I'm providing the *rhetorical* question to try to get people to really think about what they produce when designing a learning experience. I'm suggesting that people really examine what they're delivering and why. I'll offer some thoughts to get the creative juices flowing...

For example -- What purpose does the manual serve? Most people tell me its so that the user has documentation to refer to after the class. Most users report that they never use the manuals. Most users also report that if they use any documentation, it's the notes they took or perhaps a one-page quick reference guide. An instructional designer should be thinking about the adult learner. What do they *really* need in order to learn? What will they use? What is most meaningful? (And if one really, really needs documentation, why why WHY is the instructional designer producing it??)

Furthermore, when one designs learning, why is one focusing most of one's attentions on the documentation one creates instead of the activities the learner must perform in order to learn and practice the new skill/knowledge? This is similar to the problem of "classes" where what the instructor says and does becomes more important than what the learner says and does.

Focus on the learner and I guarantee you'll save time and paper -- for everyone. Faster time to get to implementation, far more flexibility, happy learners who actually retain what is taught...etc.

Of course, one of the keys is that you have facilitators who actually know what they're doing and are able to let the learners be the focus instead of themselves.

I hope these thoughts give you some things to chew on.

quote:

What purpose does the manual serve? Most people tell me its so that the user has documentation to refer to after the class. Most users report that they never use the manuals. Most users also report that if they use any documentation, it's the notes they took or perhaps a one-page quick reference guide. An instructional designer should be thinking about the adult learner. What do they *really* need in order to learn? What will they use? What is most meaningful? (And if one really, really needs documentation, why why WHY is the instructional designer producing it??)

You are absolutely correct. I do, however, use exercise manuals and I use them for three primary purposes:

• To enumerate the order of the steps to perform. Sometimes I teach courses where users have to install or configure software. They need the experience of doing it. True, they could use the manufacturer's instructions (and I sometimes ask them to) but when the manufacturer's instructions ask for an informed choice, I supply the information necessary for them to make the choice in the lab. The course materials provide them the genreal concepts for making the choices in "real life."
  
• I like to do some exercises of a genre I call "scavenger hunts". In these exercises participants look for things in software (e.g. "How would you turn off the update message?"). These require the user to play with the software and/or remember what we did in the didactic portion of the course. The manual lists the itmes to find and has a space for the user to fill in what he/she found.
• A third use is to provide questions and answer fill-in spaces. Some questions might look like "What would have happened if we hand not enabled 'Save a copy to the file server'?".
  

quote:

Furthermore, when one designs learning, why is one focusing most of one's attentions on the documentation one creates instead of the activities the learner must perform in order to learn and practice the new skill/knowledge? This is similar to the problem of "classes" where what the instructor says and does becomes more important than what the learner says and does.

I don't think everyone is. I know that when I create an exercise manual for a software course, the design and testing of the exercise is much more time and brain intensive than the production of the documentation.

quote:

Focus on the learner and I guarantee you'll save time and paper -- for everyone. Faster time to get to implementation, far more flexibility, happy learners who actually retain what is taught...etc.

Of course, one of the keys is that you have facilitators who actually know what they're doing and are able to let the learners be the focus instead of themselves.

I agree. I think that there are different types of software training, though. Let me mention two big ones: first there is the "how to use the new system for retreiving sales leads" where the focus is on how participants can do particular tasks with the tool. Second is "how do we use product X". One example of this is "Introduction to Excel". Every class will have users with different needs. One needs to teach a broad set of skills for using Excel. I never do "pivot tables", but they are in every excel class. I'm sure some participants use tham and some don't. Including that is being participant-focused, but the course broader than that. One could have a whole lot of small courses on various aspects of using a tool (e.g. Excel), and while that could be better, it might not expose users to new parts of the tool they did not know existed.

Sorry for the long-winded comment. I hope I have helped further the discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Fanatic Facilitator:
I'm sorry - I know what you're talking about. I guess I'm making my point in a round about way. The bottom line is -- do you want to improve the learner's experience in the class room and save time and money or are you attached to the idea of having that manual?

(If people are in a classroom together with a facilitator and the computers on which to learn and practice, why do you need a manual?...that's a rhetorical question)

Hi:

That is just our requirement. We must have a student manual that students use in the classroom, and then take with them back to their jobsite.

Thanks,
L

quote:

Originally posted by travelerjjm:
OK, FF, I'll bite. What are you suggesting?

I use printed manuals for a number of reasons which I will share, but I'd like to hear your alternative first. I've worked on a few alternatives to printed manuals, but they have not yet been usable for many courses I teach.

We just want to see what other folks' training manuals look like before we re-design ours. First, it can give us some ideas. Second, it will help us validate that our manuals are already on the right path, or not.

Sincerely,
L :-)

I do not use manuals during computer training. What I do prepare is an instructor's guide that outlines the process of learning not the content for the trainer. For example, how the trainer communicates the new features in the future world compared to the current world is through an activity. How to facilitate this activity is outlined in detail for the trainer in the instructor's guide. For the participants, I usually create a workbook using Microsoft Word or Power Point. In the workbook are key points, definitions, and the activities. At times, I will leave some of the information blank so that participants are forced to write down the information. As a review, at the end of class we go over the answers. I also include cheat sheets. I find its helpful as a reference instead of a bulky manual during the activities. Any forms I need to complete the activities are also included. For example, with a new process also comes new reports. I'll create a form with 10 questions on the reports. I will hand out copies of the form and the report(s), and have the class work in pairs or small groups, analyze the reports and answer the questions.

Other than that, I might include a short power point with the objectives, process flows, etc just to help the trainer. However, our classes focus a lot more on demos, practice activities in pairs, and other group work. The training manual is provided after training as a reference. However, from what I hear, employees rarely use them!!

Hope this helps!