Two of the most important characteristics of good design are discoverability and understanding.
Don Norman (2013 p. 3)
I am reading Don Norman’s book, “The Design of Everyday Things.” In his book, Don Norman describes the importance of good design. His examples range from doors to teapots to nuclear power plants. However, his model remains the same, that design should be intuitive. This includes designing from the users’/learners’ perspective.
When designing courses/training for learners, the first step is to ensure the training is “discoverable and understandable” (Norman 2013 p.3). When we design and organize a Learning Management System, a Learning Design Community, or even a Blog, the first question must be, is it easy for learners to find and understand the content they need?
It is the duty of machines and those who design them to understand people.
Don Norman (2013 p.6)
Don Norman states that it is the responsibilities of designers to create effective user-friendly content. When we get excited about new learning solutions like augmented reality or virtual reality, we still need to ensure they are designed in a way that will help learners, rather than leave them frustrated. We need to ensure the tech companies responsible for these learning solutions create a well-designed product that make students and designers happy.
I recently read an article about how frustrating it can be when a classroom is forced to use a system that does not work for them (Hashir 2021). The Reddit thread described a teacher who was so frustrated with the program his students were forced to use. He encouraged his students to take screenshots of every error they encountered and send them to the CEO (and other executives) of the technology company. This resulted in no longer being forced to use a program that did not work for them.
When design is done well, our jobs are made so much easier, but when it is not, or we are forced to use technology before it’s ready…mayhem can ensue.
References:
APA. Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things. MIT Press.
Thank you for posting this. This is one of a big bushel of books I’ve always meant to read, but (*ahem*) just haven’t been able to yet.
It’s always seemed to me that for the most part, good design isn’t even more expensive than bad design (and, as IKEA would like to tell us, might even be less) and yet mediocre design surrounds us. Why, when ideas (good or bad) are equally free?
As an example, consider an extension cord. On one end, a familiar “male” plug that connects with our wall socket, and sticks out an inch and a half into the room for no particular reason. We can also, perhaps, purchase an extension cord with a “90 degree” plug that sits nearly flush with the wall, but most often for a higher price.
The “90 degree” plug doesn’t seem to require any more plastic or metal in its construction — maybe even less — and surely there’s no pricey microprocessor technology in there. It’s literally just bent, so why should it cost any more? Better yet, why shouldn’t it just be how ALL extension cords are made? Are there end users out there who NEED their plug to stick out and get in the way? Is there a benefit to the classic plug that I’m just unaware of? Is there some benefit to the manufacturer, if not to the user? What are designers considering, if not things like this?
As designers of educational materials, we might do well to remember that better can also be cheaper (or easier) and that the user experience is the sole measure of the goodness of what we do.
Thank you Sean for giving this excellent example! The 90 degree plug should become the “standard plug” as it is designed much better. As a fan of IKEA I agree that they’ve built a platform on good design and personalization. For example, the KALLAX shelves (my boardgame shelves) have the option to add on shelf dividers, shelf doors, and more.
I also love your quote “As designers of educational materials, we might do well to remember that better can also be cheaper (or easier) and that the user experience is the sole measure of the goodness of what we do.” And I absolutely agree with that. However, I listened to a webinar by the great Tim Slade last year, in which he showed this graph: https://images.app.goo.gl/1YrJ4oBLmK8q5X9J6
Well designed objects/training can be well-designed and cheap, but great designs rarely can be produced quickly.
I love this Ted Talk. Design is so important, especially within technology. This video reminded me of The mere-exposure effect, which is basically a psychological phenomenon in which people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them.
Do you think the design in technology that we use for education will always be slowly changing in response to the current media trends? For example, I’ve seen a lot of the design concepts of Minecraft adopted into other platforms. Which I assume is due to its popularity and familiarity among the younger users.
Great post as always Emma!
Thank you Mike for introducing me to the mere-exposure effect. To answer your question, I think in order to engage learners we, as educators, look for design concepts from popular platforms (like Minecraft). I’ve seen popular game shows like Jeopardy or Family Feud be adapted to the classroom setting as well. Therefore, I don’t think it always needs to be current media trends, per se, but that we need to be knowledgeable of the current media trends to leverage them when we can use them to solve a problem within the classroom (for example, disengagement).