Reduce authoring time for our partners, specifically degree partners. This meant:
This was a cross-functional effort, tightly aligned with the product team. My primary contributions were as follows:
The team met with our product researcher to get more context around what already knew.
There were three roles in the course authoring process, instructors, instructional designers, and course builders.
Improving the platform's capabilities to eliminate square pegs and blind spots completely would be a long term effort. Redesigning the UI also was not an easy fix. But what if we could create something in the shorter term to to make things more efficient? We asked course authors for samples of their blueprint documents and found common themes. What if instructors designed their course with a blueprint built to prevent some of the design phase issues and could be uploaded to eliminate some of the repetitive building work? That would be a win.
We can improve the authoring experience by providing a blueprint template that...
While some of the examples provided by course authors were in doc format, most were spreadsheets (Google Sheets or Microsoft Excel). That gave us the ability to embed logic into the template and use multiple sheets in a file.
We needed to start with the right principles to act as a guide to make sure we met the needs of our course authors. There were adoption risks if we didn't successfully adhere to them. We collaborated as a team to land on these three.
About how to use the template and about Coursera’s structure and pedagogical philosophy.
So it fit the current partner needs and workflows.
So it was easy to work with and could be a viable replacement for current design documents.
Using a spreadsheet gave us flexibility. My plan was to use an introductory sheet for initial grounding, an importable sheet which was the actual blueprint, and a sheet filled in with a real course example to show what a completed course should look like. The focus was mainly on the blueprint sheet. It took the most effort and was the primary subject for our testing.
I designed the template in parallel with engineering as they built out the backend. It wasn't quite like working on a plane's engine during flight, but it also wasn't uncommon to have to make adjustments mid-stream. I met frequently with engineers to make sure I didn't design too far ahead of them. The template evolved as engineering constraints evolved.
Using the principles, I leaned heavy toward education in the design. We wanted to make sure that we explained how the template could be used. With the I intention of being efficient, I built out quite a bit of structure by default so they could spend less time creating it and more time filling it in. Collapsable sections could let them focus on just what they needed at the time. And in terms of being flexible, I added hints about adding columns or rows in relevant cells and in the tips section.
After much iteration, collaborative team review, and feedback from internal partners, we landed on a version to put in front of real course authors. Below is the blueprint sheet in expanded and collapsed views.
While partners were receptive to the idea of using a template that could save them time, they were unlikely to use this. Some clear themes emerged.
Actually they don’t need that much. They just need to know how much they’d need to alter the way they work. Can they mostly work in the same way? In terms of customization and set up.
Actually it won’t, they’ll delete most of it and rebuild to match what they have as closely as possible.
Here's a deeper look at what didn't work and how I was able to correct it. We needed to stop over-explaining and stay out of the way.
A course structure was primarily made up of modules, lessons, and items (videos, readings, or assessments). Some things were required to be filled in for the import to work. There were also things things about how to use the template that I wanted to make sure were noted.
We didn't need groups, so they were the first to go. I also removed images and unnecessary tips as it added more cognative overload than useful guidance. I revised the tips that were still important, regarding notes within cells and explaining what's required.
There was too much structure here by default. It didn't fit the way they want to work. They said they'd delete most of it because they wanted more control.
After making the changes and more testing and demonstrations with course authors, we knew we had a viable product. They were much more receptive and willing to try our template on real courses. The final version consisted of three sheets, Start Here, Example, and FOR IMPORT, the actual blueprint and the most important sheet.
This purpose of this tab was to ground the user on our intention with this template. It was relatively straightforward in execution and didn't require a lot of revision. I used our writing guidelines to ensure the language was clear, concise, and informative.
This sheet was a filled-in version of the same blueprint used in the FOR IMPORT sheet. Its purpose was to act a reference for what a completed course should look like for a successful import.
This was the headliner. It was the featured product that took the most effort and was most crucial to get right.
The template was considered a big success and heralded at the annual partner conference. We featured it in a session where I co-presented and shared a demo video I made to walk through the process. By the end of the year, we had metrics to be proud of.
This was a chance to really cut my teeth on a rudimentary form of content design that isn't what you see everyday. I learned as I went, had to think on my feet, and adapted with evolving constraints.
This project was closely intertwined with the Import Flow.
Let's work together! Say hello.
