top of page

The Specter of "Interactivity"

A specter is haunting e-learning – the specter of "interactivity."

My Photoshop adaptation of the AI illustration, created by Gemini per my request
My Photoshop adaptation of the AI illustration, created by Gemini per my request


There is a long-standing (and partially correct) belief that active processing leads to better retention than passive consumption. This is why lecturers encourage taking notes. The physical act of translating a heard sentence into a written one requires a mental effort. You simply can’t fall asleep if you are busy writing notes. That’s how I studied in college 30 years ago; a demonstration of those notes to the professor was a required part of the assessment.


The mistake e-learning designers made was assuming that any physical movement equals active processing. However, there is a distinct difference:

  • In real life: writing a note requires a cognitive "synthesis" of the info.

  • In e-learning: clicking a "Next" button or a "Spinning Hotspot" requires zero synthesis.


If the learner isn’t clicking, they are sleeping.

The power of motor memory (kinesthetic learning) is only realized when the physical action correlates with the real-world skill. The Apple Pencil will be a great example for that: the grip, pressure, and movement mimic a real pen, the brain creates a direct neural pathway between the digital action and the physical craft of writing or drawing. This isn't just "interactivity"; it is proprioceptive learning. Clicking a mouse to "flip" a digital flashcard is a motor action, but you could just as easily hit the spacebar or blink – it doesn't anchor the knowledge.


I believe it’s disrespectful to force students to click everything just to proceed. Instead, we should use inquiry-based tasks: not "Click to see a fact about 1920," but rather: "Look at this 1920 photo. Drag the circle to the part of the image that shows a Jewish symbol." This requires the eyes and brain to work together.


As Richard Mayer (2021) noted, "Learning is an active process of sense-making, but 'active' does not necessarily mean 'hands-on' or behavioral activity... Rather, it means cognitive activity – the learner must engage in the mental processes of attending to relevant information, organizing it into a coherent mental representation, and integrating it with existing knowledge."


It’s not mirroring real-rife.


This "forced interactivity" is a simulation of life that ignores how humans naturally process information. In the real world, if you want to know what’s inside a cabinet, you open it. If you want to talk to someone, you ask a question. (Yes, in many cases you dont' really want, you have to, but still). In e-learning, we force people to click five glowing circles just to read five sentences that could have been a simple list.


In real life, interaction is driven by curiosity or necessity. In poorly designed modules, it is driven by compliance. When we force a learner to click every tab before they can hit "Next," we aren't creating engagement; we are creating a digital toll booth.


This is where Cognitive Load Theory provides a reality check (Sweller, 1988). There is a very fine line between "engaged" and "exhausted." Too much interactivity creates a high extraneous cognitive load – mental effort spent on the mechanics of the course rather than the content.


The auditory assault.

Then there is the auditory assault. There is a specific type of "ding" or "whoosh" associated with e-learning that has become the digital equivalent of a fingernail on a chalkboard. In professional training, sound effects are frequently intrusive and redundant. A "tada!" sound for a correct answer treats a 35-year-old professional like a toddler. If the screen says "Correct," I don't need a bell to tell me the same thing. I am not Pavlov's dog.


If the learner is trying to process a complex family tree while a quirky background track loops every 30 seconds, their brain is working overtime just to filter out the noise. Animations often suffer from the same "look at me!" syndrome. In tools like Captivate, it is incredibly easy to make a text box bounce in – but as a designer, I must ask: Does the movement convey meaning?


A little bit of Russian slang…

In the world of Russian tech-slang, there is a phrase that makes "bells and whistles" sound like a polite Sunday brunch. To describe these useless, over-the-top, distracting features, Russians use an earthy term: "свистелки и перделки" – svistelki i perdelki – (little occasions of, ahem, “noisy gassy accidents”). In Russian colloquialism, this describes a noisy toy that makes a lot of commotion but accomplishes absolutely nothing. It’s the linguistic antidote to "forced interactivity."


The Minimalist Manifesto (Please don’t take it too seriously).

I believe that:

  • An animation is only valid if it shows a process or draws attention to a critical warning.

  • Narration is powerful, but "sound effects" are usually clutter.

  • A clean, still slide allows the learner to breathe. It respects their time and their intelligence.

  • The "Real Life" test: Ask yourself, "Is this vital information, or is this just a svistelka?"


Based on the readings
 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page