Hi Jenny,
In another post you asked if I would be ok sharing my footprint and my comments. I am fine with this and have attached my 2 files (the footprint as a pdf and the word docx of my comments) in this space. Not sure if this is what you were hoping for but here goes. : )
I should also let you know that right after I did this course I sketched my experience of the course and discovered was that there really were two "narratives" or what I might consider 2 courses in one. The course I have mapped (attached) involved using industry standard software to complete the assignments (with no negotiation). This "design dilemma" is not uncommon in courses that require students to "learn to use" specific tools while undertaking course assignments. While there is some wisdom in this approach and clearly students must use the software based on an "authentic" practice opportunity, this process must be unpacked to reduce the cognitive load. It requires specific design techniques to ensure that students are not "lost" in software and much more and thus it takes tons of time, often time faculty don't have. I have spoken with faculty about this design issue and they repeatedly tell me that they have no time to actually scaffold the acquisition of skills that would lead to a specific level of proficiency using the software so this results in a "learn as you go approach". Industry standard software is increasingly complex and in some disciplines this can really lead to issues for students. The instructor did not negotiate the tools and also took marks off if students didn't use the specified tools. The funny thing is that this was not a "design course" but actually one about culture and digital media and the instructor used the course to "slip in" design skills.....
see what you think : )
cheers,
Barb