I agree with fanatic facilitator... but there are a few good ones out there. I'd recommend going to their sites, trying some demo's and see what level of interactivity they have... did you feel engaged? For example I did an advanced excel course (how's that for a bland topic) but it was cool because no only was their interactivity as they explained the features, but I could actually click in the cells live, like I was actually in excel and try the functions for myself. With immediate feedback as to whether I was doing it right or not.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JimmyNice,

One of the biggest issues we faced when moving in this direction was how to achieve the correct balance of interaction with an instructor or facilitator, how much was done independently, and the support/encouragement provided to the participants.

We chose a mixed solution that combined web conferences with WBTs and handbook activities to achieve our purposes. The use of a live web conference provided the comfort for the participants that there really is a live instructor that will answer my questions. Our sessions were set up to begin with a web conference that outlined the expectations of course, provided the WIIFM and educate the participants as to how they were to get the maximum benefit of the training. Following the initial web conference, the participants completed one or two lessons developed as WBTs. They were also instructed to download an activity sheet that had them try to apply the information introduced in the sessions. During the second web conference, the instructor asked participants to provide their feedback on the activities, what successes did they have and what were the barriers to success. This provided opportunities for the participants to provide feedback to each other and helped clarify the application of the learning content. The instructor provided a little more information and guidance on how people could further their skills or better use their knowledge. Then again, the participants completed a couple more WBT lessons and this was followed up with a third and final web conference, where again, the participants provided their feedback on the activities.

The course materials were based upon an existing 3-day (18 hours) Instructor-led session, and this methodology provided the same amount of content but it did require spreading out the sessions to allow the participants to complete the WBT lessons. We found that this methodology did not reduce the amount of time the participants interacted with the content or the instructor (it still took an average of 18 hours) but it was spread out over the course of 5 days instead of crammed into three days. The savings to us was it required less time from the instructor, there was no travel involved (we are spread out all over the US) and it got the participants to interact with the content within their working environment.

It did take time to think through the design for both the web conferences as well as how to design the WBT lessons and the activities. It was not a matter of simply converting the existing ILT materials for web delivery but designing the content and interactivity to achieve the desired goal. The result was worth it from our perspective.

quote:

Posted 21 May 2007 05:51 AM Hide Post
Reasons why employees do not complete an online training program:
- The 'what's in it for me' is not clear
- Course is extremely passive
- No research is done to identify prior knowledge, learning styles, learner motivation, learner background
- No motivation to learn
- Instructional interactivity is extremely low
- Belief that classroom training is more effective
- Content presented does not show direct application
- Does not allow the learner to experience for themselves
- Courses designed for everyone which actually caters to no one

I would agree that these issues do come about but I would not put the blame on e-learning but on poorly designed e-learning. I have seen and personally supervised the development of extremely engaging e-learning interventions. All of the points mentioned above can be overcome with careful design and the thorough due diligence before one contracts for the development of e-learning. Also many of the tools on the market to allow you to develop your own e-learning do nothing more than bring PowerPoint’s to life, which is poor design.

I think e-learning can be effective and the value proposition built for learners if the design and development are thoughtfully done. This does cost a few more bucks and you HAVE to be sooooooooooo selective as to whom you select to be your developers.

I think the human factor is an issue.

Even with the most highly interactive E-Learning courses, organizations still fail to back it up with the ability to "ask a question" after taking the E-Learning modules.

The next biggest issue has to be "uninterrupted" access to E-Learning. Knowledge absorption is better when in uninterrupted surroundings.

How many companies have designated "learning labs" with all audio, soundcards etc... NOT blocked / appropriate flash admin rights...

I have found far too many E-Learners "half absorb" E-Learning content "at workplace" while their attention drifts in and out according to daily office activities around them.

Even in organizations which have such designated rooms, I bet dollar to a dozen the rooms get commandeered when e.g. somebody in sales has a sales meeting, but no other free meeting room available...

I have created and participated in elearning. When I have dropped out of elearning sessions it has been due to:

Too large a chunk size. I cannot sit at the PC for four hours. Sessions need to be limited in length. I have found twenty minutes to be optimal for the work I have done.

"Bogus" interaction: asking me to do mindless activities before I can proceed. Don't make me play a little game to get to the next part. I don't make participants do that in ILT.

Fake simulations. I hate it when someone is trying to teach me to use some sort of software and they have a "simulation" where the only thing I can select is the correct answer. So often there is this path: A. watch flash animation of what do to; B. do it in a "simulated" flash environment.

I much prefer a blended environment where I can interact with an instructor. If that is not realistic, as in the case of some situations, fine: let me do the canned course and email questions, comments, etc., but then assign someone to reply quickly.

I have developed long (5-day) elearing courses. We broke it into 20-minute segments. Participants liked it, but indicated that they would not purchase it -- they wanted "just-in time" learning. That is, they wanted how to do a particular task, not all about a subject.

Just my USD0.02 (which is worth less and less these days :-)