Summit 2017 Reflections and Review

by Marcia Shannon, Secretary

 

THE (emphasis intended) event of the year, of course, was the Summit, with the theme Gain the Edge to Get Results. Our IDL Sig was well represented by attendees and speakers at a conference packed with education, information, networking, and fun.

I am very glad that I participated in this year’s Summit. I am in the process of taking my career in a new direction and this was an opportunity for exposure to a wide and deep pool of technical communication expertise and experience.

I had several goals for my Summit adventure: to put faces to the voices of the people I have met through online SIG meetings, webinars, and online classes; to freshen my perspective on my career in technical communication; to socialize with fellow tech commers; and to learn about techniques, trends, and theories in technical communication.

Did I gain the edge to generate improvements in my career and in my writing? Yes. I was engaged, energized, and found at least one take away idea in each session. I attended the opening and closing talks and ten education sessions. Two of my favorites were Leveraging Cognitive Science to Improve Structured Authoring, presented by Rob Hanna and A Tech Writer, a Map, and an App, presented by Sarah Maddox.

In Leveraging…, Rob described how to increase the effectiveness of documents by structuring them the same way people think and learn. A Tech Writer… was something of an adventure: Sarah decided that she wanted to write an app that would display a map of technical communication-related events. She described stepping way out of her writer’s comfort zone to learn how to develop the app, how she engaged developers to participate in a group revision of the app, and how we can participate in keeping the app up to date.

Use these links to see and use what Sarah built:

Another engaging (and interactive) session, Gamification of Instructional Design by Phylise Banner, was an introduction to Learning Battle Cards, an instructional design technique new to me. I am still chewing on what I learned and am researching for additional information about this topic. I will have more with details about this in the next newsletter.

Did I meet, interact with, and engage with other people, both known and unknown? Yes, I definitely did all of those. There were plenty of opportunities to network or just chat between sessions, at receptions, breakfast, and lunch. I enjoyed conversing with other techn comm professionals because we shared common experiences and language. Learning one-to-one from someone else and sharing my own expertise made every minute interesting. All of my Summit goals were well met.

If you did not attend the Summit, look for regional conferences, online meetings, and webinars where you can dust off your ideas, learning and teaching with other tech commers. Our SIG will keep bringing opportunities to you, so check the web site regularly.

Rapid Prototyping

By Whitney Lewis 

Rapid prototyping is way to save money and time by getting feedback on your design and ideas immediately. Trust me, it’s the way to go and by the end of this article, you’ll be able to incorporate rapid prototyping into your design process.

Rapid Prototyping and Testing

There are a lot of different ways for testing our instruction. We have one-to-one evaluations; formative evaluation; focus groups; user testing; participatory design; and many more. Including the user is at the heart of these testing strategies, which is no different for rapid prototyping.

Rapid prototyping is testing the design or the instruction as soon as possible at the beginning and then throughout the entire production process. To imagine what this looks like, here is a scenario: I’m creating instruction for a software company. The instruction is on how to use a certain program, so I do some initial steps to get an idea of how this instruction will look. At this point, I could begin rapid prototyping with inexpensive tools like pen and paper. I would sketch out the flow and include as much information as I can, so the interaction is as authentic as possible (for a paper prototype). Now, all I need is to gather 4-5 users from my target population and hold a user test.

This might seem a little weird because we are using paper to test an interaction that may be electronic, but the fantastic thing about rapid prototyping is that it doesn’t matter. You will still learn so much from your users before investing a lot of time and money creating the learning product.

At this point, you have gathered some good insights from your first user test with your first paper prototype. Now, you can create an even more informed second prototype. This process can repeat with a version of the final learning product that is bit by bit more completed and effective than the last. Before you know it, you have a final draft and are ready to do a more formal evaluation for a final deliverable.

Challenges

Rapid prototyping is testing with your target population at multiple stages throughout the design process. Because the testing is so frequent, the biggest challenge is finding people in your target population for your tests. Depending on your company and the scope of the project, this can be difficult. Even if the resources or people are not available to test a paper prototype or an initial digital prototype, it can and still should be done with either SMEs, the client (whether internal or external), other instructional designers, or anyone. You will still learn much about your design that can be incorporated into your next prototype.

Benefits

You may have heard the saying, “fail early and fail often”. This seems discouraging, but can be quite liberating when looked at it the right way. So, let’s examine how this aphorism applies to rapid prototyping.

Failing early just means learning that something doesn’t work before a lot of money or time has been invested in it, which is a very good thing. Learning a certain aspect of the instruction won’t work after spending countless hours developing it, can feel like a true failure. But, learning that it won’t work after a low-cost prototype? Well that saves you time, money and effort. The lessons learnt pay rich dividends as they inform the next iteration of the design.

On the flip side, maybe you have an out-of-the-box idea you need to get your manager or client on board with. Testing it early in the process, using low cost materials and without spending a lot of time, could result in finding it is a great way to move forward and now everyone is on board. This is where “fail often” comes into play. Because we are rapidly prototyping without spending a lot of time or money on a prototype, we can try new, creative ideas without the pressure of “I’ve invested so much into this now, it’s got to work!” We can truly participate in the creative process to find ideas that shine.

Overall, rapid prototyping is how we can try out big ideas and, if we are lucky, get the backing for them. Or they can fail: So what? We are still lucky because only a little time and a little money was lost.

How to Start Rapid Prototyping

To start rapid prototyping, you’ll need to know two things: the process and the tools to use.

The Process Tools

 (from low cost/little time to higher cost/more time)

 1. Select the tool for this iteration

2.  Build the prototype as authentic as possible

3.  Test with users

4.  Debrief – understand what was learned and what changes should be made

5.  Repeat the process

  • Paper and pen
  • PowerPoint
  • Wireframing tool (InVision, Axure, Adobe Suite, etc.)
  • Tool used for final product

Videos and Websites on Rapid Prototyping

Here is a list of links to websites and videos with more information on rapid prototyping:

 Websites 

 

Videos 

 

Whitney Lewis is committed to problem solving through design thinking strategies such as empathy, co-design, diverging on problems, and rapid prototyping. She strives to bring these strategies into her educational and professional work by including her audience every step of the way, to gain valuable insights and by starting with low fidelity products before beginning development. During her time at Intuit, Whitney has learned the importance of these strategies as she connects with her customers, to help improve training. She intends to complete her Master’s in Instructional Technology and Learning Sciences in May 2018. She aspires to transform online corporate training into seamless and enjoyable experiences.

Technical Communicators’ Empowered with the User-centered Approach to ISD

By Jessica Lynn Campbell, Alex Gurtis, Gabriel Latorre

 

Jessica Campbell

The evolution of web-based tools, applications, and digital communication today has changed the role of a technical communicator. It is necessary to bring technical communicators into the usability testing process earlier in the design and development of instructional applications. This optimizes both the effectiveness of the product and the end-user experience. Instructional System Design (ISD) is the process of creating instructional aids that help learners gain proficiency in a subject matter.

Alex Gurtis

Usability testing for ISD is often done procedurally, which is to say, as a standard practice; however, technical communicators are not effectively used during development. When focusing only on whether software worked rather than if the user experience was optimal, ISD teams miss the mark on the value of usability testing. A product is not successful if the end-user is not able to effectively employ it.

Gabriel Latorre

Even today, when developmental teams include a variety of experts and deploy various quality assurance testing, a prevalent problem is the lack of simultaneous discourse production and user testing. Thus, the need for technical communicators to be involved the in the process is made evident. Researcher Robert R. Johnson agrees, “Bringing users to the table with writers and developers is necessary if we are to do more than just represent the fictional user in technologies or texts.”

With the proliferation of many online instructional technologies, usability testing must play a central role in the design, development, deployment, and discourse of instructional systems. According to scholar Elizabeth Fanning, the understanding of students’ computer-based education, “may evolve into a more personalized, expressive dynamic.” Technical communicators are at the forefront of integrating user testing into the design and developmental process, which affords ongoing feedback on the functions and features desired by the audience. When a technical communicator brings user testing into this process, both the user and the design and developmental process benefit from the enhanced knowledge of end-product use and context.

Technical communicators’ user-centered approach to instructional system design and development is critical to the success and usability of both the end-product or application and the corresponding technical communications. The user-centered approach to ISD guarantees the purpose of instructional systems will be achieved, as developers are able to make incremental changes to the system that are informed by the results of simultaneous user testing. Dianne Cyr and team found that even the slightest details of an online environment can improve and enhance a user’s experience. Their research shows how the mere placement and position of images and text focuses users’ attention on certain paragraphs and phrases. Understanding these minute aspects of a system design enables designers and developers to emphasize important content in instructional systems, which enhances the effectiveness of the system. Technical communicators are uniquely positioned to understand these minute details, which makes it vital to involve technical communicators in the ISD process.

A similar conclusion is echoed in Shahron Williams van Rooji’s study of a collaborative team of students. After working together to build an instructional website, the design team concluded that to create an effective instructional interface, an ISD team should focus on a user-centered design. This approach includes identifying elements such as users’ interaction with the data display and how they comprehend the information.

In today’s technological landscape, consumers demand not only innovative, functional technology, but user-friendly products. The practice of a user-centered approach to ISD ensures developers’ focus on functionality. As online interfaces, games, and instructional platforms evolve, users expect more stimulating learning environments. It is key for ISD teams to identify their target audience and their needs to accurately build in the instructional system elements that will facilitate learning. Technical communicators’ user-centered approach enables the design and development of effective instructional systems and optimizes the end-user experience.

References

Cyr, Dianne, Milena Head, Hector Larios and Bing Pan. 2009. “Exploring Human Images in Website Design: A Multi-method Approach.” MIS Quarterly 33 (3): 539-A9.

Fanning, Elizabeth. 2008. “Instructional Design Factors as They Relate to the Creation of a Virtual Learning Environment.” Journal of Interactive Instruction Development 21 (2): 24-42.

Johnson, Robert R.  2004. “Audience Involved Toward a Participatory Model of Writing,” In Central Works in Technical Communication, edited by Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber, 91-106. New York: Oxford University Press.

Williams Van Rooij, Shahron. 2013. “Usability Testing with Online Research Panels: A Case Study from the Field of Instructional Design.” International Journal on E-Learning, 12 (4): 403-423.

Jessica Lynn Campbell received her Master’s in English-Technical Communication, from the University of Central Florida. She has a Bachelor’s in Psychology, from the University of Wisconsin-River Falls. Jessica is an expert and experienced technical communicator, author, and multi-media manager having been published on multiple media platforms including print and online. Jessica has been an active member of the Society for Technical Communication, since 2010, and has been a mentor in the group’s Mentorship Program, since 2014. She is skilled in APA, MLA, Chicago, and Bluebook citation styles. Her scholarly interests include digital spaces and online connectivity, online sociality, the consumerization of the consumption of animals and deconstructing social norms, and digital marketing. Jessica can be reached at jessica.campbell@embarqmail.com or 407-810-7542.

Alex Gurtis is Technical Communications major at the University of Central Florida and will receive his degree in August 2017. In addition to being a talented technical writer, he has published creative works in the Santa Fe College literary journal “Zephyr.” Alex has been a member of the Society of Technical Communicators since 2016.   

Gabriel Latorre graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Technical Communication from the University of Central Florida in 2017. Gabriel is a skilled technical communicator in the areas of web design and web communications. Having studied markup and programming languages, Gabriel is proficient in creating, communicating, and designing websites that effectively deliver a user-friendly experience. Gabriel’s academic hobbies include learning programming languages, creating user-friendly designs in websites, and implementing a concise and effective language in user manuals. Gabriel can be reached atlatorreg@outlook.com and at 407-916-9978.

Session Review: Credibility in Responsive Design

By Sylvia Miller

 

Have you ever looked at a webpage, perhaps of your own content, on a desktop computer and wondered, “What would this look like on a mobile device? What will become tiny, and what will not be visible at all?”   Dr. Clinton R. Lanier presented an excellent session at the Summit on responsive web design (RWD) titled “How to Fix the Credibility Problem When Using Responsive Design.” I’d like to share some key points here in case you, like many technical communicators, are now having to develop for both desktop and mobile device viewing.

First, a few basic facts to remember when developing content that will be viewed on both a desktop computer and a much smaller mobile device:

  • Online content has to be optimized to the viewing window in which it is being displayed.
  • Online content can immediately (“on the fly”) arrange or rearrange to fit the screen’s width.
  • You might need to exclude some content or resize items.
  • Designers decide how the above is accomplished.

Dr. Lanier began by establishing that (a) content must be indexed to be found online, (b) content competes against other content created by random people or organizations, and (c) the content must be responsive to multiple viewing platforms for viewing preferences and search engine optimization (SEO). “Therefore, content from legitimate organizations must appear credible as a requirement to be used,” he asserted. He noted that little attention is paid to the credibility of responsive/mobile sites with much more attention being paid to usability.

So what makes a website credible, you ask? Quoting from 2007, 2009, and 2011 studies, Dr. Lanier gave many characteristics of credible websites, including these:

  • Visual design (graphics and structure)
  • Social cue design (human-like features, assistive interface)
  • Informative-ness and informational quality
  • Brand alliances
  • E-Assurances
  • Usefulness and ease of use
  • Third-party recognition
  • Consumer feedback mechanism
  • Sponsor credibility (information source, advertisements on the page)

A 2014 study done at Dr. Lanier’s university—New Mexico State—made some interesting findings about RWD. Researchers randomly separated 53 participants, median age of 36 years who were native English speaking, into two groups. One group read an article on a desktop (Mac with wide screen), while the other group read the same article on a smart phone. Both groups completed a questionnaire afterwards. Participants were asked to judge the credibility of the website, article, and author on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being lowest and 5 being highest. They were asked the following:

  • How likely are you to agree with the author’s point?
  • How credible did you find the website that published this article?
  • How credible did you find the author of this study?
  • How important is the argument made by the author?
  • How accurate did you find the information in the article?
  • Please write the name of the website this article was published on.
  • Please write the name of the author who wrote this article.
  • Your age
  • Do you use a smart phone to view websites?
  • Do you use a desktop computer to view websites?
  • Have you ever read this article?
  • Have you ever heard of the author of this article?
  • Have you ever visited this website?

The participants judged the desktop version to be MORE credible for ALL questions except two: (a) how credible did you find the author; and (b) how important is the argument made by the author. The sponsor (in this case, The Chronicle of Higher Education,) did not appear in the smart phone’s window: The credibility that would have been earned by the article from its association with the renowned publication was lost. Plus, the lack of any peripheral information did not allow readers to judge associations. Also, graphics in the smart phone’s window took up way too much real estate, as did the font size of the article’s title.

Dr. Lanier advised, as a result of the study, that to maintain credibility in web content we ensure a site is usable and functional, and information is grammatically and technically accurate. We should also ensure that the logo is prominent and at the top and remains prominent and in view. He also urged us to ensure that some authority is mentioned before the content and provide peripheral information immediately to establish associations. And, of course, we should ensure that the author is attributed immediately and prominently. These are all great points to remember when developing content for responsive web design.

Summit 2017: Session Reviews

By Jamye Sagan

 

During the 2017 STC Summit at National Harbor, MD, I attended several interesting, insightful presentations. Here are highlights of some of them.

 

 

Picture Perfect! How to Turn Words and Data into Powerful Graphics

Mike Parkinson (@Mike_Parkinson)

Graphics creation has always been of interest to me, as graphics can complement the written narratives I must prepare as part of my IDL work. So, I thought this presentation would suit my needs perfectly – and it did.

Parkinson explained how pictures are easier to understand than words, by demonstrating how more effective a diagram of how to tie a tie was vs. a paragraph on how to do so.

He also explained the “concept and render” method for transforming data into graphics. “Concept” pertains to defining one’s audience and determining what message to convey to them, while “render” refers to the physical assembly of the message into something visual. Parkinson provided a handy poster illustrating which chart/graphic element works best for visualizing data.

What I found most intriguing is that the designer need not have the fanciest software to create graphics. Parkinson demonstrated how he used PowerPoint to create an image of a padlock, which he incorporated into a graphic showing bullet points about keeping data secure. Here the graphic—a padlock—resonates with the message of data security.

Very useful presentation!

 

 On track! Running Effective Meetings

Viqui Dill (@viqui_dill)

Oftentimes, meetings can be a waste of time because they go all over the place without  a clear purpose. In her spotlight talk, Dill shared useful advice for conducting meetings, including:

  • Establishing a parking lot for ideas not relevant to the meeting topic. Doing so not only helps keep the meeting on track, but also communicates respect for the teammate bringing up the idea.
  • Collecting feedback, especially CONSTRUCTIVE feedback about how the meeting could have gone better

Dill kept her presentation fun yet educational with her aerodynamic icebreakers (I won my flying pig by knowing the Wright brothers’ names!) – another tip for conducting effective meetings: Dill swears by icebreakers because they get people talking, interacting and thinking.

I was most surprised to hear that meeting attendees should not generate any deliverables at meetings, especially if the purpose of the meeting is to discuss a specific subject. I had to ponder that statement for a bit, because sometimes we do have meetings where we actually do create or edit deliverables. However, if that is not the meeting’s purpose, then of course deliverables should not be created.

Fun and effective talk!

 

Six Super Success Hacks

Leah Guren (@Leah4CowTC)

In her spotlight talk, Guren shared six actions people can take to become more professionally successful. These tips include:

  • Work your calendar – review your calendar at the start and at the end of the day. Also review your calendar at the beginning of the week. The most valuable piece of advice Guren gives is “check first, commit later” because if you miss a deadline, you risk being perceived as unreliable and unprofessional.
  • Stop lying to yourself. Work with your nature, not against. Ask yourself: How long did this take last time? What works best for me?
  • Lobby for the user. According to Guren, if you focus on the users’ needs, everyone wins! Ask yourself: How does this help the user? Am I providing my client with the right options?
  • Communicate like a pro. Guren recommends that you treat all text with respect, AND
  • Find the spotlight. Sometimes, this is hard since many of us have been conditioned to not brag about ourselves. However, modesty wins no awards. Ask yourself: What did I initiate? How did I contribute to the user experience or the bottom line?
  • Fake it ‘til you make it. Guren demonstrated how taking a power stance with one’s body can help build feelings of confidence: Body language can greatly help in building confidence Wonder Woman and Superman immediately came to mind. It really does work!

Guren also shared one final piece of incredibly SAGE advice, which I try to follow: Spend at least one hour a week to read articles and publications pertaining to your profession.

 

Video Provides the Edge

Mark Kleinsmith (@kleiny7352)

In his presentation, Kleinsmith explains how technical communicators should start embracing the “YouTube world”, which is to provide more video in support of autonomous work, since many people (especially millennials), tend to try 3-5 different strategies for troubleshooting the problem themselves before calling for help. In my work, I always google how to perform certain actions in the software applications I use – with much success.

Kleinsmith also argues that videos create bonds with customers, in that they readily provide information in a captivating, easy to digest way. He also explains how to incorporate videos into content–from editing software (Adobe Audition) to robust hosting platforms (Vimeo) that enable private viewing and user stats.

This presentation gave me much food for thought, about how to better incorporate video in my work – from embedding software tutorials in email communications, to using our in-house communication channels to promote these videos.

 Know Your Client’s Language

Chrystal Mincey (@Annika_2822)

Knowing what your client expects and what they want to accomplish are crucial to the project’s success. In her presentation, Mincey shared some tips for how to understand your client’s needs.  Main takeaways include:

  • Understand your role in helping your client reach the end goal. This includes knowing:
    • What the client expects
    • What their end goal is
    • Who is responsible for what
    • What the deadlines, schedules, and milestones are
  • Begin projects with the end in mind.
  • Always use style guides. If none exists, create one.
  • The client is always right – but may be open to change.

It all boils down to effective communication and never losing sight of the finish line.

 

So You Think You Know What Your Readers Want?

Yoel Strimling (@reb_yoel)

You know the saying “don’t make assumptions because they make an…”? Making wrong assumptions about the audience, dear readers, can result in our work not being as effective as it should. In his presentation, Strimling explains the research that is needed to determine what readers really are looking for, vs. what writers think readers need. In essence, readers want accurate, clear, and relevant documentation that provides VALUE. Readers want to feel it was their worthwhile to use the documentation that it made their tasks easier to perform.

Strimling effectively used a pen analogy in describing intrinsic quality of documentation.

When writing a letter, would one rather have a beautiful pen with no ink, or a cheap-looking pen with ink? Since the purpose is writing a letter, and not just gazing at the pen, the obvious choice here is the pen that works. In other words, if the documentation looks attractive but does not serve the intended purpose, it is useless.

Overall, Strimling challenged us writers to put ourselves in the readers’ shoes and ask ourselves: “If I were the reader, would this deliverable help me do my job better?” Now, whenever I design any materials, whether it be job aids or department memos, I always ask myself this question. It’s helped me focus on the purpose at hand, and what my readers need.

 

The Gamification of Instructional Design

Phylise Banner (@phylisebanner)

In her session, Banner took an interesting approach to showing how to incorporate play in the overall instructional design process. She demonstrated how to use the Learning Battle Cards (https://www.learningbattlecards.com/\) in exploring different aspects of instructional design.

Learning Battle Cards, which consist of a deck of 100+ cards, describe various forms of learning. Each card contains a wealth of information on:

  • Where in the instructional design process the concept occurs, from beginning to end
  • Type of learning (e.g. self-learning, formal, asynchronous)
  • Ranking of various characteristics pertaining to: production effort and time required by the educator, process effectiveness, and engagement and difficulty of use by the student.

Banner split us into smaller group and guided us in an exercise where we devised a basic training plan based on the cards we drew. These cards really helped us to look at instructional situations from different perspectives. Even if some of the concepts were unknown, our group still had fun devising a training plan for the project at hand. Although the cards right now are a bit pricey for my budget, I would like to eventually purchase a deck for my own enrichment.

 

How May I Help You?

Todd DeLuca (@TechCommTodd)

In his spotlight talk, DeLuca uses an analogy, likening technical communicators to restaurant workers. Are we the cooks, who toil behind the scenes? Or are we the waiters, who serve upfront? Of course, the customers are the diners enjoying the meal.

DeLuca proposes that technical communicators be more like waiters, since waiters interact with the customer and are therefore closest to the customers’ needs and expectations. There is nothing wrong with being behind the scenes like the cook, but one runs the risk of being too far removed from the customer.

I played around with DeLuca’s analogy in my mind: Technical communicators can also be chefs who emerge from the kitchen doors to showcase their dishes to the customers. After all, look at Wolfgang Puck or any other famous chef! How best to serve your customers? Well, getting to know them of course!