on the E-Learning for Healthcare Plat- form. A second tier of the project was to then produce further modules outlining an additional four techniques. In addi- tion, a set of associated quick reference cards3
were updated and expanded. The project was commissioned in August 2017 and was expected to deliver by May 2018.
What actually happened? At the planning stage, it soon became clear that just lifting and shifting the original e-learning modules would not produce best results. We felt that stylis- tically the original was dated and key learning outcomes were getting lost. We wanted to simplify the learning from each module and make them more engaging visually. We decided to re-work the content of all modules and add in four new techniques to make a suite of 11 modules. The title was also updated to become the Knowledge Mobilisation Framework to reflect the shift to using knowledge rather than just managing it as an asset. Times- cales and budget were adjusted to take account of the revised specification. We took an action mapping ap- proach4
to understand our target
audience, define the learning outcomes and design the e-learning. Principles of good learning design underpinned the entire project and were re-visited at each stage of the project. Four of the modules use video scenarios to showcase the techniques in action. This was outsourced to a specialised company who worked with
April-May 2019
NHS Knowledge Mobilisation Framework postcards: quick reference guides to using 11 knowl- edge mobilisation techniques to help people learn before, during and after everything they do.
us to produce the video assets. We wanted to ensure the e-learning would be accessible via computer and mobile devices, and would be easy to maintain. The Adapt authoring tool is the standard software used by E-Learn- ing for Healthcare and we felt that it was suitable for our purposes. We took a rapid design approach to creating the content; designing directly into the authoring tool whilst developing the content. However, additional time was required for refining the beta-test version. Adding in suitable images, considering question set-up and responses, and working with the con- straints of the software all took more time than expected.
Why was there a difference? The specification for the project changed
at the beginning from what was originally requested by the project sponsors, leading to a change in scale for the project, deliv- ery times and cost.
The decision to use video was soon followed by a realisation that we did not have the expertise and skill required to produce this in-house. Working with the specialised company, Nice Media, was one of the highlights of the project. Shared responsibility for leading the project, driving forward actions and editing the content enabled a flexible but responsive approach that could be tailored to competing demands upon both our time. The iterative approach to authoring content and designing directly within the software avoided wasteful production of too much content or over-elaborate concepts.
INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL 49
NHS AlisonDay
pp48-50.indd 5
25/04/2019 13:08
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
