Why is e-learning just plain wrong?

Q： We aren’t taught to learn. We grow up doing it naturally: through exploration, example, and experimentation. Think about it: ever since that first time...you’ve avoided hot stoves, right? That’s because you’re an awesome, natural born, mean, lean, learning machine!

Now think about your e-learning program. Does it let your learners naturally explore new information? Does it allow them to practice applying that information, until they’re confident they can get the right results in the real world?

Or is your program more e-reading than e-learning? Maybe you’re getting sucked into that vortex of page-by-page, PowerPoint-like courses! If you are, that really does suck...and it's just wrong, if you're really looking for measurable business results.

If you've been following discussions I'm in (or my blog) you know I advocate s system of learner exploration, followed by practice in a simulation.

Each scenario in these avatar-driven simulations is purposefully designed around a critical risk area. These risk areas are key elements of sales or business strategy where your people are likely to falter or fail, without practice in making the right decisions. Focusing on these critical issues means your learners are getting the highest-value training possible.

So...the discussion here? How to escape the vortex of page-by-page e-learning! Are you in it? Do you see anything wrong with it? Are you getting positive, measurable results in your program?

Comments：

1、I agree with you 100% that most of what we see today is eReading and not eLearning. It takes a long time to design and to develop effective eLearning and most companies want results quicker than 9 mos. or a year of development.

My bias is towards good ol' ILT and a simulated lab experience with realistic work scenarios for application-level skills training, particularly for software and hardware training. I know it isn't a popular position to take, but I have never seen an outstanding example of eLearning in a corporate application.

Thanks for taking the rogue's position. I do, too.

2、I don't think e learning is plain wrong, just not designed to meet the needs of most learners. I have always wondered why people can make great kids games but e learning for adults is boring.

I guess it also depends how you define e learning. Surfing the web can be e learning...

3、that was a pretty good example of e-learning. Thanks for sharing. relating to what Pamela had mentioned, we keep bumping into corporate clients that want to deploy a ten hour e-learning program but have the budget of $20,000. In that scenario, it is not surprising that you you get to see mostly page turners.

I guess, why K-12 has more examples of interesting and engaging stuff is that each module is leveraged for hundreds of schools, white a corporate piece of e-learning has limited audience - the budget being the resultant differentiator.

In fact, as observed and predicted by quite a few, e-learning is coalescing into two ever widening groups - high-end simulations, and rapid e-learning. Each has its own market and uses.

I too would like to see more of the stuff like what you have posted.

4、In addition to all of the comments already posted, there is a eLearning barrier related to culture.

I work in Brazil, catering for all of Latin America and although we do have plenty of eLearning resources, it is not widely used/accepted. Here, the "view" is that they are still working and not really learning anything.

I do push for a blended approach, that seems to yield better enrollment and completion rate.

I do hear the same story from other companies as well.

5��A blended approach is what I prefer. It tends to reinforce what has been implemented via elearning. I utilize Captivate, see it, do it, try it (scored) and a lot of hands on scenario based training in a live environment once we have demonstrated the behavior. If classroom is not an option, sometimes I have to use a CBT simulated environment and the dreaded "power point" in the LMS but usually with fun cartoon scenario discussions with a select the good, better, best answers with an assessment. I am a huge proponent of pre and post tests too. Pre tests have really driven efficiencies avoiding unneccessary learning time. If I have a global endeavor I have been known to implement a webinar in conjuction with accessing what we need through the LMS, checking out the web, white board discussions, etc. I just really dig the blended concept. Of course, nothing is done without an assessment to check for understanding and to "tell the story" with metrics for those who need to know. Also, the University of Maryland is the best example I have ever seen using eLearning. It definetely has its place if done correctly.

6、I would suggest that while they get the learner a lot further down the road to proficiency, there's still that last mile where we need adaptive answers to questions regarding our particular situation; where we need cases related to our company's secret sauce and way of doing business; etc.

Renata and Teri - I also like a blended model, but with the advent of social media and new social learning platforms, blended doesn't need to mean blending eLearning with face to face instruction. Let me give you an example: A sequenced case study.

1). 12 claim adjusters receive an email about a new claim (this is the way they usually receive info). It is complex, and they will need to consult with a nurse before making a call. They formulate their questions,

2). They have a conference call with the trainer - role playing the nurse - and ask the questions, hearing each others Q&A and learning from them,

3). They each email their answers to the instructor, who then posts them all in a forum with names removed. (There's no "right" or "wrong" answer btw) Also posted are general remarks about documentation - where it is not behavioral, where the logic does not flow, which ones are models, etc.

4). They each read each other's answers, then revise their own answers and email them to the instructor.

5). The instructor emails back the critique, and they make a final revision.

I purposefully set this up with a telephone, open source forum, and outlook. We used our eCampus which tracks everything to do this for 1,000 claim adjusters, but for small groups you can set up social learning on a shoestring that I think is TREMENDOUSLY effective. Oh - i should have mentioned - there was a hour hour custom eLearning course they watched first. When they used it alone there was no behavior. change. Using this method they reduced their claims losses from $300M/year to $130M/year.

So lots of ways to skin the Bad eLearning cat, neh?

....................................................