Manual Reuse Systems

In traditional, project-oriented design settings, each new project was a separate entity. Analysis, development, and production were defined by the time line and requirements of each discrete project, and instructional designers produced design and content as an artisan custom-crafting a product for a customer. When this process has worked correctly, it has worked very well. Students receive curriculum that is specifically fashioned to address their needs. Trainers and designers can be student advocates at many different levels. Everybody wins. However, there are some important limitations to this methodology.

It is important to understand that these limitations and disadvantages are not a function of the skills or artistry of the designer. However dedicated and talented a designer might be, armed with a typewriter and a mimeograph machine, he will be at a disadvantage compared with someone of, perhaps more pedestrian talents, but provided with computers and web-based delivery options.

At the same time, it must be admitted that the best tools will not make a poor designer produce excellent training content. Really good tools have been used to camouflage poor design. It is certainly easier for a incompetent instructional designer to produce much more crummy training deliverables with an XML content reuse system than when working alone with MS-Word.

Assuming competent designers. some of the most important limitations and disadvantages of the cottage industry approach to instructional development are:

• Inconsistency - Since every project is independent of every other, it is very difficult to create and enforce standards. Even if templates are used, designers tend to create exceptions.

• Inefficiency - There are many opportunities for reusing content that are missed, either because designers are unaware of legacy content that could be adapted, or because the legacy content is in a format that makes it difficult to adapt to their current project.

• Inaccuracy - Because each project recasts some of the same information in a different way, there is no way to globally update information and reissue training when changes occur.

• Scalability - As workloads increase and staffing levels decline, there is no way to maintain output and quality levels. Designers become frustrated, being unable to meet the expectations of their audience.

• Tool Costs - Reliance on outmoded tools, different versions of standard tools and fringe tools complicates things and makes people less efficient. The cost of maintaining learning materials sourced in multiple tools is enormous. Standardization on a few tools and methods makes a substantial difference to the production cycle.