Håkon Skard
A pioneer in interactivity, Håkon Skard has a Mag.art. in Sociology, on the topic of communication and media, from the University of Oslo. His speciality is finding practical solutions to improve learning outcomes. In this interview he discusses the evolution of interactivity and shares some key points to consider when developing powerful interactive content in rapid e-learning courses.
Working with interactive training programs since the mid ‘80s, Håkon Skard has made a considerable contribution to shaping the industry’s ideas about interactivity. One of his earliest e-learning experiences was tailoring health and safety training for workers on oilrigs in the North Sea.
Even back in the mid ‘80s, Håkon understood the potential of interactive storytelling and developed his expertise in this field.
"I was perhaps the first person in Norway to make these types of interactive programs. The 1980s was a period of experimentation. A common example, often referenced, was a simulation where one could walk about inside an oil platform. The initial creators thought it was going to be fantastic, but in the end the creators discovered that there wasn’t actually any point in walking about in a landscape where the learner didn’t know his way around!"
The more successful – and now rather well known – method of creating realistic interactive situations that let users see the consequences of choosing various
courses of action, stems from this period:
"We carried out some experiments in interactive e-learning using a videodisc player and PC technology. We tried putting people into situations where their various choices could have different consequences. The main objective of course, was to teach the target group to identify the correct course of action from the wrong course of action – with emphasis mainly on correct actions."
This was at a time when it was not yet common for people to have a home PC, and years before the Windows interface and a mouse made the use of computers so simple that no understanding of the inner workings of the machine was needed. However, one of the strengths of e-learning is its democratic power to include people from all levels of an organisation in important processes. Håkon was convinced that interactive e-learning could be made accessible for target groups with no computer skills.
"One thing that I’m a little proud of from that period is how we used barcodes and A3 sheets of paper to create interactivity. This overcame the problem that nobody in the target group – who were oil rig workers in the North Sea – had any experience with computers. This was in 1987-88."
Interactive exercises range from a single question, where the user simply has to identify the right answer among several alternatives, to exercise sequences that let the user try out several different courses of action, and experience the positive or negative consequences of his or her choices. This is a great approach to lead the learner through an argument and encourage reflection:
"The core and smallest unit of interactivity is the single question. But interactivity should be more than simply making a series of individual choices. There should be a series of interactive exercises that give the impression that there is a continuous course of action going on. One choice should bring you on to the next situation and a new choice. So the choices you make will have consequences for your further choices."
Håkon believes that there are some specific things that distinguish a well-written exercise from a poorly written one:
"There must be some uncertainty of what the correct answer is. The alternatives must be written in such a way that it is not obvious what is right; the wrong alternatives mustn’t be plain silly. If they are, you are underestimating the users and making them feel stupid, and you have missed the target group."
However, a wrong answer that is habitually thought to be right can be a valuable tool in addressing common misunderstandings, says Håkon:
"A "red herring" – an alternative that seems like it could be right – gives a fantastic opportunity to address common prejudice and misconceptions, and encourage the user to think about their attitudes. It doesn’t matter if you answer a question incorrectly, as long as you are guided towards the correct answer."
Håkon has a lot of experience in creating e-learning programs that train towards competence in highly complex matters, and he advocates using interactive story lines to build up arguments and show the consequences of the users’ choices:
"Instead of giving feedback that immediately tells you what is right and wrong, it is much better to show the possible consequences of a choice. Generally, people already know what is right and wrong. Changing attitudes and patterns of behaviour is much more complicated..
In security training the differences between right and wrong can be very clear, but in programs about ethics things may be subtler. In these instances you have to make things concrete while creating room for reflection. Changing attitudes and courses of action is not as easy as achieving an understanding and knowledge of routines. You must stimulate the user to think about consequences, and to generalise from the concrete situation the user has been presented with. To simply show somebody the ethical guidelines is not enough.