Project Spotlight: Cyber Training & Knowledge Management

This knowledge management process helped to ensure that a small cyber training group received American Council on Education (ACE) college level credits for all six cybersecurity training courses submitted. 

• Skills: Knowledge Management, Instructional Design Best Practices, Process Development

• Audience: Adult Learners, American Council on Education (ACE) auditors

• Tools Used: Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft SharePoint, Bloom’s Taxonomy, Knowledge Management Best Practices, Content Organization and Presentation Best Practices

• Final Deliverables: All course content (6 courses), Application for Review, All ACE-requested documentation

• Year: 2018

Customer

The customer was a small cybersecurity training firm located in Maryland. I joined their team as the Lead Instructional Designer, and assisted in the development and maintenance of six high-level cybersecurity courses. Those that attended these courses were former military cyber operators and contractors wanting to learn new techniques. The instructors were subject matter experts in their fields and had advanced degrees in the topics they taught. 

Courses

The six courses covered topics such as operational analysis, digital forensics, security, networking, and Windows and Linux operating systems. All courses were instructor-led and had a large hands-on component requiring virtual set-up of complicated computer systems. Each course was 10 days in length, and required passing a hands-on assessment to receive certification. 

Process

Many of the courses had been written and designed before the training group employed an instructional designer. Because of this, the courses were inconsistent in design and organization. My first step became designing a development guide for the team. The guide set forth standards for development processes and task assignments, content writing and design, technology best practices (naming conventions, tool access, etc.), formatting standards, and document templates (Word and PowerPoint). 

At this time, I also organized the courses into Introductory, Intermediate, and Advanced groupings based on the course’s rigor and objectives. This allowed ACE auditors to see the progression of our content, and provided learners a way to advance through the cyber training curriculum as they gained additional skills. I then re-wrote the objectives to more closely align to Bloom’s Taxonomy, and each course as a whole. 

Once standards were in place, I began to organize content according to the standards. The standards streamlined this process, making it easier to ensure that all content had a consistent design and presentation. Some items that took priority during this process were: 

• Fonts: There was a great deal of inconsistency throughout the courses with how instructors chose to format file paths or coding examples. 

• Graphics: Screenshots were used throughout the slides and learner guides, with no formatting or reference to where the images could be found. A graphic designer also helped to design data-based infographics and images to supplement the content.

• File Naming Convention and Repository: A SharePoint site was used to house all content, but each course differed in how the course content was named, and what folders housed the content.  

When each course was complete and files were stored electronically, it was time to create hard copies. At this time, ACE required a hard copy version of all course materials for the audit. This meant that all guides, outlines, development materials, PowerPoints, and process documentation must be provided to the auditors. Also, each auditor required their own hard copy for every course they would audit. Because we didn’t know how many auditors would be at the audit, we chose to create 6 course packages for each of the six courses. 

Each course package included: 

• Course Outline

• Course Objectives

• Course Overview

• PowerPoint slides (x10)

• Instructor Guide

• Learner Guide

• Assessment

• Technical Information (coding, virtual machine data, etc.)

• Instructional Design Processes

To make it easier for the auditors to access the information, we used large binders with tabs consistent across courses, and included a Table of Contents. We also created a cover page for each binder using the course branding. 

Results

This process lasted roughly 6 months with the help of a graphic designer, program manager and course instructors. There were built-in review cycles at pre-determined intervals to ensure that the content was correct and also consistent to the standards. 

On the day of the review, we received feedback from the auditors that they were impressed by our work, and the well-organized packages. A few weeks later, we learned that we had received 3 undergraduate credits for each course, meaning that any learner that attended one of these courses, could submit their transcript to receive three credits at numerous universities across the United States. 

ACE re-audits courses every 3 years, and our newly organized content and process flow was sure to make preparing for the next audit a more streamlined process.