This article in June 2008 Training & Development magazine by Marc J. Rosenberg, outlines issues and concerns that training professionals have observed in the nearly age of online training. Training organizations are taking a hard look at online training and how technology can really contribute to the desired outcomes of corporate training programs.

Five key questions are discussed. First, is technology a strategy or a tool? The answer to this seems obvious, but many organizations have focused on the LMS or course catalog instead of the the purpose or desired outcomes of the training.

Second, is the culture right? A poor learning environment may compromise even great learning. a good learning culture is one that supports shared learning and open exchange flowing across organizations and locations.

Third, the wrong solution for the wrong problem. Technology end-runs can only delay poor processes, fixing the problem is essential, technological answers may only delay the inevitable.

Fourth, is the course the overarching concept? In the past, most training was packaged into courses or modules, once completed, the learning was over. Today, web-based robust knowledge bases provide a much more immediate and ongoing way to distribute information and share learning. Web 2.0 has contributed to this and provides an opportunity for more collaborative work and strategies. Instant messaging and social networking tools also add to the possibilities for training to be a continuous process, not a one time event.

Fifth, how is success defined? Pre and Post testing is often the method used to determine success in a training situation. However, more focus is now being placed on the client's definition of the success of the program. Were the desired outcomes accomplished according to the client. Is there a marked improvement in areas of concern?

Training and technology go hand in hand, as this article points out, but a new way of looking at that relationship is something trainers and organizations need to consider when trying to solve the issues or problems that may exist in their organization and when trying to provide the best training for employees.

Posted by Muriel Ballou at 7:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This kiddy training potty is a shining example of bells and whistles being chosen over effective learning architecture. My wife and I purchased this “nifty “ unit that lights up and talks thinking that it would make potty training more engaging for our two-year-old daughter. I quickly came to find that all the lights and voices were actually working against my daughter learning to successfully use the toilet.

I could go down a list of how the designers of this product got it wrong but ultimately, it comes down to improper formative feedback given out randomly and not supporting and re-directing the actual decisions and/or actions of the learner.

The designers built a triggering system into the seat with a couple of states, on and off. When in the on state, (ie. butt on seat) the device gives messages like “going potty is fun” and other cutesy little things. OK, there’s nothing wrong with that aside from being rather annoying over and over. Here is the real problem: once the child get’s off the seat and triggers the off state, the potty says, “You did it! You went potty!” My reaction the first time was horror!

As every parent knows, this is not the case in the beginning of potty training and as of yet my child has NOT gone potty but has consistently been given feedback stating otherwise every time. So while the little toilet voice is giving its inaccurate feedback, I am trying to revise it and tell my daughter that she made a good try but next time it would be even better if “pee pee” went in the potty. Still the cutesy voice and celebration lights in the potty had me beat. It was cooler and more “engaging” than Dad.

I think you can see where I am going with this. The very same example can be applied to larger learning initiatives for adult learners where we get sucked into technologies that ultimately don’t adhere to sound learning architecture and either provide no feedback or inaccurate feedback due to system, design or content limitations and shortcomings.

Feedback is where it’s at…Get it right!

Posted by Christopher Keesey at 4:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)