The flexibility of online learning is marvelous. We’ve got used to having greater range of choices in the way that material is arranged & presented; how our expertise is shown & demonstrated, when we choose to communicate & convey our thoughts, how we connect with peers and academics.
Flexibility has ramifications for curriculum, for the way that we go about our assessment. For the way that we see and use platforms, apps and devices and the materials and media that appear there. A student can study after hours, obtained their readings when it suits them, watch a micro-lecture. Participate in “classes” when they are ready. This flexibility was the pitch for “online learning”. But in focusing on flexibility, we may have unleashed a range of unintended side effects that come with the choice. Effects that could interrupt or disrupt the established paths of learning in education. (this could be seen as a good or bad thing, but that’s a topic for another blog post).
In this post, I’d like to focus in on the “support experience”. The “paper cuts” of institutional uptake, that interrupts the “anywhere anyplace” experience. By themselves a “paper cut” is minor and insignificant. But thousands of paper cuts begin to feel very painful. Something is wrong. Paper is abandoned.
“Maximum flexibility”? Convenience has a consequence. Despite the “any-time” and “any-place” core of the distributed digital network, campus is not prepared to shift away from underlying office based norms which fundamentally shape the work hours of those who offer support. Its unlikely that the teaching and learning centre will help with curriculum redesign at 2 AM. Will have advice on engagement with students, when the server has a wobble before a major assignment. T & L or tech support will never be an emergency services, promising instant answers 24/7 . Your education experience may be personally designed for you. But sorry, you’re on your own after hours.
So what’s the ed tech narrative? One is, let’s introduce another system? Chatbots, intelligent assistants, tickets. Or are these still the equivalent of a placatory answering machine message, explaining that your call is important to us. In my experience, a quick and timely response that really explains what is going to happen to a help request is something golden. Not a ticket, with a placatory number. But somebody reliable, who offers to understand the problem and can manage unreasonable time frames.
So, how well do we ed techies / learning designers manage to offer a “good” and “competent” online support experiences. In many cases, the good reputation of the help desk is held together using “duct tape”. Elearning staff perform heroics behind the scenes, accross challenging silos, in between management hierarchies, all to ensure a positive user experience. Sometimes during office hours, but way off a job description. Lots of times, once the kids have been put to bed. And in many cases they have no alternative to use an all purpose adhesive (duct tape) to hold the support process together.
Being ed techies, we assume that all answers are found with technology. I’d suggest that we take a step back. Find another route to diagnose the problem. Could “Service Design” assist. They’d point out that some of the problems include
- Vague articulation / understanding of roles and responsibilities among the support crew
- Incomplete or over bearing organizational workflow designs to resolve problems
- The organizational culture regards this as a junior position, for those with minor responsibilities
- People who are appointed to help desks have expertise that is shallow and limited experience.
- Capability gaps remain hidden from management
I’m not suggesting that we emulate call centres. But neither is a comforting pre-recoded answering machine messages suitable. Perhaps we could draw on the Service Design Field and especially check out their Service Blue Print. Could this be used to address the “duct tape” approach to support and shift the “Helpless Desk” to a “Service Desk”?
Incomplete advice, incompetent assistance and unavailable service are three of the most frustrating experiences when needing tech support. It doesn’t have to be that way (and sometimes support actually surprises you). Below are some journey maps to unpack the support experience. A model for us to look the territory, discover where everyone is tripping up. And a space to suggest a way to address the problem.