No surprises and it takes this beyond the original scope of project but it will make it better to do the below as a more educational ooc even though I may no longer have time / input from content developers – it is worthwhile to improve it.
1. I am not quite sure who is the target audience for this course and what background one should have to benefit from this course. The aims suggest that the course is aimed at aspiring drug or technology developers and if that is the case, this course has given me some ideas of the process without empowering me to take any useful action.There is too much signposting to other materials which makes the course overwhelming and difficult to navigate. A good course should first and foremost have clear core learning outcomes and message. The topic headers suggest that there was a clear plan but what I observed in each topic was an ‘information dump’. We are in essence curators of open resources but a good curator will provide an accompanying narrative that will gently guide the learner through the resources. We were also taught in the PGCHE that ‘less is more’.Some of the resources seem meaningless for e.g. the ICMRA e-learning links just opens to a document with meta-data on various courses developed by the WHO.
In summary, I think the concept is good but the target audience needs to be identified; instead of course aims, focus on concrete learning outcomes (ideally, with reference to Bloom’s taxonomy, include fewer (and relevant resources), briefly outline what learning we want students to take away from the resource; have a brief but clear narrative describing each topic.
2. I guess, in the UK which is all I can comment on, R&D directors in trusts and their staff and HEI business managers involved in encouraging academics to commercialise could usefully use such course material either for themselves or for those they are advising. Could there be a useful route in through patent lawyers too? It is quite difficult to navigate ones way through the various options presented. I would have found a bit more linearity reassuring eg do a the b then c. In short, sharper editing needed. Worked examples in boxes are always useful. So would be a guide as to how long each element will take ( once more sharply edited).
3. We are getting some feedback from our students about videos, and many are keen on them but many still have bandwidth problems limiting access.
4. I reviewed the specific OOC on pharmaceutical development. Content wise it looks good and comprehensive. For the pharmaceutical industry, I’m guessing there are a lot of competing providers that have visually engaging content. Adding more visual content, animation, ppts etc – is that just effort for creating the content? Can the current application handle more visual content easily? Did you have a mobile version of this application? I do think there might be more grant opportunities if there was a mobile version of this training – especially something that can be delivered in an online-offline mode.