Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Internship
Context
In the summer of 2023, I interned with the Applied Learning Sciences team at Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (HMH), an educational publishing company.
I engaged in preliminary discovery work for a taxonomy (called a learning spine) to assist with the organization and development of Social Studies content for HMH's Connected Teaching and Learning System.
While I am unable to share the detailed outcomes of this design work I am happy to share my process below!
Design Challenge
Design Process
Guiding Literature, Lenses, and References
I consulted standards from multiple states as well as national guidance for Social Studies and science to develop ideas rooted in the different approaches to Social Studies education.
College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework & National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies
These two documents outline the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS) suggestions for a robust social studies curriculum.
While these are not reflected in the standards and curriculum used in every state this provided some guidance on what could be expected and a reference point for a quality social studies product.
Next Generation Science Standards
This is a nationally accepted set of science standards and was used as the starting point in the development of a science taxonomy. Science standards, like social studies standards, closely integrate content matter with disciplinary skills.
Using this in conjunction with the previously created science taxonomy helped me address one of my biggest challenges: dealing with content and skills that are closely intertwined in some standards but not others.
Building Mental Models
The theory at the center of my project was building and supporting mental models. Mental models are the cognitive frameworks that we use to represent, interpret, and organize the world around us.
These are especially useful in supporting learners as they make sense of complex concepts, like those central to Social Studies. Approaching social studies content through the lens of mental models promotes a conceptual grasp of the subject matter and steers away from the rote memorization of facts.
Iteration 1
My work centered on the history segment of the learning spine. This seemed to be the most complex, and trying to address content and practices concurrently was an exciting challenge for me.
In the first iteration, I developed three ideas of how a Social Studies learning spine could be structured using research from the guiding literature and feedback from the Applied Learning Sciences team and my Learning Engineering faculty and classmates. I presented each of these options with their implications and challenges to the Social Studies Team for suggestions, feedback, and advice on how to move forward.
Design Descriptions and Feedback
State Standards
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and New Mexico have social studies standards that are drastically different.
Utilizing these standards allowed me to understand the variety of approaches to social studies education that need to be represented in the learning spines. These approaches range from the content-heavy standards of Ohio to the inquiry skills-based standards of Illinois.
Iteration 2
In the second iteration, using feedback from stakeholders, additional standards sets, and additional research, I develop a new organizational structure. Stakeholders expressed interest in one of the previous design ideas, so I used that as a starting point for this iteration.
I presented Design Idea 4 to stakeholders, highlighting the challenges and affordances of this approach to organization and labeling along with my own recommendations of how to move forward with this social studies taxonomy.
Design Descriptions and Feedback
While I am unable to show visuals of the second iteration, I am able to provide a general design description and a synthesis of feedback I received from the stakeholders and collaborators.
Critiques
Supporting and Building Mental Models
What went well: The project as a whole centered on building mental models around social studies. A strength of this design was that I developed a structure that supports users to see the connections between the themes, eras, and skills of social studies. The hope is that content developers will be able to use this taxonomy to support learners in making those connections as well.
What could be stronger: There are connections across the social studies disciplines that I didn't have the opportunity to explore fully ( for example, the relationship between geography and economics). Designing a structure that better supported thinking about social studies as a whole and not separated by the different disciplines would have supported the development of mental models around interdisciplinary Social Studies.
Addressing Variation in Users
What went well: While I was not designing a tool that would be for direct learner use, I still attended to the variations in my intended end users. For my final design, I articulated the implications of the organizational structure for teachers looking for resources, content developers designing, and the curriculum adoption process. Collaborating with experts in some of these fields gave me the chance to elicit critique from a variety of standpoints, which ensured its usefulness to each set of users. Additionally, the structure I proposed supported variations in how teachers approach history education - the structure supports thinking about history thematically, through practices, and through a more traditional chronological and location-based approach.
What could be stronger: I was initially fixated on one use case: how a teacher may be able to use this to help them navigate resources. This was based on my prior experience as an educator. It took me longer than I had hoped to consider how a learning spine could be used from the content development and sales perspectives.
Design Process
What went well: My work on this design was heavy on research -- starting with developing a deep understanding of the learning challenge. The concept of a taxonomy used to label curricular materials was foreign to me. In order to understand the challenge better I had to take advantage of all of the methods I as a designer have to develop an understanding of what I'm being asked to do. Looking into research literature, prior approaches, and most importantly talking to people who have experience with similar challenges were all valuable pieces of information that gave me a strong foundation for my design work.
What could have been stronger: This design process could have been stronger if I had incorporated more critique from stakeholders and end users during the first iteration. This would have allowed me to develop my first design ideas with more depth and certainty.
What I Learned
When designing for K12 education, standards aren't the end all be all of learning. They need to be considered, but often putting aside the standards and having imagination about what GOOD learning looks like is necessary to design for supporting learning.
Consulting with a wide variety of people is important for the most effective design. Different collaborators have insights into different aspects of the design. Each of the groups I consulted with (stakeholders, the Applied Learning Sciences Team, peers, and professors) was able to look at my design from a unique perspective and give feedback that pushed my design forward.
Getting other people to see your vision can be challenging, and can take multiple attempts. The Social Studies team was initially skeptical about the usefulness of a learning spine to their work as Learning Experience Designers. Even after the first iteration, there was a feeling from the team that developing and using a Social Studies spine would be too challenging. However, after my final presentation, I received feedback that the work I had done helped the team visualize what a spine could be and how they may be able to move forward.
It's important to balance what you think is “right” and what is useful to stakeholders. In this project, there were instances where my ideas of how to move forward did not align with stakeholders' views. But designing something innovative and in line with theory might not be easily understood by others, and it that case it doesn't have the intended impact. It does no good to be alone on a soap box.
Through this process, I learned what is meaningful for an educational publishing company. I've had plenty of experience with the final products but seeing the intricate work that goes into developing learning materials that have some connection to the learning sciences was exciting.
Good leadership requires giving both trust and support. My experience with my mentors at HMH was superb. I was given the independence that I needed to do my own research, ask the questions I thought were important, and follow my intuition. At the same time, I had the support I needed to refine my work and participate in a work environment that was very different than my previous experiences.