I am all about the straight line - get what you need accomplished in the easiest way possible. Learn Flash. Learn ActionScript. Who says editing an XML file is easier than editing a Flash file? Is this "Do it yourself" idea good for eLearning? Shouldn't it be "Learn the tool."

Am I alone here? Is this something I should just deal with? Since when do customers care about the intricate guts of a project, rather than its functionality, look and feel? Should I just grow up and understand that customers are getting more technical and are asking to "peek under the hood"?

Thanks for listening. Anyone else experiencing this?

There have been reports leaking to the web that hint of an April release date for the Adobe CS5 suite of software. Although Adobe goes out of their way to keep these release dates a secret, reports keep coming out. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. I've had lots of buggy situations with Flash CS4 and with Dreamweaver CS4 on my Mac, so I'm hoping that in addition to those new features which are coming, Adobe has taken the time to clean up the code a bit.

And, because I cannot wait, here are some CS5 Videos and a dedicated CS5 website that should keep you enticed:

Flash CS5 : Export to iPhone
Flash CS5 : New Features

Photoshop CS5 : Sneak Peek
Photoshop CS5 : Patch Match
Photoshop CS5 : Spot Healing

GREAT CS5 Site: http://cs5.org/

Second day session overview. Great morning!

8:15 :: Introduction of Rich and his awesome background!

8:20 :: Richard (Rich) takes the stage - game designer/Chief Creative Director for EA - was the designer for the first Madden Football game, Yeager's flight Sim and Golf - 25 years at EA. Born up in MN, moved to Vegas.

8:22 :: "What did I learn while I live in Vegas? People Lie..." People Lie...but their actions don't

8:22 :: People Lie, but they don't mean to

8:25 :: Learning through Games - showed Cartels & Cutthroat$ - an economic sim game built on a wall street model. At an EA retreat, had a Cartels & Cutthroats tournament. About 11 out of 150 people participated! LOL.

8:25 :: EA University :: Knowledge Changes Everything - Xcelerator program - investment in the key folks at the firm - primarily Creative Directors. Has 40 products and about 25 Directors - Working on leadership and teamwork

8:30 :: Plugged Lego Mindstorms - YES - Lego RULE!!! Integrated into the Xcelerator program and his other classes - An educational toy that allows you to create a working, programmable robot with Lego.

8:30 :: Used in Leadership and Team Training - simulates what its like to launch products on new platforms, simulates market cycles, create teams of Production, Design and Engineering professionals (playing out of position - each of them plays a different role than their "real job"

8:31 :: Exercise Gameplay - each team attends a faux "Developer's Conference" to learn the "new" tech, then they get access to "The Market". "The Market" is a separatecontains Play Money and plexi-glass squares and during the market cycle, the robot tires to acquire revenue by putting a wheel on a moneyed square.

8:33 :: Complications - The Market you see, isn't always what you get - more than one team can win a square - the wheels don't have to stay on (encourages creativity)

8:35 :: The purpose of the exercise is to CREATE CHANGE - winners have an appropriate combination of risk and a high iteration cycle :: The anticipate market changes

8:36 :: Some other games :: The Gong Show (public speaking and rapid production techniques), The Pieces Game (Game design iteration techniques and team dynamics), The Roaring Silence (sound design for emotion, quick repair techniques)

8:37 :: "Audio is 51% of the entertainment experience" - George Lucas

8:38 :: How we Used to Make Games - a single designer on a game - "Drove them crazy because they never finished anything!"

8:38 :: Now, they add a few more people to the mix - the problem is that the numbers of people on a game design have increased and the products are more complicated. Godfather had 300 people on the project! They have had to change they way they worked - from solo to team

8:42 :: Was failing because they are guessing about what people are telling them. Aircraft carrier story - "We thought people wanted to fly the planes off the carrier...others thought they wanted to drive the ships...others wanted to do fleet and resource management. Resource groups told them ALL THREE!" The problem is that PEOPLE LIE! (We had to shout this out...some of us more enthusiastic than others... LOL)

8:44 :: Every online game played in John Madden "phones home" sends a report back to EA so they can read the reports. Actions Don't Lie!

8:45 :: Played a number of games calibrate some problems - comparing performance verbally - People Lie, their Actions Don't

8:46 :: Real World Problem - Madded 10 had a Kicking Problem - Telemetry messed up - Video testing verified it

8:47 :: Team worked on the DATA, rather than what people said was wrong.

8:48 :: Stop Guessing, Start SCORING the Change - Google Semantic Analysis relies of user data and Amazon's uses your ACTIONS: Suggested Products. Data mining based on choices and correlating that to other customers, services and products.

8:50 :: Stop guessing and start measuring - Identify your Markers of Progress, Turn those into Scorecards all can see, Pay attention to the results, Iterate for success, Celebrate metrics, Pursue new Markers and Correlations for insight they provide

8:52 :: Nice Telemetry Based Education example - applies the measuring steps to an educational example

8:55 :: All that is nice, but how does it help me get paid? Metrics are important

8:56 :: Benefit of programs - Know the difference between clients and customers, Avoid different scoreboards for different audience, Measured progress metrics ensure all parties:: be sure development outcomes = business outcomes

8:57 :: People Lie, their actions don't - don't trust, don't guess, Find metrics to measure, Communicate progress and value through scoreboards of those metrics

8:58 :: Questions

8:58 :: Where is gaming going and how does it integrate into the rest of the world? We spend lots of times building games for machines that are not in educational environments. PS3, XBOX and Wii are not in the business world. Why not? Building for these platforms, not business platforms. Web based games may be the solution for gaming in the workplace.

9:00 :: People complain about gaming isolating them from others. How do you see that changing? People are playing with other humans online. The online environment means people are playing games against each other. The most interesting interactions are between the humans playing the game. Human beings beat the "crap" out of any code.

9:02 :: You face the challenge of leading creative people. Every organization drives creativity. Do you try to manage your "leadership brand" using games and NOT stifle the creativity? In EA's case, every four years the company has radically changed. From 5 1/2" disks, to CDs, to game platforms. Changed the "game" that is the company. Done lots of work communicating the "rules" of the new game, and have "learning camps". Change is then put into class. Reinventing all the time.

9:04 :: What tools can you use to create corporate training? What tools? There are lots of tools but they take forever to learn. Game designers are working on making the products more accessible from the back end. Sim builders and stuff...game design tools..sometimes you just need to be a program...then there is Flash which takes about a year to master.

9:05 :: Situations and case based learning using Flash. What measurement techniques can we test and implement in Flash? Have tools to generate output, but choosing the metrics are the hard part. Create your variables, export them and use things like Google Analytics to examine the data. The hard part is exporting the data.

9:06 :: Retention is a problem. Especially with creative minds. What do you do to manage retention? What motivates people. Tie retention to motivation. (I think he misunderstood retention (keeping people employed) from retention (keeping content in their minds)

9:10 :: If I purchased Madden 10 for my husband for Christmas and his field goals never go in, how can I make him better at kicking goals? YouTube videos

9:12 :: We've changed our idea of what our "platform" is. Its not a system where you can dedicate many hours to it, its now a change to the mindset of "touching" the gamer where they access. Take your game from the web, take it to the iPhone, finish it up on the console when you get home. Take the game out of the living room to the mobile device. Take the game experience with you.

9:13 :: Applause! Good session.