As I finish my project, the JLPT N3 Assessment Quiz, and this course, I am reflecting on both my last week of work and the overall learning journey during the semester.
In this last week, I've spent most of my time finalizing the details of my project, fixing final technical issues, and making sure the module is publicly available on GitHub Pages. I can proudly say that I have achieved the main goals of my learning contract, which aimed to develop a Japanese grammar and vocabulary assessment tool aligned with the JLPT N3 level. Although I encountered many obstacles — most notably the corruption of the Japanese text, CSV formatting, and the limitations of Captivate — the project remained true to its original goal: to create a learning aid that supports both self-assessment and future learning goals.
A key insight I gained in the final stages of the project came from Chapter 21 of Clark and Mayer (2024), which includes a comprehensive multimedia checklist. Before finalizing my project, I used this checklist to evaluate the design of my module. It confirmed decisions such as minimizing redundant content, presenting feedback immediately after each question, and having a clear, readable layout — all with the goal of reducing cognitive overload. Reviewing this list helped me identify minor issues, such as overly wordy instructions, and make final adjustments to improve the learning experience.
Additionally, Chapter 17 on teaching thinking skills (Clark & Mayer, 2024) influenced my decision to structure the grammar questions to require not only memorization but also active sentence analysis. For example, users must weigh multiple options and consider the meaning of the entire sentence, reflecting the actual skills required for success on the JLPT. Even though my project is an assessment tool, the goal has always been to subtly encourage deeper processing — not just superficial recall.
Some of the strongest influences on the design of my project came from earlier in the semester. Chapter 4 on the multimedia principle had a lasting impact on how I incorporated text and visual layout into my quiz pages (Clark & Mayer, 2024). From the beginning, I was careful not to clutter the screen or overload it with irrelevant graphics. Even though the module is simple by multimedia standards, I recognize that simplicity and clarity are part of good design, especially for cognitively demanding content like language learning.
Chapter 5 on the contiguity principle (Clark & Mayer, 2024) also stuck in my mind. During development, I made sure that text instructions, question prompts and answer options were always closely spaced on each slide to avoid unnecessary eye movement and reduce cognitive load. This principle had a direct impact on the design of the slides and ensured that learners could focus their working memory on solving questions rather than figuring out where the information was located.
As for my final learning contract, I'm pleased to say that the core elements have remained intact: I created a Japanese grammar and vocabulary assessment tool using Adobe Captivate; I demonstrated the use of multimedia and assessment features; and I created a functional, sustainable learning resource. However, the scope of the project has changed significantly over time. I originally intended to develop a question pool of around 400 questions, but due to technical and time constraints, I had to limit myself to 50 well-designed questions. I also originally intended to dynamically adapt the quiz to the users' needs, but this was not possible in Captivate without extensive scripting. Realizing these limitations, I adjusted my goals and focused on quality over quantity to create a reliable and accessible user experience.
Another important development concerned the way I handled text input with Japanese characters. At the beginning of the project, I assumed that direct input would be easy. When mojibake (text corruption) occurred, I had to research encoding standards and eventually learned to save CSV files in UTF-8 format to get Japanese characters correct. This problem alone taught me more about internationalization and technical troubleshooting than I expected in this project.
Finally, while I didn’t have much time this term to reengage deeply with the Constructionism readings from Week 1—specifically Papert and Harel’s (1991) "Situating Constructionism", Ackermann’s (2001) "Piaget’s Constructivism, Papert’s Constructionism: What’s the Difference?", and Noss and Clayson’s (2015) "Reconstructing Constructionism"—I now realize that my overall project experience reflects Constructionist principles in action. Through building, testing, encountering failure, and revising my JLPT N3 module, I engaged in meaningful, hands-on learning. This project was not only about producing a final deliverable—it was about constructing knowledge through direct experience, an approach that Papert and others argue fosters some of the most lasting and impactful learning.
Overall, this project challenged me technically, creatively and cognitively. I am proud of what I have achieved and grateful for the deepened understanding of instructional design principles that I can bring to my future work in educational technology.
Reference:
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2024). e-Learning and the science of instruction (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.