The Harmonization of Learning Approach Systems
Content
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
The Harmonization of Learning Approach Systems By Bradley DJH Loiselle, PMP President of iPal Interactive Learning Inc. Co-Author Scott Hunter, CMA, PMP President of the Project Management Center Today there is an ongoing debate around instructor-led versus self-led learning and the benefits that each can bring and each can take away from the learning approach. Both approaches offer advantages and disadvantages in terms of costs, flexibility, productivity, learning experience, competency development, collaboration and support. The debate continues today about these differences and how the two approaches could work together in harmony. The key word here is “harmony” because the blended approach being used in the market today, for the most part, is not as seamless as most would believe. The blended learning approach brings the two teaching methods together and makes them work in synchronization providing the students and the instructors the benefits of both approaches. The difficulties that people have in blending the two approaches, seems to stem around the uncertainties that one approach might take away from the other’s outcomes or advantages. An example of this conflict is with courses that focus on practical knowledge or have an applied element that requires the student to interact with certain tools or products; an approach that allows the learner to gain ‘hands on’ experience. At first glance, most would agree that self-led learning is a difficult proposition within this teaching environment, but in fact it is possible. A blended learning approach, when done correctly, provides the student with the support and attention they require in their weaker areas, while providing the instructor with details about the strengths and weaknesses of the student. These benefits of ‘Personal Student Support’ and ‘Instructor Understanding’ are critical to being able to effectively enhance and advance the education of a student. Many workshops or instructor-led courses end with the students being asked to complete a test, assignment or activity in order to measure how well they understood the lesson. The main problem with this process is that, in most cases, the students would still be able to recall what was discussed throughout the day, since they just took the course. Does this provide the instructor with confidence that the student truly understood the lesson? Truly knows how to apply the knowledge? Or will remember it, after they return to work or their other priorities? It is hard to gauge a student’s understanding and retention of knowledge without further testing, comprehension measurement, and reinforcement of lesson objectives. Some would also say that the final exams and further Instructor-led testing at the end of the course would be able to address these concerns. But, is it effective to wait until the end of the program to determine success or failure? Would it not be more rewarding to have all students that complete the course, pass successfully and achieve the desired competency? For the most part, the knowledge obtained through ‘Instructor-led’ courses is typically forgotten and shelved along with the course text books shortly after the course. I must admit that in my earlier years, I was one of those students that would forget most of what I was taught and in some cases went back to my old working habits almost immediately and never looked back.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
The blended approach succeeds when you have the proper technologies, resources, knowledge and infrastructure, that allows you to develop the processes that will be required to be integrated into the Instructor-led and self-led programs. When developing a blended program it is important to ask yourself how will the self-led program support the instructor-led programs and reinforce or augment the lessons the student has completed without taking away from the instructor-led lessons. These questions are typical and relevant because the blended program should support and not conflict both approaches. The solution to developing a blended program really comes down to the technologies used in its’ construction. When building a blended program one must look at: 1. technology compatibility issues through integration of different platforms; 2. competency or capability measurement with regards to being able to track a student`s self-led progress; 3. the ability to tie into a student’s immediate online results and provide them with further training as required to support areas of weakness; 4. ensuring that content already delivered by the instructor reinforces and augments versus requiring the student to go through the entire course again; and 5. providing feedback to the instructor on each student`s understanding and ability to apply the knowledge while identifying who requires additional support. At this point you are probably asking yourself how it is possible to make this happen. This seems like a lot of things to take into consideration; how can I bring them together? The answer –“You have to have the right resources in place and plan to make it happen”. Not one tool will enable you to develop a blended program that provides the benefits of both learning platforms. Even the purchase of an e-learning tool is not enough to create this type of program. In order to successfully develop a blended approach, you require the instructor’s program content, experiences, workshops, interaction and applied understanding converted into the self-led support program by tapping into multiple technologies including such things as: designing software, learning development software, a Learning Management System ‘LMS’ 1 system, as well as content developers, and a delivery methodology, Refer Figure 1a.
1
A Learning Management System ‘LMS’ includes a series of training components that enrolls students, allows them to select and complete courses, measures their progress at and within the course or curriculum level, and directs them to lesson reinforcement exercises or skill and competency learning paths.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Figure 1a – Development elements
The most important aspect for a blended program to work effectively is to ensure that it includes the positive outcomes for both the instructor as well as the student within both instructor-led and self-led approaches. If you lose the benefits of one in the trade off, the program will not be successful. Let’s take a quick look at the different approaches in order to better understand the advantages of each and how they will complement one another. Instructor-led courses: The student participates in an Instructor-led program. This could include such things as hands on practical learning (Applied), workshops and other collaborative events along with the social and team building environment. The interaction with other students within this environment helps foster immediate questions to answer responses in areas of uncertainties for the students.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Figure 2a – A blended program
The above model illustrates how a blended program, which is instructor-led (the center of the model), can be combined with a self-led online program (the outer rim) which encompasses the entire life-cycle of the course. For each lesson (L1, L2...etc) a student would work through the instructor-led approach, which would be followed-up by an online assessment that is predetermined by the instructor. The assessment could be immediately after the course, a week later, a month later. The purpose of the online assessment is to ensure that the student has understood and has been able to retain the information. This assessment is tied directly into the same lessons that were instructor-led. The instructor-led lessons are built into the self-led online program in such a way that the student is supported in the areas that they need help. Here is how it would work. Self-led courses: 1. The student is required to take a follow-up online assessment/test and then is taken through a series of activities that would test their understanding of what they learned through their instructor-led lesson. Based on their assessment scores, which could be benchmarked or set at any percentage, the student would be either directed through to the next assessment/test
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
(because they passed the level of acceptance) or forwarded to a reinforced lesson that is designed to provide them with additional support in the areas of weakness; 2. The student’s results are then recorded into the LMS and made available to the instructor. These results would provide the instructor with a better understanding of where the student might be having issues. If most students are having the same issues, it also provides the instructor with an indication that perhaps the Instructor-led lesson is not effective in teaching that lesson point, 3. The student would then have the ability (either required or not by the instructor) to retake the assessments/tests and lessons as many times as they require in order to grasp the message. This approach is a form of ‘Coaching’ that provides a cost effective and customized training approach to one-on-one support. 4. If the student still requires support, the self-led approach can also provide online collaboration and forums that would enable communication with other students or the instructor. A primary benefit of the blended approach is that the instructor-led program can continue to move forward with each lesson from one module to the next with the confidence that students are receiving the right support throughout the entire program. With this strategy the online self-led approach becomes an effective tool that can help instructors provide a quality education to their students and improve their ability to achieve competency in the subject being taught. The Self-Led Approach Now let’s take a look at how the self-led approach would work. There would be 3 types of results from the assessment. Either the student 1) understood the lesson, 2) understood the lesson, but is unclear in a couple of areas, or 3) requires support throughout most of the lessons. The following outlines the process a student would follow when they log into their LMS and move through the assessments. Keep in mind that with the development of the online program, you will need to ensure that all the lessons are incorporated into the self-led program because one student might be having a problem in one area, while another is having a problem in a completely different area. The set-up of the assessment and lessons, need to tie into and support the instructor-led lessons in its entirety.
1. Student understands the Instructor-Led lesson In this scenario, the student successfully completes all the assessments/tests that pertain to each lesson delivered by the instructor-led program. The student has understood the lesson and the instructor is made aware that the student has passed the assessments/tests without any issues. In this case, the student would not need additional support. Figure 3a – Assessment with correct answers
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
2. Student understands most of the Instructor-Led lesson, but needs a little more support In this scenario, the student has successfully completed most of the assessments/tests, but has made a few mistakes that have resulted in an assessment/test not being completed. In this case, the student is then directed to an online version of the Instructor-led lesson. The student then has the opportunity to review an interactive, engaging lesson that is designed to better address their particular needs as it pertains to their competency requirement. They will not have to watch lessons where they succeeded, only those that they did not. This ensures that their lessons are focused on key areas for improvement. The results are then carried forward, through the LMS, to the instructor where he/she would be able to see the individual’s results and follow-up. Figure 3b – Assessment with mostly correct
3. Student does not understand the Instructor-Led lesson and requires more support In this example, the student is not successfully completing the majority of the assessments/tests. That being the case, the student is directed to reinforced lessons for each failure and then back up to the next assessment. This strategy provides additional support to the student and makes the instructor aware of the issues. It also enables the instructor to set rules within the LMS that state if a student fails most assessments, that they will be automatically bookmarked for another review of the lessons in the upcoming weeks. This automated tracking of competency attainment will help the instructor maintain control of the students` progress.
Figure 3c – Assessment with mostly incorrect answers
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Conclusion In conclusion, the blended approach is a very worthwhile program if it has been set-up properly and incorporates the necessary elements to not only support the students, but also provide the right feedback to the instructors on progress, issues, successes and areas that require the student to improve. The fight between instructor-led courses and self-led courses is no more. With the right approach, the right set-up and the right resources, you too can have a program that will make your student’s learning experience more rewarding and successful.
Bradley Loiselle has had the fortune to work with many industry leaders worldwide including some of the top companies such as The Walt Disney Company. His experiences have taken him across Canada, the United States, UK, China, Australia, Europe and Mexico. Brad currently sits on several Boards, including Ottawa’s Project Management Institute Chapter. His speaking experiences include teaching multiple project management courses at Algonquin College to classes of 25 to 58 students, to a technology lecture at the Ottawa Congress Centre to 100 project management peers. Brad is the founder and President of I-Pal. Brad will be speaking at the 2010 CSTD Annual Conference.
The Harmonization of Learning Approach Systems By Bradley DJH Loiselle, PMP President of iPal Interactive Learning Inc. Co-Author Scott Hunter, CMA, PMP President of the Project Management Center Today there is an ongoing debate around instructor-led versus self-led learning and the benefits that each can bring and each can take away from the learning approach. Both approaches offer advantages and disadvantages in terms of costs, flexibility, productivity, learning experience, competency development, collaboration and support. The debate continues today about these differences and how the two approaches could work together in harmony. The key word here is “harmony” because the blended approach being used in the market today, for the most part, is not as seamless as most would believe. The blended learning approach brings the two teaching methods together and makes them work in synchronization providing the students and the instructors the benefits of both approaches. The difficulties that people have in blending the two approaches, seems to stem around the uncertainties that one approach might take away from the other’s outcomes or advantages. An example of this conflict is with courses that focus on practical knowledge or have an applied element that requires the student to interact with certain tools or products; an approach that allows the learner to gain ‘hands on’ experience. At first glance, most would agree that self-led learning is a difficult proposition within this teaching environment, but in fact it is possible. A blended learning approach, when done correctly, provides the student with the support and attention they require in their weaker areas, while providing the instructor with details about the strengths and weaknesses of the student. These benefits of ‘Personal Student Support’ and ‘Instructor Understanding’ are critical to being able to effectively enhance and advance the education of a student. Many workshops or instructor-led courses end with the students being asked to complete a test, assignment or activity in order to measure how well they understood the lesson. The main problem with this process is that, in most cases, the students would still be able to recall what was discussed throughout the day, since they just took the course. Does this provide the instructor with confidence that the student truly understood the lesson? Truly knows how to apply the knowledge? Or will remember it, after they return to work or their other priorities? It is hard to gauge a student’s understanding and retention of knowledge without further testing, comprehension measurement, and reinforcement of lesson objectives. Some would also say that the final exams and further Instructor-led testing at the end of the course would be able to address these concerns. But, is it effective to wait until the end of the program to determine success or failure? Would it not be more rewarding to have all students that complete the course, pass successfully and achieve the desired competency? For the most part, the knowledge obtained through ‘Instructor-led’ courses is typically forgotten and shelved along with the course text books shortly after the course. I must admit that in my earlier years, I was one of those students that would forget most of what I was taught and in some cases went back to my old working habits almost immediately and never looked back.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
The blended approach succeeds when you have the proper technologies, resources, knowledge and infrastructure, that allows you to develop the processes that will be required to be integrated into the Instructor-led and self-led programs. When developing a blended program it is important to ask yourself how will the self-led program support the instructor-led programs and reinforce or augment the lessons the student has completed without taking away from the instructor-led lessons. These questions are typical and relevant because the blended program should support and not conflict both approaches. The solution to developing a blended program really comes down to the technologies used in its’ construction. When building a blended program one must look at: 1. technology compatibility issues through integration of different platforms; 2. competency or capability measurement with regards to being able to track a student`s self-led progress; 3. the ability to tie into a student’s immediate online results and provide them with further training as required to support areas of weakness; 4. ensuring that content already delivered by the instructor reinforces and augments versus requiring the student to go through the entire course again; and 5. providing feedback to the instructor on each student`s understanding and ability to apply the knowledge while identifying who requires additional support. At this point you are probably asking yourself how it is possible to make this happen. This seems like a lot of things to take into consideration; how can I bring them together? The answer –“You have to have the right resources in place and plan to make it happen”. Not one tool will enable you to develop a blended program that provides the benefits of both learning platforms. Even the purchase of an e-learning tool is not enough to create this type of program. In order to successfully develop a blended approach, you require the instructor’s program content, experiences, workshops, interaction and applied understanding converted into the self-led support program by tapping into multiple technologies including such things as: designing software, learning development software, a Learning Management System ‘LMS’ 1 system, as well as content developers, and a delivery methodology, Refer Figure 1a.
1
A Learning Management System ‘LMS’ includes a series of training components that enrolls students, allows them to select and complete courses, measures their progress at and within the course or curriculum level, and directs them to lesson reinforcement exercises or skill and competency learning paths.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Figure 1a – Development elements
The most important aspect for a blended program to work effectively is to ensure that it includes the positive outcomes for both the instructor as well as the student within both instructor-led and self-led approaches. If you lose the benefits of one in the trade off, the program will not be successful. Let’s take a quick look at the different approaches in order to better understand the advantages of each and how they will complement one another. Instructor-led courses: The student participates in an Instructor-led program. This could include such things as hands on practical learning (Applied), workshops and other collaborative events along with the social and team building environment. The interaction with other students within this environment helps foster immediate questions to answer responses in areas of uncertainties for the students.
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Figure 2a – A blended program
The above model illustrates how a blended program, which is instructor-led (the center of the model), can be combined with a self-led online program (the outer rim) which encompasses the entire life-cycle of the course. For each lesson (L1, L2...etc) a student would work through the instructor-led approach, which would be followed-up by an online assessment that is predetermined by the instructor. The assessment could be immediately after the course, a week later, a month later. The purpose of the online assessment is to ensure that the student has understood and has been able to retain the information. This assessment is tied directly into the same lessons that were instructor-led. The instructor-led lessons are built into the self-led online program in such a way that the student is supported in the areas that they need help. Here is how it would work. Self-led courses: 1. The student is required to take a follow-up online assessment/test and then is taken through a series of activities that would test their understanding of what they learned through their instructor-led lesson. Based on their assessment scores, which could be benchmarked or set at any percentage, the student would be either directed through to the next assessment/test
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
(because they passed the level of acceptance) or forwarded to a reinforced lesson that is designed to provide them with additional support in the areas of weakness; 2. The student’s results are then recorded into the LMS and made available to the instructor. These results would provide the instructor with a better understanding of where the student might be having issues. If most students are having the same issues, it also provides the instructor with an indication that perhaps the Instructor-led lesson is not effective in teaching that lesson point, 3. The student would then have the ability (either required or not by the instructor) to retake the assessments/tests and lessons as many times as they require in order to grasp the message. This approach is a form of ‘Coaching’ that provides a cost effective and customized training approach to one-on-one support. 4. If the student still requires support, the self-led approach can also provide online collaboration and forums that would enable communication with other students or the instructor. A primary benefit of the blended approach is that the instructor-led program can continue to move forward with each lesson from one module to the next with the confidence that students are receiving the right support throughout the entire program. With this strategy the online self-led approach becomes an effective tool that can help instructors provide a quality education to their students and improve their ability to achieve competency in the subject being taught. The Self-Led Approach Now let’s take a look at how the self-led approach would work. There would be 3 types of results from the assessment. Either the student 1) understood the lesson, 2) understood the lesson, but is unclear in a couple of areas, or 3) requires support throughout most of the lessons. The following outlines the process a student would follow when they log into their LMS and move through the assessments. Keep in mind that with the development of the online program, you will need to ensure that all the lessons are incorporated into the self-led program because one student might be having a problem in one area, while another is having a problem in a completely different area. The set-up of the assessment and lessons, need to tie into and support the instructor-led lessons in its entirety.
1. Student understands the Instructor-Led lesson In this scenario, the student successfully completes all the assessments/tests that pertain to each lesson delivered by the instructor-led program. The student has understood the lesson and the instructor is made aware that the student has passed the assessments/tests without any issues. In this case, the student would not need additional support. Figure 3a – Assessment with correct answers
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
2. Student understands most of the Instructor-Led lesson, but needs a little more support In this scenario, the student has successfully completed most of the assessments/tests, but has made a few mistakes that have resulted in an assessment/test not being completed. In this case, the student is then directed to an online version of the Instructor-led lesson. The student then has the opportunity to review an interactive, engaging lesson that is designed to better address their particular needs as it pertains to their competency requirement. They will not have to watch lessons where they succeeded, only those that they did not. This ensures that their lessons are focused on key areas for improvement. The results are then carried forward, through the LMS, to the instructor where he/she would be able to see the individual’s results and follow-up. Figure 3b – Assessment with mostly correct
3. Student does not understand the Instructor-Led lesson and requires more support In this example, the student is not successfully completing the majority of the assessments/tests. That being the case, the student is directed to reinforced lessons for each failure and then back up to the next assessment. This strategy provides additional support to the student and makes the instructor aware of the issues. It also enables the instructor to set rules within the LMS that state if a student fails most assessments, that they will be automatically bookmarked for another review of the lessons in the upcoming weeks. This automated tracking of competency attainment will help the instructor maintain control of the students` progress.
Figure 3c – Assessment with mostly incorrect answers
Feature Article appearing in the May 5, 2010 e‐letter
Conclusion In conclusion, the blended approach is a very worthwhile program if it has been set-up properly and incorporates the necessary elements to not only support the students, but also provide the right feedback to the instructors on progress, issues, successes and areas that require the student to improve. The fight between instructor-led courses and self-led courses is no more. With the right approach, the right set-up and the right resources, you too can have a program that will make your student’s learning experience more rewarding and successful.
Bradley Loiselle has had the fortune to work with many industry leaders worldwide including some of the top companies such as The Walt Disney Company. His experiences have taken him across Canada, the United States, UK, China, Australia, Europe and Mexico. Brad currently sits on several Boards, including Ottawa’s Project Management Institute Chapter. His speaking experiences include teaching multiple project management courses at Algonquin College to classes of 25 to 58 students, to a technology lecture at the Ottawa Congress Centre to 100 project management peers. Brad is the founder and President of I-Pal. Brad will be speaking at the 2010 CSTD Annual Conference.
