Content & Goals
Due to the nature of our topic, we chose to do a Content Analysis over a Task Analysis. This enabled us to break down the content into manageable and understandable categories. The results of this analysis, combined with previous ones, helped inform our Goals and Objectives for the instruction.
This section was informed by the works of Morrison, Ross, & Kemp (2006) and Brown & Green (2015).
The combination of the needs and learner analyses provides a starting point... to determine the scope and sequence of the content to be included in instruction. The result of a [content] analysis is used to provide input for developing instructional objectives.
Brown & Green, 2015, p. 62
Content Analysis
Morrison, Ross, & Kemp Topic Analysis method (2006)
Our first decision was to pursue a Content Analysis instead of a Task Analysis since our material-to-be-learned involved more Facts and Principles rather than Procedures. This made the Kemp Topical Analysis approach the best fit for our needs. The organized contents is as listed:
Based on the interviews and surveys send to users, as well as the suggestions from our SME, the most concerned parts were investment and protection/retirement, however, after doing the first round of content analysis, we realized that integrating protection/retirement into investment makes more sense, and saves our efforts. Therefore, we reorganized the content structure as the tree above.
Besides the contents inside the tree, we are also thinking about adding an information section, where providing the recent investment trends for our users, for trends are a very important part of investment.
Goal Analysis
After finishing the content analysis and determining our focus, we then asked the question: What do we want our learners to be able to DO after this intervention? Using our research data as well as discussions with our SME, we narrowed it down to the following:
Goal #1
We want learners to understand the fundamental rules and concepts of investing.
Goal #2
We want learners to be able to create their own investment portfolios.
Mager's Performance-Based Learning Objectives (1997)
The problem with the goals above is that they lacked a lot of important details. Therefore, we decided to apply Mager’s performance-based objectives approach (Action, Condition, Criteria) in order to more rigorously define them.
Goal #1
Upon completing the learning module, learners will be able to understand the rationale and core concepts of investing.
Goal #2
Upon completing the learning module, learners will be able to create an investment portfolio that fits within their budget and risk tolerance.
Determining Objectives
We turned to the Morrison, Ross, & Kemp approach to objectives by categorizing our goals into Terminal Objectives (Goals) and Enabling Objectives (Objectives).
Terminal Objective #1
Enabling Objectives
Upon completing the learning module, learners will be able to understand the rationale and core concepts of investing.
-
Enabling Objective #1:
-
By the end of the first half of this learning module, learners will be able to name at least 3 investment methods and articulate their mechanism of how they work in the market.
-
​
-
Enabling Objective #2:
-
By the end of the second half of the learning module, learners will be able to analyze different products under each investment method by applying appropriate evaluation metrics.
-
Terminal Objective #2
Enabling Objectives
Upon completing the learning module, learners will be able to create an investment portfolio that fits their budgets and risk tolerance.
-
Enabling Objective #1:
-
By the end of the first half of this learning module, learners will be able to assess the risk profiles of different investment portfolios.
-
​
-
Enabling Objective #2:
-
By the end of the second half of the learning module, learners will be able modify portfolios so that they better fit the needs and situations of investors.
-