LinkedIn Learning Change Management Case Study

1

Case Study: Learning Design Thinking: Lead Change in Your Organization Michelle King Arizona State University EDT 523 Issues in Online & Distance Education Dr. Yi-Chun Hong March 2, 2021

2 Case Study: Learning Design Thinking: Lead Change in Your Organization Learning Context The Learning Design Thinking: Lead Change in Your Organization course is an asynchronous eLearning course delivered through the LinkedIn Learning Platform. The course is directed toward learners in a business setting who are interested in developing “tools and strategies that make meaningful connections with people” (McKinley, 2014). Learners across business areas can benefit from this course as the approach is centered on leading change rather than developing skills for a specific role. The course is designed to target learners who may have little to no skill in design thinking. Each video features the course instructor Turi McKinley from frog, a global design and strategy firm, delivering concepts and instructions for each lesson interspersed with key ideas presented on slides supporting the lesson. Lessons contain an area for note taking (notebook), overview of the lesson and Q&A section where learners share information and collaborate. Learners are invited to learning group for ongoing collaboration, provided exercise files, and can achieve certification for successfully complete all lessons and quizzes.

Instructional Goal, Objectives, and Structure The instructional goal of the course is to “teach learners how to help their teams adopt a design thinking mindset” (McKinley, 2014), through the defined learning objectives: 

Defining design thinking



Implementing a design thinking mindset and approach



Leading design thinking



Aligning the design team



Managing creative flow

3 

Guiding collaboration



Generating hypothesis



Concepting



Prototyping fast and often



Making a culture change

The course is structured into six sections which include videos, quizzes, and printable materials. Each lesson must be completed prior to advancing to the next lesson providing a linear programmed instruction benefitting learners by “revealing key ideas to learners progressively, which can help to avoid cognitive overload, while increasing knowledge retention” (Pappas, 2018). Learning happens “sequentially until all the content blocks are completed” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 101).

Course Structure: 1. Introduction (2 micro courses) - 2 min 51 sec 2. What is Design Thinking (6 micro courses) – 25 min 47 sec a. Quiz (4 questions – multiple choice and T/F) 3. Leading Design Thinking (9 micro courses) – 39 min 7 sec a. Quiz (5 questions – multiple choice and T/F) 4. Guide Creative Collaboration (7 micro courses) – 39 min 15 sec a. Quiz (4 questions – multiple choice and T/F) 5. Making to Advance Thinking (5 micro courses) – 15 min 40 sec a. Quiz (3 questions – multiple choice and T/F) 6. Closing and next steps (1 micro course) – 1 min 52 sec In each course section learners are invited to connect through discussion board using asynchronous communication. This approach gives learners “more time to think about their responses” leading to more meaningful contributions (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 235). In addition, learners may participate in a learning groups on LinkedIn, aligned with their business area, with other course participants reinforcing the collaboration of design thinking.

Technologies

4 The LinkedIn Learning Platform where the course is stored is a Content Management System and a Web 2.0 tool. Web 2.0 tools “represent the very essence of learner-centered instruction” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 110). The platform is accessible by LinkedIn subscribers for a monthly subscription fee of $29.98. Organizations that subscribe at an organizational level provide learnings with no cost to the learner. Each course is accessible through the LinkedIn platform by selection the LinkedIn Learning icon and searching by skill, subject or software.

Courses can then be refined by filtering the results by type (courses, videos, learning paths), level (beginner, intermediate, advanced), time to complete (<10 min through 3 + hours), Software (19 types), Subjects (20+ types), and Continuing Education Units (6 types). Learners may also select preferred language and accessibility options. All videos are closed captioned and have transcripts for learners. Courses are easy to access and complete via computer or mobile device.

The CMS is structured with the contents of the course in a list on the left side of the screen. The contents section can be collapsed or expanded at learner discretion by clicking on the word contents at the top left of the screen. Learners can view the topics and lessons, length of each lesson and overall structure of the course. On the right side of the screen is the area for video lessons with controls for learners to pause and move forward and backward while listening and watching the video. All videos have the options for closed caption, speed, quality, volume, and full screen viewing. Below the video lessons a toolbar with tabs for overview, Q&A (discussion board), notebook, and access to the transcript can be toggled by the learner. As each lesson is completed the CMS automatically advances to the next lesson. The completed lesson is marked by a green check mark.

The design and delivery of the course was done very effectively. The instructional designers focused on reducing cognitive overload, providing real-world examples, and

5 introducing concepts effectively without learners needing to complete prerequisites. The lessons were short, the longest only lasting 6 minutes, however the design thinking principles being taught were quite obviously also applied to the course design making each lesson memorable.

The barrier of cost is minimal but is still a consideration for learners. The CMS was designed so learners had access to everything they needed in one screen, reducing cognitive overload, and engaging the learner.

Instructional Strategies, Activities, Methods “An instructor must remember to think of strategies that engage learners in active rather than passive learning experiences” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 175). The instructional strategies employed in this course included microlearning “a learning strategy that involves small, focused segments of learning that are each designed to meet a specific learning outcome” (Admin, 2018); retrieval practice through section quizzes; and feedback through providing the correct answers to quizzes.

Instructional activities included recorded video presentations, discussion boards, learning groups, printable documents for note taking and deeper knowledge exploration, and clearly defined learning objectives. The course design considered “instructional strategies that work best to engage learners over time” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 176) by providing both passive and active engagement with the learning materials. The course opened with an overview of the course, expectations of learners and an overview of the CMS ensuring “at the beginning of the course students were guided as to the expectations for their participation, use of tools, and location of resources” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 176). Learners were expected to complete each lesson within the course content structure through watching videos, note taking and printable documents engaging learners to evaluate concepts like their current working style. In addition,

6 links to reading materials including case studies, books, articles, and other media were provided for further study. At the end of each section learners were provided a quiz ranging from 3-5 questions reinforcing the section lessons allowing learners to check their understanding. I did not discover an aspect of the course that did not meet the desired outcomes of the learning methods, strategies, and activities.

Instructor or Mentor Support Although there were many interactive options within the course, it was designed and released on the LinkedIn Learning platform seven years ago. From my review of the course contents, discussion boards and learning groups there was clear evidence that a high level of engagement continued after the course release to the present. There were several ways to engage with the instructor including email, discussion boards, and additional webinars upon completion of the course. I found no specific information on response time from the instructor, however I emailed the instructor directly and she responded within 24 hours. There were no guidelines around expectations of instructor communication due to the nature of the course but the instructor and other individuals from her organization actively respond to comments and questions on the course. In my email to the instructor I asked how and when she responded to students given the course has over 3,400 students who have taken the course. She responded that she receives notifications when someone submits a question and she responds as quickly as possible or has someone from her organization respond. She remains actively engaged with the course and with the students but there are no specific expectations for student/instructor interactions. She noted that the learning group mentors are more engaged in learning collaboration for course participants. I saw no comments reflecting a lack of response from the instructor or mentors leading me to believe the course communication is working as designed.

7 Assessment “Assessment is defined as the determination and measurement of learning” (Simonson, et al., 2019, p. 154). For this course, assessments were provided in the form of knowledge checks/quizzes at the end of each content section for the purpose of assessing the learning outcomes as defined by the course objectives. This is a self-paced course that is learner-centered, “learner-centered training puts the responsibility on the employee to successfully complete the training. As active participants, learners apply their minds to concepts more effectively and can utilize the knowledge in the workplace more readily” (Lamberti, 2017). Due to the nature and delivery of the course the evaluations are formative assessments focusing on “the active engagement of learners, including the extensive use of self-assessments designed to build a sense of ownership and responsibility within the students learning” (Simonson, 2019, p. 234). The assessment approach achieves the instructional goals, provides feedback for the learners on level of understanding and achievement and builds upon the learner’s prior knowledge through constructivism learning theory.

Overall Critique & Reflection I tend to be fairly critical of most eLearning due to the lack of clear objectives, lack of interaction, length of course and learning strategy. I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed this course and how well I felt the instructional objectives and strategies were delivered.

I learned several new tools and strategies I was not familiar with prior to engaging with the content, enjoyed the printable exercises, found the quizzes well designed and thought the length of the course was appropriate. It was clear the instructors applied design thinking to their strategy for the course which reinforced the learning for me. I am looking forward to incorporating these approaches into my learning design and believe all instructional designers

8 can benefit from these tools and strategies. The only weakness of the course is how long ago it was created. When I emailed the instructor I asked how they might be intending to update or change the course based on emerging technologies and she replied that they are considering updating some portions of the course or creating a new course expanding on the existing course.

As an instructional designer I was most intrigued with the micro learning approach and have been working on how to incorporate that going forward into my own design. It is an approach I see as valuable in the future of learning. As the course is now, I would not change any aspect of the design.

9 References Admin. (2018). Use These 5 Instructional Design Strategies to Create an Effective eLearning Course. https://www.shiftelearning.com/blog/instructional-design-strategies-effectiveelearning.

Lamberti, D. (2017, May 8). 5 Reasons Why Learner-Driven Training Is Good for Business. eLearning Industry. https://elearningindustry.com/learner-driven-training-good-business5-reasons.

McKinley, T. (2014). Learning Design Thinking: Lead Change in Your Organization. https://www.linkedin.com/learning/learning-design-thinking-lead-change-in-yourorganization/welcome?u=57692769 Pappas, C. (2018, March 16). 7 tips to create Linear ELEARNING COURSES. https://elearningindustry.com/7-tips-create-linear-elearning-courses.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., & Zvacek, S. (2019). Teaching and learning at a distance: foundations of distance education. Information Age Publishing, Inc.