Digital Training of Higher Education Students

Cite this


The instruction context under review implied the training of higher education students. The purpose of the learning exercises was to master their digital literacy skills that extend beyond the average computer user’s capacity. The group consisted of 12 students, each of whom participated voluntarily and free of charge. The scope of the Instruction context comprised several widespread services and software, such as Google Documents Application Tabs. The interest of students was ensured by the emphasis on the applicability of such services in most professional environments today (Brown & Green, 2019). The instruction took place in a local institution of higher education. It was presented in a single 90-minute session with a 15-minute break in the middle of it.

The organization of the instruction was completed in accordance with the ADDIE model. Its title represents an abbreviation that is expanded as follows: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (Larsen & Lockee, 2020). The first stage implied the front analysis of the upcoming instruction, which is explained in the next section. The step of design included the initial outline of the instructions with its key elements, as well as the projected outcome. The development part was completed upon the analysis results, tailoring the activities to the envisaged interests of the students. Then, the implementation took place during the presentation of the instruction to learners, along with the scheduled activities. After the completion of all procedures, the evaluation process commenced, combining the objective test results with the learners’ feedback examination.

Front-end analyses

The instruction was projected to take place in a local institution of higher education. As such, the participants were to be first and second-year students with a visible interest in expanding their soft skills. This context suggested that the learners were expected to have a basic knowledge of computers and software functioning. In other words, they would unlikely require assistance with installing or deleting the application and connecting or using peripheral devices. However, the knowledge of advanced functions of popular Google Document applications was not guaranteed. Therefore, the instruction relied on the basic knowledge of computer use. Furthermore, to stimulate the learners’ interest, the instruction design implied that they were interested in building successful careers (Ertmer et al., 2019). In this regard, the practical value of the presented skills was discussed at length.

Instructional goals and objectives

  • Goal One: Learners will become familiar with the full scope of Google Documents applications.
  • Outcome: Learners will know the full variety of Google Documents applications and supported formats, such as text documents, spreadsheets, presentations.
  • Goal Two: Learners will be able to create and edit their own Google Documents
  • Outcome: Learners will use the function “New” to create a Google Document and add text to it in the three key formats: text, spreadsheet, and presentation.
  • Goal Three: Learners will be able to apply advanced functions of Google Documents editing.
  • Outcome: Learners will knowingly perform the following procedures on their own, without the instructor’s help or supporting materials:
    • Text – make the writing bold, italicized, and underlined; change the type and size of the font; change the paragraph settings (indentation); use headings.
    • Spreadsheet – change the text wrapping format; change the type and size of the font; merge and divide cells.
    • Presentation – select different slide formats; change the slide order; add images; apply slide transition.
  • Goal Four: Learners will become familiar with the safety and sharing features of Google Documents;
  • Outcome: Learners will be able to change access to the document by sharing it via a link or making the document open to specific users.
  • Goal Five: Learners will become familiar with the practical application context of Google Documents;
  • Outcomes: Learners will refer to a minimum of three real-world contexts in which the use of Google Documents will be of use, as well as emphasizing the value of the service from a personal perspective.

Instructional strategies

  1. Feedback to learners: inform each learner of their progress upon the completion of each activity; pose relevant questions; answer the learners’ questions;
  2. Retention and Knowledge: start training with a brief presentation that outlines the practical applicability of Google Documents in today’s universities and firms; explain the value of the taught skills to future employment and career success.
  3. Learner Participation – invite the learners to practice with Google Documents, exploring the platform’s features and functions on their own.
  4. Content Presentation – combine the oral presentation with visual supporting materials prepared in advance and shared-screen, real-time demonstration of the knowledge.
  5. Assessment – provide each learner with an opportunity to demonstrate the new knowledge in practice with short yet comprehensive final exercises.


The instruction design is mainly focused on video presentations from the YouTube platform. The module name is “Google Docs Tutorial,” which is designed to help learners with the proper and effective utilization of all essential functional aspects of the instrument. The instruction module comprehensively covers all key components needed to work with Google Docs.

The instruction is instructional effective since it begins with the most basic points of instructions, which is creating a process of a single Google Doc file. It includes specificities, such as template use or blank page creation. Next, the module addresses the unique shortcuts in regard to zooming options for more convenient operations on the page (Technology for Teachers and Students, 2018). These basics are followed by the comparison and contrast of Google Docs with its main alternative, Microsoft Word software. The listed differences include the fact that Google Docs is a cloud-based tool, which makes it accessible from any location or device. The tool is easy in the context of collaborative effort.

The instruction module transitions to the essentials of working with the tool. The layout is explained as being divergent from the latest Microsoft Word design but rather is similar to older versions, such as Microsoft 2003 (Technology for Teachers and Students, 2018). The video overviews the key toolbars and editing instruments provided at the top of the page in order to showcase how and when each function is utilized. Next, the instruction module focuses on more specific functional elements, such as the formatting of images, graphs, and tables. The key details are provided in regard to the interactional aspect of the text and these units, such as wrap text or font text.

The instruction module video is also designed to help the learners to work more effectively with Google Docs software. The core of this part of the learning process is the use of shortcuts, which can be customized and personalized. The video presents the standard settings of the shortcuts but also presents how they can be changed for individualized preferences (Technology for Teachers and Students, 2018). The following segment focuses on the main advantage of Google Docs over Microsoft Word, which is the share option. The given function is among the most critical elements of the software since it makes the process of sharing substantially easier and more precise. For instance, the video covers how one can share a document with a specific person or group of individuals through customization via Gmail.

The following section of the instructional module focuses on the cooperative and collaborative aspects of Google Docs. The key element is the fact that several people can work on a single Google Doc document, which makes it advantageous in team-based or group-based settings. The video demonstrates how Google Docs presents and operates when a number of people work on one document with an emphasis on changing authorship and time as well as color-coding related to such changes.

Lastly, the download functions are also covered since any Google Doc document is initially created as a cloud-based page. The video covers the core functions of differential download options on the basis of formats, which include docx, odt, pdf, txt, epub, odt, and html (Technology for Teachers and Students, 2018). The range of possibilities in the case of download options adds more flexibility and convenience when exporting or utilizing different on-device tools. In addition, the add-on feature is also briefly summarized and mentioned in order to illustrate the range of functional elements available on Google Docs.


  • Where did you implement the instruction and conduct the evaluation? – The instruction was implemented during a two-hour session with volunteer students at one of the local institutions of higher education. The evaluation was partly completed in the classroom upon the completion of final exercises with a subsequent examination of full evaluation data at home, adhering to the aspects of Kirkpatrick’s framework.
  • How many learners engaged in the instruction? – 12 learners completed the instruction.
  • What instruments did you create in order to collect the evaluation data? – Short final exercises that implied the creation of Google Documents:
    • Create a text document in Google Docs titled “Your Last Name_Text,” then edit the following: 14 font, Arial, double-spaced, 0.5 cm indentation. Then, share the document to the instructor’s email only.
    • Create a Google Document spreadsheet and edit it to make the spreadsheet identical to the one that is presented on the screen. Then, share the document to the instructor’s email only.

Secondly, the learners completed a short survey that reflected their subjective perception of the instruction.

  • What data did you collect in order to determine whether the learners achieved the instructional goals? – Google Documents completed and shared by the learners were the primary indicators of whether the instructional goals had been completed. The survey results elaborated on the learners’ perception of the instruction.
  • How many learners achieved the instructional goals? – In total, 9 out of 12 students completed all of the goals, and 3 students completed them partially.
  • What data did you collect in order to determine how to improve the instruction? – The learners’ surveys became the primary sources of data for the envisaged improvement of the instruction. In addition, practical observations were made to gauge the learners’ engagement in the process.


  1. More time is needed for the instruction: in their surveys, most students mentioned that the time devoted to several activities was not sufficient to review and memorize the material properly.
  2. The instruction should be presented in several portions: most students indicated in their surveys and personal conversations that presenting the material in several sessions that span across 2-3 days would benefit the outcome.
  3. Separate different types of Google Docs into different sections: observations suggested that working with texts, spreadsheets, and presentations contributed to the confusion of learners.
  4. Ensure a more in-depth examination of the subject – several students indicated in their surveys that only the basic features were explored, meaning that the instruction would benefit from the exploration of more advanced functions of Google Documents.
  5. Increase the share of teamwork – learners’ surveys suggest that they would like to see more teamwork opportunities, as joint access is one of the key features of Google Docs that was underexplored during the session.


Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2019). The essentials of instructional design (4th ed.). Routledge.

Ertmer, P. A., Quinn, J. A., & Glazewski, K. D. (2019). The ID Casebook: Case studies in instructional design (5th ed.). Routledge.

Larson, M. B., & Lockee, B. B. (2019). Streamlined ID: A practical guide to instructional design. Routledge.

Technology for Teachers and Students. (2018). Google Docs tutorial [Video]. YouTube.

Cite this paper

Select style


ChalkyPapers. (2023, January 31). Digital Training of Higher Education Students. Retrieved from


ChalkyPapers. (2023, January 31). Digital Training of Higher Education Students.

Work Cited

"Digital Training of Higher Education Students." ChalkyPapers, 31 Jan. 2023,


ChalkyPapers. (2023) 'Digital Training of Higher Education Students'. 31 January.


ChalkyPapers. 2023. "Digital Training of Higher Education Students." January 31, 2023.

1. ChalkyPapers. "Digital Training of Higher Education Students." January 31, 2023.


ChalkyPapers. "Digital Training of Higher Education Students." January 31, 2023.