A Learning Consultant Reviewer

Lately I’ve been wondering if we are developing learning products in the most efficient way. Are we maybe missing out on developing a better learning product? I’m not thinking about cost effectiveness or timeliness or any other factors yet. Just for right now I’m talking about the learning product itself.

Okay, first I need to share my bias. I believe that content developed by course developers should be reviewed by learning consultants like me, in addition to being reviewed by technical resources.

For many years my role in various learning organizations was to review learning materials and consult to course developers. I would have preferred to be involved from the very start, when the need for the learning product was first identified. But in most cases I was brought in to review and provide feedback to the almost complete product.

My role was to identify areas that needed to be enhanced, revised, developed further, and so on. Sometimes I recommended exercises so the learner could self-test the application of what was being taught. At other times I recommended revisions to the language used. Often, because we were working with international audiences, I needed to determine whether there might be a better way to present the material to different audiences. I also reviewed the instruction for several other factors. While this was my role, it isn’t as far as I know a role that many other people have filled currently or historically.

While I wish that I could say that large portions of my recommendations were implemented, in most cases they weren’t. In almost all cases it was simply too late to make any but the smallest non-technical revisions or additions or corrections.

Now, what if I was a partner to a team of course developers, and I reviewed each component as it was developed? If this were the case, I could not only recommend enhancements but often I could draft a version of my recommendations.

For example, if I believed a story or an exercise would allow for better absorption of the content, I would draft a version of what I was recommending. This is something I was actually able to do on occasion, but not as often as I would have liked.

I was never a subject matter expert (SME), nor did I know very much about the technical content being taught. But I did have the developing instructional materials as a basis to work from. I most often got things right enough so that the SME could revise or build on what I had developed. My products usually had holes in them where I just didn’t know enough. And sometimes those holes even let the course developer know that additions were needed. But, I’d write what I knew and then put a note for the SME to add content where needed. Sometimes I’d include an example from life.

Maybe the content was talking about how to solve a technical problem and the steps needed to resolve the problem. I might include an example of solving a problem like changing a light bulb and the steps and thought process needed to get there. This usually was enough for the SME to develop a better example if necessary.

At other times, I saw that detailed and complex content was being presented and I thought an exercise would help the learners to integrate and also verify that they understood what was being presented. Again, I developed questions based on the content. For example, I would turn a concept that was presented in the instruction into a question and try to develop the correct response along with incorrect responses for review and modification.

The key was that I gave a direction to work with. If for example, the instruction was covering how to code in a new language. I might use an example of a new feature in a new car. I’d explain how the new model contained a new feature. Perhaps the car now made a sound when the driver changed lanes without having the turn signal on. I might give this example to a course developer writing a module on an upgrade to an existing product and ask that they include this type of example.

Having a trained consultant provide this kind of support to course developers would produce better learning products. Learners would in turn be better able to understand and use the product. This resource might not only improve the learning products, it might also lead to better sales, support, marketing or whatever roles for which the product was developed.

It’s an idea that, like I said above, still needs a lot of consideration regarding cost, timeliness, and other factors. But the rewards might far outweigh the price. What do you think?

10 Steps to Design Effective Instructional Materials

This is (mostly) a check list of what I believe are the key points for instructional designers to remember. Use these before starting to develop a new instructional product. Similar to reading a reminder or an update about good nutrition, good sleeping habits or getting enough fresh air and so forth. This post addresses the steps that I think are important to winding up with quality instruction.

What’s old is new again or dressing up or modifying an old concept can lead to increased success. I am cheering in the stands because leaders in the field of learning have recognized and publicized the fact that (once again) less is more. Yes, some of us know this is a concept that has been around for a long while, but it is now getting prominence.

Give people small units of instruction with examples and an opportunity to practice components, provide feedback to the practice exercises, and then explain how to apply the learning to real world activities. Small units of instruction can be linked to each other to create a course. Okay, so here is a checklist for developing small (20 minutes or less) units of instruction.

1. Begin with the end in mind, document what you want the learner to be able to do
2. Develop test questions that will allow the learner to demonstrate what they are able to do
3. List the steps needed to accomplish the end results
4. Identify the order in which steps need to be completed. Showing which steps can be completed in any order and show which steps must be completed in a specific order
5. Explain the gotchas, list the things that could go wrong and explain how to avoid them, how to fix them, or how to mitigate them
6. Develop instruction for each step, explain why it needs to be done, why it needs to be done in a specific order (or doesn’t need to be done in a specific order)
7. Develop several examples for each step
8. Develop one or more questions that will allow the learner to test if they are able to perform the action needed
9. Find a member of the target population to go through the instructional unit while you take notes on what works and what doesn’t work
a. Note: If a member of the target population isn’t available have someone else work through the training and identify what might be confusing or missing
10. Modify the materials based on findings from the evaluation of the unit of instruction

This might look like a lot to do, but doing something right the first time will produce the product you need without having to revise or replace parts because the product doesn’t work. A learner should be able to complete each unit of instruction you develop in 20 minutes or less. The development process should also take less time once you gain proficiency in using this process.

I hope that you will use this checklist and see how it works for you. Please comment below!

The Changing Times

Usually when I select a topic for a new blog I start by doing some research. I think about the topic and what I want to share. Then I look for current postings about the topic, what the most common thinking is, and what new or interesting information I can impart.

For this blog I wanted to look at the roles of corporate course developers and trainers. It wasn’t so long ago that people who wanted to be hired into a technical role often found that only training roles were available. They generally came in, did their time in the role, and then moved on within the corporation.

I was very surprised to learn that the requirements for current jobs had changed significantly. In what I think of as only the recent past, the main requirement was a technical background and a willingness to learn on-the-job how to develop and/or deliver training.

Today the role of instructional designer now has many additional responsibilities. And, of course, along with the additional responsibilities there are additional areas of knowledge required to carry out the role responsibilities.

The instructional designer is now a sought after role. People want to be in the role rather than wanting to move from it into a more prestigious role.

https://elearningindustry.com/6-figure-instructional-designers
WANTED: Six-Figure Instructional Designers
By Vicki Kunkel
May 26, 2015

“Once considered the red-haired stepchildren of corporations, instructional designers are finally going from no-respect Rodney Dangerfields to super cool content heroes.”

Kunkel also had two important observations to make.

The first was that the role now commands a six-figure salary, but she also said:

“One caveat: nearly all of the director and VP level positions required both design and development skills; not one or the other.”

This last comment was of great interest to me as, other than when I was a student, I have worked as a course designer or as a consultant to course developers but never both. The role of the course developer has expanded to include more areas of expertise and is generally now referred to as an instructional designer.

I am wondering where the role of the individual who uses a structured process to design and develop instruction has gone. In the past this role was known as an instructional designer. This role, while still performed in an academic setting, doesn’t seem to have a place in corporate training departments. As this is a role that I have performed in several different corporate settings I believe it is a role that has gotten lost and that corporate training departments might do well to consider bringing it back.

What Do Instructional Designers Do?

What Instructional Designers Do: Is this a career for you?
by Connie Malamed

“Instructional design involves the process of identifying the skills, knowledge, information and attitude gaps of a targeted audience and creating, selecting or suggesting learning experiences that close this gap, based on instructional theory and best practices from the field.

Ideally, workplace learning improves employee productivity and value and enhances self-directed learning.”

I believe that the change in the role responsibilities for the corporate person who is called an instructional designer are excellent but I would also like to see corporate training departments considering the value of adding someone who does the up front analysis of what is needed based on learning theory. As we move more and more away from instructor led training I believe this role will become even more important. I believe using these techniques will allow for better-targeted learning experiences with better learner retention.

If we look at other professions we can generally see that people who perform those roles do a creditable job with delivering the needed end result. Accountants, engineers, business executives and many others for the most part deliver a more successful end result than training professionals. Almost all business training organizations request feedback on the quality of the course and when an instructor is involved the company also looks for feedback about the delivery. This is because there are, in my opinion, far too many complaints about the quality of training offerings. If a learning professional does the up front analysis and identifies the end results for a learning event, it will go a long way towards offering a better quality product.

Why Survey?

Several years ago a company I was working for asked for help finding out why sales reps weren’t selling a new product. The marketing materials were done and out. The product was a great fit and the competition had yet to release a comparable product. And yet the reps weren’t talking to their customers about the new product.

We put together a quick survey and asked reps attending a quarterly meeting to complete the survey. The responses showed that reps weren’t presenting the product to their customers because they weren’t comfortable with their knowledge about the new offering. Somewhere in the management chain the decision had been made that training didn’t need to be developed, as the product was easy to understand. We realized that it was important to get input from the reps in the field to understand why they were not presenting the new product to customers.

I believed then, and still do now, that what was needed was a quick survey of field sales reps about presenting the new offering to their customers. I understand that most sales reps – for all sorts of reasons – wouldn’t be willing to take the time to complete a survey during their typical workday no matter how short it was. We decided to present a short (10 items) survey to sales reps attending meetings within the next month. Our thinking was that we didn’t need a large response as long as we were pulling responses from all the geographies.

This was a bit of an experiment but we wanted to see if reps would complete the survey. We told the reps that responses were voluntary. We presented the survey as the first page of the meeting agenda and invited them to complete it. We made it clear that it was voluntary. We received a sufficient number of responses to identify that reps wanted to know more before speaking about the product to their customers. More importantly, we were able to identify what specifically they wanted to learn. The survey didn’t take us long to develop and it didn’t take the respondents long to complete. In a very short period of time, we were able to develop a short learning event.

I’m writing this blog today because I want to talk to the value of developing a survey before developing certain learning events. It likely wouldn’t be effective to have surveys for every learning product. But, just as we need to identify the objectives of a learning offering, I believe that, rather than only identifying what we expect them to know, we also need to understand what knowledge learners bring with them.

This is especially necessary for learning events that need to connect the new learning to specific knowledge. For example we don’t often combine sales techniques or marketing messages or business benefits in technical training. But, I think that in some cases, developing a survey that combines more areas might lead to a lot of additional information. For example better sales, customer satisfaction and better feedback about what else customers need could result from this type of survey process.

Learning organizations have effectively developed and delivered learning materials for new products, new versions of existing products, and new or revised services. However, whether it be because of time, money or lack of interest, learning organizations rarely survey the learner population and their managers as to what the needs are, what they will consume, and why.

A quick survey distributed electronically with about 10 questions can often provide both revenue and decreased expenses because the responses to these surveys will allow the learning organization to better meet the learner needs.

The key question is how to get responses to the surveys. In person events usually result in a sufficient number of responses, but it is best to incentivize responses by providing something of value. The something of value that a learning organization can provide is often information that is germane to the population. Perhaps it is a small discount on the next offering they register for within the next X months. Or it might be a tool or a document that would be of interest to people taking that training.

I believe surveys really can help your business, but only if the needed end result is identified before the survey is developed and distributed. It is important to know which learners are likely to take the training and also to have an identified end result. That is to say, what specifically are you looking to learn before you develop the survey?

Mini MOOCs: Right Sizing Online Training

MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) are a part of today’s training toolbox for some universities and businesses. The concept of this type of learning event is to provide instruction to a massive worldwide audience. While the use of MOOCs to provide needed learning is a good concept, to date MOOCs have had only a mixed reception. Most MOOCs offer instruction through several types of delivery methods including readings, recorded lectures, videos, gaming and many other delivery techniques.

Many of the people who sign-up for a MOOC don’t complete all of the content offered. This may be because of boredom. Or perhaps they only needed to learn about some of the topics covered in the course and weren’t interested in the rest of the content. Or it might be that most MOOCs don’t provide effective methods for interacting with instructors and other learners. Furthermore, satisfactory methods for testing and feedback are still a work in progress.

Feedback and scoring of tests usually comes from individual MOOC participants grading each other’s work. Even when a participant receives scores from many other students most learners don’t find this satisfactory feedback. There is also the problem of worldwide audiences not sharing a common language. Whatever the reason for not completing the learning event the stats show that many people who start a MOOC do not complete it.

“MOOCs are not single, long-haul flights, but rather they are more like train journeys where some people want to get to the end of the line but most people get on and off along the way.”
https://www.class-central.com/report/moocs-course-completion-wrong-measure/
MOOCs: Course Completion is the Wrong Measure of Course Success
by Donald Clark . Published on April 11, 2016

At this point in time MOOCs are showing limited success. The use of MOOCs is still not where some of the developers had hoped it would be, but they are still being developed and used. There are still people and organizations that believe MOOCs offer a delivery method, which is needed in our ever-growing globalized learning environments.

“In the future, MOOCs have the potential to completely transform education. However, as of right now, don’t expect to see universities shutting down as a result, as some experts have begun projecting. Despite the recent rapid rise in MOOCs, this format continues to be an evolving model, and one that isn’t quite established yet.”

What’s Wrong with MOOCs and Why Aren’t They Working?

The tech edvocate
WHAT’S WRONG WITH MOOCS AND WHY AREN’T THEY WORKING?
BY MATTHEW LYNCH JUNE 12, 2016

So while MOOCs continue to evolve and offer learning events to meet many different needs I believe we have an opportunity to look at how the “MOOC concept” can be applied in other ways. One way might be to develop very short units of instruction or in other words Mini Open Online Courses (mini MOOCs). I believe if we use the MOOC processes for units of instruction that cover a single – or very few – topics, we may find that the mini MOOC is an effective delivery method.

Multiple mini MOOCs could be linked together to provide a learning experience that can be tailored for each individual. These mini MOOCs can be thought of like a large lunch buffet. The mini MOOC concept would allow learners to pick and choose what they want or need to meet their individual learning needs. The mini MOOCs with very few topics would be like a college curriculum and be applicable to multiple degree or certification programs.

Short modules addressing just a few topics have been shown to be very successful. I propose that we look at whether this instructional methodology can be applied to the MOOC concept. Perhaps this can best be described as an offshoot of the MOOC concept. Most MOOCs present multiple lessons on an overarching subject. They also include several different types of learning activities. There are self-paced, group, team etc. types of learning experiences contained in most MOOCs. It is likely that the developers want the learners to have the option to experience a wide variety of learning methods and also allowing learners to choose learning techniques that work for them. These mini MOOCs can follow the MOOC methodology of making each mini MOOC available 24x7x365.

“… from our ongoing research on adult learners that while they do still prioritize degrees, there is growing interest in shorter-form online programs.”
http://www.eduventures.com/2017/05/seismography-101-understanding-shockwaves-purdue-kaplan-deal/
Seismography 101: Understanding the Shockwaves from the Purdue – Kaplan Deal
By Howard Lurie, Principal Analyst. Published May 2017

Much like instructional guides developed for instructors, guides for the learner can be developed which present different ways to group lessons together to gain the needed learning. Each mini MOOC would present just a few topics along with practice and feedback. Once a learner completes a mini MOOC it would be important for the learner to apply their learning to their work or find other ways of practicing what they learned. It might be that the mini MOOC developers create exercises or games for the learners to use once they complete the mini MOOC. This will allow learners to incorporate the new learning into their knowledge base. Testing also would need to be delivered and scored effectively. I have some recommendations for testing that can be applied to MOOCs and mini MOOCs as well as more traditional learning events, which I will present in future blogs.

The Components of Good Course Development

I want to take a walk down memory lane and I invite you to join me. Let’s go back to when the development of instruction was done without electronic authoring tools. Back in those days there were several areas of focus, there was the psychology of learning, there was the development of media to enhance the understanding and integration of learning, there was learning research, and a few other areas that fell under the overarching title of Instructional Design.

Today while universities do offer programs in all of these areas and more, corporations tend to hire people to do what is labeled as instructional design. Most often the job description talks to the ability to use e-learning authoring and image creation tools such as Articulate and Captivate. In and of themselves these are important to the presentation of learning materials. However, what I believe is often missing in these job descriptions and the work that the e-learning developers do, is the application of the principles of learning design and development. Well-designed learning materials include presentation of information, examples, practice exercises, repetition, and feedback. It also helps to test the materials out with a few members of the target population to learn how well the learning materials perform. Changes can be integrated as needed before the materials are released.

For the most part, corporate course developers start with a technical background and then they gain the knowledge of how to use course development tools later. However, we also must focus on training course developers in how to develop content that makes learning happen. Today most corporate training departments are promoting the development of mini modules of learning, usually covering one to three concepts. While this is really a great breakthrough and will lead to better training and learning, I believe that understanding how people learn must still be factored into what corporate course developers need in order to develop good, quality instruction.

I believe that the development of a learning event should consider all of these components and perhaps more. Learning is complex and using the systems approach of considering all factors that impact it will lead to better outcomes.
• Technical or other information, concepts, and so forth
• Systems approach to design of learning
• Learning theory
• Learning design
• Current and emerging technologies for development and delivery
• Presentation design (for example, Articulate, Captivate)

While this may look like an overwhelming list of areas needed for the development of good instruction, I believe it isn’t any more (or less) extensive than any other field of endeavor.

I hope you will weigh in with comments and let me and others know your thinking. Let’s help make learning happen.