We interviewed the following individuals: Tim Shannon, Pam Gouldsberry, Judith Hall-Bayliss, Jill Garcia, Miriam Cohe, Bob Coleman, Ms. Barber, Mr. Birkholz, Mr. Keehan, Ms. Loudin, Ms. Hunter, and Mr. Taylor 

  Below are the themes derived from the responses we received to the following questions:

• Can you confirm your job title?

• Center Director (CD)
• Learning Capabilities Integration Center (LCIC) Deputy Director
• Knowledge Project Officer (KPO)
• Instructor / Professor
• Course Manager (CM)
• Department Chair

• Please describe your role relative to the learning asset design and development process.

LCIC:

• Must ensure competencies are integrated into courses as directed by Functional Integrated Product Team (FIPT) (Pentagon alignment)
• Not responsible for what is taught
• Department has slow grasp on integration of games and simulations
• Does not engage knowledge sharing piece; CDs have heavy workload
• Responsible for methodology, delivery method, and course design
• Responsible for deployment of learning assets following development / distribution to the regions

Performance Learning Director (PLD):

• Advocate for including something into a course

Faculty Professional Development (FPD):

• Aligns faculty training to Performance Learning Model (PLM)
• No role relative to the learning asset design and development process

CM:

• Not assigned until course is complete / manages pre-existing assets
• Could advocate for including something in a course – especially during revisions
• Selected by LCIC / Regional
• Responsible for balancing curriculum development and delivery
• Voluntary role / not a title
• May meet with FIPT for content / update
• Gets feedback on merit of instruction

Instructional Systems Designer (ISD):

• Advocate for new technologies to integrate
• ISD is a title; their role is different
• Matrixed to CD

KPO:

• Supports knowledge sharing /does not make decisions about technology in classes
• Intended to provide recommendations to all levels of how to better integrate KS assets into DAU’s Learning Environment (e.g., FIPT, classroom, Continuous Learning Module (CLM), distance learning (DL), etc.)
• Matrixed to CD

Instructor:

• Does not make decisions about technology integration
• May have the opportunity to participate in curriculum development / depends on LCIC relationship

• Describe any other roles you play in the learning asset design and development process.

• LCIC Leadership controls overall budget and timelines
• CDs Manage their own projects
• PLDs control / oversee  curriculum development
• CMs manage the courses for PLDs
• KPO and ISD matrixed to CD to participate in curriculum development
• Expectation is that instructors will take a more active role
• Instructors can make minor adjustments during course delivery
• Instructors are asked to pilot new courses/technologies
• Roles between LCIC and instructors are blurred

• Describe your role in integrating technologies in DAU’s learning assets.

• LCIC makes decision on technology integration / based on stakeholder input
• Instructors need time to figure out how to fit technology in
• Use “tools” such as Excel or Project because it is what they [the students] use on the job
• KPOs incorporate technology from the start – their role affords them the opportunity
• CMs have opportunity to include technology during revisions
• Instructors can make recommendations to CMs
• GLTC can make recommendations to LCIC

• What aspects of the technology selection and integration process would you like to be involved with?

• Mapping learning outcomes to objectives / particular technologies
• Standardized cases / scenarios built across the three levels
• More involvement in curriculum development process

• How are decisions about learning methodologies and strategies made? What’s your role in that process?

• Decisions are based on Bloom’s taxonomy, competency, learning outcome, business decisions, maintenance considerations, and measures of success
• That’s not done very well in our department
• Decision has already been made 
• Choices are not based on a learning best practices outcome
• CMs are open to recommendations, instructors share information amongst themselves regarding learning methodologies and strategies, especially after changes or new courses
• Learning Asset (LA) Integrated Product Team (IPT), PLDs, and CDs make the decisions about a course or learning asset

• Describe your role in aligning learning objectives and strategies with advanced learning technologies.

• Aligning learning objectives and strategies with ALT is largely based upon what the student would have access to in their office
• ALT can be addressed up front in the development of CLMs
• Does not select technologies
• Does not have the flexibility to alter or add to the class but does have some flexibility as to how to introduce a topic
• Learning objectives are normally in place by the time I get them
• Does not work with learning methodologies and strategies
• If you need them to use facts (response to question about aligning objectives with ALT)
• Uses technology such as Excel and PowerPoint for class
• Methods can change a little, but objectives have to be met
• After they have objectives, instructors create courses
• Would be good if tool could align objectives/strategies with advanced learning technologies so people could rationalize
• The internal development team looks at research for the knowledge project officers

• What factors influence your selection and integration of advanced learning technologies?

• What’s currently available
• If it’s directed or mandated
• Funding
• Content
• Bloom’s taxonomy level and course level (I, II, or III)
• Workforce demographics, learner characteristics
• Workforce bandwidth, access to computers and the internet, and security
• Section 508 requirements
• Having to update training materials due to technology integration
• Training the instructors on the technology
• Potential equipment malfunction which may be rated as “teacher wasn’t prepared”
• Having to change vendors to meet the technology requirement
• Speed to market and feasibility
• Having a designated champion for the technology and leadership buy-in
• Having a defined purpose for the technology
• Business decisions
• Engaging the user
• Ability to rate the content value, tag the content, download content
• Online response time
• Replicate and standardize technology across regions
• Number of students put through a course

• Given your role as it applies to integration of advanced learning technologies, what’s not working and what could be done more efficiently?

• Change the behavior of external stakeholders (don’t allow mandate such as “you have to do a three week classroom course”)
• Make training easy to deploy
• Diminish layers of approval to try new technology
• Select technology collaboratively with instructors
• Develop a methodical process on how and why to use each technology
• Provide good examples of how these new technologies work within the learning process
• Embrace new technology as quickly as GLTC identifies it
• Unify the micro-culture in each region and group
• DAU is working properly within the constraints of the DAU climate
• Be driven by learning outcomes and not technology
• Develop a means to make student assessment more efficient
• Shorten time to update continuous learning modules
• Address job needs first before delving into new technologies
• Fully exploit current capabilities before delving into new technologies
• Improve workforce access to internet and web-based applications
• Address technical barriers such as interoperability and bandwidth
• Overcome security issues
• Consider all classroom feedback
• Do not reflect technology malfunction as instructor problem
• Evaluations should not be multiple choice
• Improve evaluations to ask students “what works”
• Make classes tailor-able or scalable
• Do not dummy down difficult courses
• Remember to include experiential requirement
• Improve Ask A Professor process (question quality and response timeframe)

• Framework: Would you find something like this useful? Do you have any tools like this to help in your decision making process?

Affective responses

• I think it’s good that you’re addressing these topics
• An assessment tool would be helpful
• Research on the pedagogically appropriate use of technology will be valuable 
• ALT research is valuable; address technology implementation and security issues
• Providing technology options would be helpful
• Training on technology would probably be helpful
• User community – maybe helpful
• Based on inputs, showing evidence for decisions would be helpful
• Already get training on new classroom technologies
• Don’t need it because the decision has already been made
• No such tool currently exists

Potential uses of the framework

• Address technology barriers
• Can help answer the question "why we are doing something"
• Include real life subject matter examples
• User need should drive the framework
• Distinct use cases: core development, CLM, knowledge sharing, and targeted training
• Decision making tool, having a decision tree up front would be useful
• Tool would have to be available to DoD community since our mission supports them
• Tool would be part of the process as in the LAMP 709, as an analysis piece
• Need LCIC buy-in on the tool as it would help them
• Could assist with the Performance of Work Statement as part of the decision process
• Could integrate with Dr Hardy’s Learning Lab (desktop learning lab)
• Help determine the best delivery mechanism for a requirement, competency, issue
• Need a better mechanism to determine the best way to communicate the material
• Tool could be useful to CD/PLD and the LA IPT
• Identify technology purpose
• Identify how technology could make instructor’s role more efficient
• Could justify why use technology
• Address how technology can enhance level II and III content
• Support self-directed research on teaching remotely, security, and cost
• Explain how to exploit technology within security bounds
• Need to make technology reachable
• Major concerns: replication, security, money, method of instruction