THE COST OF E-LEARNING INTERACTIVITY

THE COST OF E-LEARNING INTERACTIVITY

A reader asks: Does anyone have information about how to break down the cost of e-learning by level of interaction? In addition, "Is there any evidence that higher-interactivity-level courses are worth the cost?"

Here's what you said:

There are two ways to break down e-learning interactivity, says Keith Koh (keith1303@hotmail.com): by learning outcome and by media creation. In Koh's organization, interactivity levels are typically defined using learning outcomes based on Bloom's Taxonomy. Learning outcomes and their corresponding levels are as follows: knowledge and comprehension (Level I); application and analysis (Level II); and synthesis and evaluation (Level III).

"Using this model, we focus on what learners would accomplish after completing the course. In a Level I course, which represents the lowest of the three interactivity levels, learners will 'know' and be able to 'recall or summarize' the content.

A Level II course will allow learners to attain a higher learning outcome, where they will be able to 'apply' and 'associate' what they learned in a new situation or scenario. Lastly, a Level III course, which has the highest level of learning outcome, will make learners 'semi-experts' in the field of study."

Typically, one can use ball-park figures or guidelines for Level I and II courses, says Koh, but Level III courses are too customized and pricing and interactivity can range widely -- from scenario-based learning (where there is no clear, structured path) to simulators (both simple and complex). "Hence, for Level III courses, we usually need to do a detailed scope before defining the cost." As for Level I and II courses, he says, the cost usually depends on the cost of development and the duration of the completed product. In Koh's organization, the cost of developing a one-hour Level I course is $8,000 (U.S.), and the cost of developing a one-hour Level II course is $12,000 (U.S.). As mentioned, another way to define interactivity is by media creation. A Level I course, for example, might be classified as one that contains an interactive object (e.g., video, animation, or a quiz) on every 10 pages; a Level II course might boast an interactive object on every five pages; and a Level III course might feature an interactive object on every page.

The latter definition (by media type), says Koh, is more straightforward -- "as the more interactivity you need to build, the higher the effort, and hence, the higher the cost." Last but not least, is interactivity worth it? In Koh's experience, more interactive objects do not necessarily mean better courseware, "as the interactive objects could, at best, be bells and whistles and, at worst, be distracters."
"On the other hand, defining the learning outcome, and then designing the courseware based on that, will keep the instructional designer very focused on the outcome, and hence, [more apt to] attain the objective set out in the needs analysis of the courseware.

And if you are able to meet the needs that are to be met by developing the courseware, wouldn't the cost be worth it, regardless of the interactivity level? And if you are teaching something more complex in order to resolve a more complex problem, then wouldn't that warrant a higher-value solution?" Koh is a senior consultant at eLearning Consultants Pte Ltd, a content development solution provider in Singapore specializing in information and instructional delivery.