I am curious to find out whether an elearning course is "superior" when developed by a teacher/trainer or when outsourced to an e-learning development Company.

On one hand an instructor can create a course that is more powerful from a pedagogical standpoint. In theory, a professor knows his content best. But on the other hand, teachers are not really tech tech savvy, so it is often best to outsource the development to a "professional" developed.

I'd like to know if anyone has experienced both and can shed some light on their experience?

David

I'm not sure if I should first ask what you mean when you say that a teacher/trainer should develop the training...but instead of going back and forth about it, I'm going to get specific and start from scratch. If you already know some of this, you'll have to forgive me for preaching to the choir...

An *instructional designer* (or team of them, in-house or vendor-supplied) should be developing learning opportunities that focus on desired outcomes that link to business goals. Before even determining whether or not all or parts of the learning can be e-learning, the instructional designer(s) should be identifying learning activities needed to acheive the desired outcome(s). Then, based on the most appropriate learning activities, audience, company infrastructure, resources, etc. the instructional designer identifies delivery mode(s).

My point? It's not the in-house or vendor that's the issue. It's that good instructional design is good instructional design.

If e-learning is one of the delivery modes, then a tech savvy designer, and a script writer, and a programmer, and a SME work with the instructional designer to develop storyboards, and a software developer (or team) builds the parts that are to be delivered online. This also involves a whole host of roles that are part and parcel of software development. (this is the extremely compressed version of what e-learning development really entails... but here, my point is that if you have a good instructional designer, he/she does not need to be tech savvy because he/she should not be the one developing the actual software)

I'll stop here for now.

I appreciate the clarification.

I understand that in order to educate a learner, we have to first analyze the content at hand, assess the learner's level of knowledge, then decide what the best medium will be to deliver the content.

I also understand that the ideal process of developing a course involves a content expert (SME), and ID to communicate the content using the best pedagogical approach, and a programmer / web developer if e-learning is the delivery mechanism.

What I really want to know is whether the outcome of an elearning course is generally better when it is outsourced to e-learning developers, or when organizations buy behind the firewall solutions that include an LCMS to create the content on their own. I'd like to hear from someone who has been through both scenarios, and can share the pros and cons of each.

There are so many open source e-learning solutions, and cost effective rapid authoring tools on the market that people are now developing their own e-learning courses. My assumption is that you get what you pay for, and a course that you develop with a "rapid" DIY authoring tool just wont deliver the same value as a course that may cost $20 000 per hour of elearning.

Perhaps I should clarify -- I have been through both many times over. You cannot make a generic statement that in-house is better than vendor or vice versa because it depends on the knowledge, skill, resources, etc. available.

I'm providing best practices because that's exactly what they are. Why is there a need to investigate pros and cons of a generic vendor vs. in-house question when the location of the people doing the work is not at the heart of the issue?

The only issue with in-house vs. vendor is the availability of resources and cost.

If one understands the ideal process, then I don't understand the point of this investigation. Perhaps it's time to critically examine what one is really trying to discover here... is it really that one is trying to prove one is better than the other because one is faced with some people wanting one thing and others wanting another in one's organization?

Ahh one has figured out what one is in pursuit of.

Fanatic Facilitator, I fold my cards.

The truth of the matter is that my company is debating developing a "dumbed down" version of our really complicated LCMS. We develop intelligent applications, one of which is an intelligent e-learning solution. Now the big question is whether it is worth it for us to develop a DIY LCMS or not? That is why I wish to hear what people who have lived through both have to say.

But you... you're good you!

David