Learning Conversations

For a while I've been wondering about the words we use to describe our profession. Like Donald Taylor, I'm not convinced that learning & development really can be considered a profession until we have a clear set of standards by which we can measure ourselves. Part of that includes tightening up on our language.

My dog is three years old. By now she's learnt where she can relieve herself and the bits of the house she's not allowed in. She occasionally walks to heel and, even more occasionally, comes back when I call her name. Why does she do that? Because she's associated particular behaviour with either reward or punishment. We call that "training".

I know very little about tennis, but, to my untutored eyes, Andy Murray has become a considerably better tennis player over the past year. How has he done that? Through considerable work, with his coach, to make his body react faster and his muscles stronger. We call that "training".

A few years back I became the manager of a small team. All new managers had to learn about the company's appraisal processes. I spent one day with a group of other managers and an expert in appraisal. By the end of that day I was allowed to perform appraisals. We call that "training".

What are the similarities here?

For each scenario there is an expected outcome - a particular behaviour or characteristic that is required. In the case of the dog it's keeping to her part of the house. For Andy Murray it's being stronger & faster than his opponents. For the manager it's being able to get the best out of the appraisal process.

For each scenario there was also an external input of some sort. Someone who sets the standard, can provide immediate feedback and suggest ways in which the expected outcome can be achieved.

And what are the differences?

The dog was motivated to change her behaviour because she learnt to associate it with reward or punishment (extrinsic motivation). Andy Murray is motivated to change because, I guess, he wants to win (intrinsic motivation). I was motivated to change because... well, I'm not sure really.

Changing a dog's behaviour takes time and constant, ongoing reinforcing feedback. Andy Murray's new speed and strength certainly didn't come about overnight, and again will require constant practice and feedback to maintain it. My ability to perform appraisals was expected to be developed over the course of one day and no-one since then has given any feedback on how I do them.

So what does this mean for the world of "training" in the workplace?

If we (the learning professionals) a're going to do training properly we need to:

• Be clear about what the expected outcomes are - not that we have to make that explicit to the trainee up front, but at least we should be certain about where we're heading. Training is very different from informal learning as it's focussed on externally derived outcomes.
• Make sure the trainee is given access to an external input who can set the direction of travel and provide feedback and guidance to reinforce the correct behaviour.
• Ensure that trainees have clear motivation to change. Without that motivation we are wasting our time. cf. Motivation post. Motivation may be intrinsic (I want to do my job better), or extrinsic (if I do this I will keep my job / get a pay rise / impress my manager).
• Forget the idea that you can take short cuts. Good training is hard work - requiring ongoing coaching and feedback.

Training that works

If we take those principles into account, then what will an effective, large scale, training regime look like. I would suggest a threefold strategy:

1. Build in extrinsic motivational factors - most of your trainees will need them. How this works will depend on your organisation, but may include financial reward, status, or recognition. Negative reinforcement may include being able to continue in a particular role or even the removal of certain privileges. Note, I'm not recommending this, just saying that it's a possible motivational factor. Positive reinforcement is always much more effective long term.
2. Expect managers (at all levels) to be coaches and to provide ongoing, reinforcing feedback. The Manager-Tools advice on feedback and coaching is invaluable here. This is a major change to the role of most managers - but will be far more effective than expecting a one-hit training workshop to make a difference back in the workplace.
3. Provide external input which sets the standard and gives examples of "correct" behaviour. Use resources like videos, posters, briefing papers, elearning packages, even a face-to-face workshop with an expert, to ensure a consistent message is available right across the organisation. The precise medium will depend very much on the type of message and who you're training.

You'll see that the training department is not the only part of the organisation involved in training. It should include senior management to model the coaching & feedback regime, HR to set reward policies, and Internal Communications to ensure messages are consistent and presented well.

Training is, and never can be, a fix for poorly designed processes, systems and user interfaces (just see the Terminal 5 debacle for an example).

Training not development

Those people who know me will be wondering what's happened. I'm normally a died-in-the-wool constructivist in my approach to learning. The thing is when we're trying to induce specific behaviours & capabilities, then we need a far more behaviourist approach, as proposed above. Constructivist approaches work when we are taking a developmental strategy - where there are no "right answers". If that's where you're heading, then you don't want "training".

What examples would you say are training and which are development?

With thanks to Donald Clark for the impetus to put these thoughts down.

Tom Kuhlmann, in his always useful Rapid Elearning Blog writes today:

Where I live, the threat of earthquakes is real so we were required to have a 72-hour emergency pack at our desks. Needless to say not many of us did. However, we always passed the online safety courses that required we have 72-hour packs.

How similar that is to the current trend for online compliance training. It begs the question, why spend the money on creating the training if it doesn't have any significant impact on behaviour? Is it really just a box-ticking exercise?

Tom goes on to describe how scenarios - stories that illustrate the consequences of behaving in particular ways - can provide the psychological impetus to change.

The challenge then is to persuade your client that this format will actually work better than the "traditional" bullet-pointed instructional elearning module.

The scenario also requires far more work from the client to come up with the background information, the stories, that can be used as its basis.

But if they want it to actually work...

How do you respond to criticism? Me? My immediate response is normally to go off in a huff - but I'm working on that!

Let's say you're creating a product for some people to use, and one of that group says it's difficult to use, how would you respond?

If it was me, I would try to engage with that person to find out why they find it difficult and then make the decision whether to change the product.

What happens if that person reviews your product in public? For example, in a web forum, or on a personal website?

A company that understands the dynamics of the web would probably respond to the criticism. They'd engage with the community, but especially with that individual. By bringing on board someone who has been critical they are more likely to win converts.

A company that doesn't understand the web may decide to request that the offending article be removed. This is despite the fact that it will still exist in the Google cache. And despite the fact that they have no legal right to request that personal opinion be removed. Just imagine what would happen if theatres or restaurants could effectively censor newspaper critics!

Yet this is exactly what has happened to Doug Belshaw. Following an article (on his personal website) in which he commented on a number of online learning environments for schools, one of the companies mentioned (TALMOS) threatened legal proceedings on him via his school if he didn't remove an offending paragraph.

Doug complied with this request due to the difficult situation it put him under at work.

There's a disclaimer on my blog that states that it's totally independent of any professional relationship that I have. Yet, even so, I am very careful to ensure that my writing does not cause embarrassment or give away confidential information. That's just sensible self-censorship.

I can't blame Doug for removing the offending words. In fact, by doing so he's probably highlighted how little the company concerned understands the web. But I am surprised that his school couldn't see the parallels between writing reviews of teaching materials (in, for example, the TES) and writing similar reviews on a personal website. I wonder how it might have caused embarrassment to the school? Is there anything that could have predicted that response?

Where does learning sit in your organisation?

Image created using Gliffy

Is it part of the Human Resources (HR) function?
Is it part of Internal Communications?
Is it part of Knowledge Management (KM)?

What input should each of these departments have to Learning? What input should Learning have to these departments? When should something be led by Internal Communications and when by Learning? How does KM fit into Learning?

Is an Organisational Development strategy something that is led by Learning or supported by?

There are good arguments for all of these.

What's your experience?

We've had one of Eon's new smart meters installed today. It means our energy suppliers can take meter readings remotely, and also they provide a power display so we can see how much energy we're using.

From Eon

The only problem is, as soon as the meter was switched back on my wireless network went haywire. Under Mac OS X the connection dropped to a crawl. Under Windows XP the connection just kept dropping out.

I tried all the usual tricks - reboot everything. Then reboot again.

The thing that clinched it was when I noticed a new connection in my list of preferred wireless networks. It was called 2Wire64.

Of course! The smart meter must be using some sort of wireless network to communicate. (Well that's what it seemed anyway)

I removed that connection and changed the channel setting on my wireless adapter to channel 7 (it had been at Auto). And, as if by magic, everything started working again.

Let's hope it lasts.

"If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." Abraham Maslow

With the growth in rapid elearning tools like Articulate, Adobe's Captivate (UPDATE: And Adobe's Breeze Presenter), and Atlantic Link's ContentPoint it means that anyone who can use Powerpoint can create materials more suitable for online delivery.

Since the launch of Powerpoint, it (and tools like it, eg. OpenOffice Impress) has been used to create the default backdrop for anyone standing up and speaking. Sometimes it is used particularly well, complementing the speaker's words so that, together they make a far more engaging and memorable experience. (See Presentation Zen for some superb examples)

Too often, though, presentation tools like Powerpoint are used completely inappropriately. Examples abound of text-filled slides, distracting animations, and speakers that read out the words on the slides.

The next stage in the presentation tool's development was to use it independently of the speaker - as an authoring tool for standalone documents. There are great examples, like this one on Action Mapping from Cathy Moore.

But, again, there are untold numbers of people being subjected to slide-based documents that should never have been put in that format. See, for example, Hilary Clinton's recent "docupoint" as described at Presentation Zen.

Now that we've realised that Powerpoint has limitations when you use it online (for one thing that vast file sizes that you have to handle), we're moving to "rapid elearning". Which basically means converting slide-based materials into Flash and adding some nifty navigation and additional media elements.

Computer geeks have, for a long time, known that if you put Garbage In you get Garbage Out (GIGO). The same is true for rapid elearning. A Powerpoint containing pages of bullet points will never become a good elearning package (ie. engaging and memorable) without a complete rethink from the learner's perspective. Just as it was never a good idea to send it to someone as a Powerpoint expecting them to work their way through it. Just as it was probably the Powerpoint, combined with the speaker reading out each bullet point, that sent people to sleep in the meeting.

So when and how should we use rapid elearning tools?

There's no absolute answer to that... It's more a case of making sure rapid elearning is just one of the tools in your toolbox, and you follow two simple principles:

Start with the learner - what do we need them to be able to do?

Consider whether they need learning activity or marketing activity? Learning & marketing overlap in many ways, as both are designed to affect a change in behaviour. In many cases, good learning involves marketing, and good marketing involves learning. The distinction that I would propose (for now) is that marketing is about provoking a response through simple, high-level messages. Whereas learning is about changing behaviour through more detailed understanding. I'm up for debate on this one!

How detailed does the message need to be at this stage?

Create materials that are appropriate for the level of detail. The table below may help:

There are no right answers, and no strict demarcation lines. But if you always keep a balance between the needs of the learner and your objectives, using the right tool for the job, then you're heading in a good direction.

Of course, I've not even touched on learning-specific stuff here like assessment (whether for the learner's benefit or the organisation's), or interaction with experts and peers. That's maybe for another post...

I was wondering why I react so strongly when people talk about allowing people to access learning resources dependent on their role in the organisation.

I think it's because, over the past eight years, ever since I left the teaching profession, I've learnt how to learn independently.

The organisation I work for, although it encourages formal learning & training, also gives people the freedom to see where they want to go and to learn how to get there. There are very few restrictions (if you're sensible!) on what we can access on the internet. We are trusted to spend our time wisely (as long as the job gets done), and, in my role, allowed to choose where we work. This philosophy of trust and devolved responsibility is endemic throughout the company; financial management decisions are pushed down as far as possible, as are personnel/human resources processes (such as recruitment, absence management etc). Of course, such a level of responsibility is not left unchecked or unsupported. Strong accountability is built in at all levels.

The key thing, from a learning perpective, is the underlying expectation - you will go and learn what you need to learn to meet your personal, team and organisational needs. When I was teaching, that expectation (in my eyes at least) was turned on its head. I tended used a lack of "training" as an excuse. From my perspective at that time, it was the school's responsibility to give me that training. Now, I see that it is my responsibility to be aware of what learning I need and to find it, when I need it.

My personal feeling is that if we put up barriers that say to adults "you're not ready for this yet, so you can't come in", we take away that level of responsibility that lets people make choices. Yes, we should guide people to help them make good choices, but is it a bad thing if they access some materials or join a forum, that are too "difficult" for them?

I bought one of the new Asus eeepc's last week.

I needed a machine that was ultra-portable but not ultra-expensive. The eeepc fitted the bill exactly. It comes with all the applications I need: Openoffice, Skype, Firefox - plus a whole load of others that will be useful to while away the time on a train!

One of the things I really want to do with the eeepc is use it as a platform to demonstrate how Moodle works. The machine has got a VGA socket, so can be plugged into a projector. It also runs Linux, which is perfect for running web applications.

I followed Liam Green-Hughes' instructions to the letter. It took about an hour of concentration. It helped that I knew a bit about how the Linux file system works anyway. This isn't a job for an absolute beginner.

But, eventually, with no real hiccups, I ended up with a full blown Moodle 1.9 site running off the eeepc!

Moodle 1.9 running on an eeepc

Note: I'm only looking here at one specific context - adult professional development within an organisation. These are high-level messages aimed at senior management.

As with any learning strategy, the solution adopted should match the problem being solved. Different problems may require different solutions. The online environment is an addition to the learning professional's toolkit, which may already include elements such as face-to-face training, books, coaching sessions, mentoring programmes etc. Introducing online learning provides the following benefits:

• It enables easier version control of materials, since there is always only one, central copy of materials to be used;
• It enables workshop facilitators to focus on embedding, reinforcing and practising ideas, rather than 'delivering' content;
• It gives learners control over what, how and when they learn;
• It provides management tools that may help evaluation of learning materials and activities.

To achieve these benefits using the online environment is as much of an art as in getting the best out of the face-to-face environment. However there are some general guidelines that we have found work well in professional development contexts:

• Ensure that you don't lose the benefits to the learner by removing control from them - in terms of what, how and when they learn. Minimise the barriers to participation or your online learning initiative will fail.
• Learning is not about delivering content - it is about people engaging with that content and doing something with it, such as discussing it, practising the ideas, taking a test, re-presenting the ideas etc. Some of this can be done online; some is best done face-to-face.
• Ensure your learners' expectations are set appropriately from the start - with clear marketing and joining instructions;
• Use the management tools carefully - the things that are easy to measure often provide meaningless information (eg. data that tells you that someone has viewed a particular page in their browser does not tell you they've learnt anything).

I know there's a lot of detail missed out here. But what other high-level messages would you want to give to an organisation considering online learning?

Don Ledingham is kicking off his new job in style. He's recently become (Acting )Director of Education and Children’s Services for East Lothian Council. His 33 ideas for the secondary school curriculum are, each one, pushing a learner-centred, flexible, and up-to-date idea of what school is about. Together they paint a picture of a radical rethink of education.

I do hope at least some of these ideas come to fruition. East Lothian will be an exciting place to work in education, and will become a beacon for what's possible.