CEPD · Module 3 — Content-layout mastery
Tables for lookup; charts for cited magnitudes; compare for two-column judgment — not all three on one screen.
About 15 min
Practice in the lesson player
Sorting, matching, quizzes, and the module gate stay behind a free account so scored answers are not public. The teaching notes below are the same cited curriculum.
01
Use a table: Feature matrix for vendor shortlist. · WCAG success criteria checklist. · Assessment map (action × evidence).
Use a chart: ATD self-ratings with source caption. · Mayer median ds — labeled as d, not %. · Before/after metric with honest axis.
02
One screen gets one primary layout. Do not stack a chart, a six-row table, and a compare block because Studio allows it. Mayer’s coherence principle is the reason: extra layouts spend working memory on navigation instead of the decision. Split the screens, or sequence them, and put the learner’s action under the one layout you kept.
03
An RFP shortlist has six vendors and eight criteria: hosting region, Arabic RTL, SCORM and cmi5, WCAG evidence, support hours, price band. That is a lookup. A table lets a producer scan a row. A pie chart of “vendor fit” with no unit and no source invents a magnitude the SME never measured. A two-column compare is the right tool only when you are judging two options against each other, not eight criteria across six vendors. Pick one primary layout, then put the decision the learner must make under it.
04
Layout | Learner job | Do not use when
Table | Scan many rows against shared criteria | You only have two sides of a judgment
Chart | Read a cited magnitude and its unit | The number is an effect size d, not a percent
Compare | Judge two approaches side by side | You need a matrix of more than two columns of data