Tuesday, December 15, 2015

elearning Wrong Thinking


Our company has been developing e Learning since the 90's, before it was ever thought to be "cool" or "effective" in training. During that time we have encountered many implementation strategies that bear close examination for their ineffectiveness and their inability to actually achieve any true measure of comprehension among learners. 

Most e Learning administrators ignored or overlooked the important lessons taught by traditional learning. For example, you must have an administrative infrastructure in place with allocated resources, its OK to expect results from learners, its OK to set high achievement levels in testing, and adult learning is a shared enterprise that includes learners, teachers and administrators. 

Here are a few e Learning thought processes that can potentially result in poor comprehension and boredom among learners.
,  
  1. Our first priority is to try and buy the most seats for the lowest price
  2.  Let’s focus on purchasing an LMS solution before we consider content 
  3.  We’ll try and use content we already have. PowerPoint is better than nothing.
  4.  Let’s be cost effective and buy off-the-shelf-content without evaluating its effectiveness
  5.  Don’t bother involving learners in e Learning program design....that’s too complicated
  6.  Isn’t self-paced e Learning fully automated? … no need to develop a management plan
  7.  Do not make completion of the e Learning mandatory – people might complain
  8.  Don’t set up a program to promote the idea of e Learning – it’s too much work and money
  9.  Don’t include a firm completion date – I am sure it will be get done in due course
  10.  I am managing the e Learning program,….I don’t have to actually take it myself
  11.  Don’t track and include e Learning results in employee records – it’s too hard to put in place
  12.  Training is important but it’s not core to our business or organization 
  13.  Let's start our e Learning program with low cost mandatory learning 
  14.  I’ll make the e Learning optional – that way it won’t be difficult to implement
  15.  We already do workshops and conferences…e Learning isn’t that different 
  16.  Let’s implement self-paced e Learning...and then we can set it up in a classroom
  17.  We want a certificate e Learning program …but we should make it easy to get
  18.  We can implement an e Learning program …no need to plan for any updates at this point
  19.  Let’s create an e Learning program…I’m sure learners will participate without reward or encouragement 
  20. Content is expensive ...let's see of somebody else has the custom knowledge we need
PS....fell free to respond with your own observations on e Learning implementation ....

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

eLearning;Making The Grade?

As learning has spread beyond the classroom through new technologies into organizations, businesses and associations, each has had to take on the responsibility of creating their own unique learning environment and administrative implementation model. Self-paced eLearning, blended eLearning and online learning have created a demand within these organizations to commit resources to develop an learning strategy that incorporates program levels & descriptions, performance monitoring, content development, audience surveys, testing, tracking & reporting, promotions and budgeting.
 Unfortunately, these demands have resulted in a very uneven and fragmented implementation process that has not benefited the organization or its employees. Here are a few examples of some of the incomplete and ineffective learning strategies that I have encountered in the marketplace, as organizations and companies try and implement a learning strategy.  
 The Layered Approach: learning approaches are layered one on top of the other. The organization uses workshops, conferences, webinars, eLearning and teleconferences without assessing the effectiveness of each medium. No overarching strategic Learning plan has been developed that links effectiveness, audience demands, learning objectives to results and budgets.
 One-Off Solution: when an organization looks at an individual learning initiative in isolation and develops a onetime solution that addresses the issue in the short term. This can lead to a layered approach that creates higher costs and ineffective application of learning and/or poorly understood learning outcomes within companies.  You can utilize multiple learning delivery mechanisms including eLearning and workshops if they are vetted through an overarching Learning strategy and budget rationalization process.
 Off -The-Shelf Solution: this occurs when an organization lacks capacity to implement learning through its own resources yet has developed a learning strategy at a senior management level. This top down approach may not consider both short term and long term impact. Short term financial gains may blind a company to the demands of administrative oversight in the learning process - so the company hires a contractor to fulfill short term demands.   
 The Technology Approach: when an organization seeks to fulfill its learning mandate by implementing some form of technology without a clear long term plan to utilize it effectively. An example might be an organization purchasing a Learning Management System (LMS) without content, or without a clear understanding of audience demands and or the need to allocate long term resources to administering the organizational learning process.  
 The Do Nothing Plan: “if it works don’t fix it”, a common axiom that doesn’t ring true in this circumstance. Many organizations ignore the need for a learning strategy and simply opt to use the mediums and strategies that have been in place historically. They may lack the resources to deliver learning more efficiently through such mediums as eLearning and as a result they become less competitive and have greater employee turnover.
The reason for many of these fragmented and ineffective implementation strategies is that most organizations do not have the in-house knowledge and experience necessary to undertake a thorough learning review. A company does not commit the resources  to help understand how they can create learning environments that make use of best practice across a variety of learning mediums to improve performance and capacity …and all within budget. They often rely on a mixed bag of external resources to guide them and when the process is complete the organization has not internalized the knowledge necessary to effectively implement a learning program that gets results.  
 When this organizational knowledge transfer does not take place there is no consistent administrative body or champion within most organizations that has the capacity to enforce learning objectives, make a case for learning and learning budgets and ensure that the learning has an impact on the effectiveness of both the employees and the organization. Most administrators are simply overwhelmed or simply unprepared to implement online learning and lack the tools and support to undertake the initiative.
 In the final summation, what is the purpose of training, if not to improve both personal and organization performance and capacity?