Don Farrell

Determining what the best training vehicle is for the right audience for the right desired skill set

Distance learning is getting the vast majority of the press these days because of its supposed simplicity in getting it to market and the ease in which the audience can access the information. My concern for those that have totally bought into distance learning as the cure all (especially when training younger generations) is that people confuse training with communicating. One is certainly not the other and i dont think enough people know this. My questions are:

1. where is the quantifiable ROI data that supports distance learning
2. where is the research that says distance learning is better for hard skills training vs say soft skills training and vice-versa
3. where is the research that shows face to face training is better for implementation of X intiative but can be supported/reinforced by distance learning, phone coaching or other means...or some other combination
4. we know that some individuals learn better one way than another....where is this learning preference data broken down by a persons personality style

I am talking to several universities about conducting this research with me, but I was really hoping some of this stuff has already been done. Can anyone lead me in the direction of conclusive research in this area?

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Paul Foreman Permalink Reply by Paul Foreman on February 24, 2009 at 7:04am
I would be very interested in your research and the response you receive on anything done prior to now or currently being done. I've looked over the years for supporting data to these same questions and have not found much of anything that was creditable. There are several “white papers” from the learning industry and groups like the Bob Pike company but I’ve never seen any in-depth valid unbiased source for the answers to your questions. I’ve even had some information from universities but they were from the “executive development” sections of the school and were marketing tools for the programs they were selling so could hardly be considered unbiased or truly based on research.

It may be that the military will have some work on this topic and could be considered to be unbiased as they are looking at it purely from a “what works” position and are not trying to sell or promote anything from the results. I found the included PDF of a PowerPoint delivered by the British a couple of years ago on eLearning that has some interesting clues to your questions. I’ve been looking a lot at these sources for information and data. The caution to this source is that it’s a “specific market” in the general type of “employee” that is being provided training. With that said, military organizations run very much like a business and there are valid comparisons.

Paul Foreman
Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Dan O'Connell Permalink Reply by Dan O'Connell on February 24, 2009 at 9:21am
From my studies in the field of Educational Technology, one of the primary nuggets I realized was that there are no absolutes regarding how people learn, what works best, or how learning can be measured, let alone what learning really is. This is an incredibly complex field of study with subjects themselves that are shaped and influenced by incredibly diverse and complex sets of variables. Yes there are very good theories which account for small bits of the whole but none encompass all the ways that even one individual learns. There is also a lot of diversity in the fields of study and yes lots of controversy as well. Some aspects lend themselves reasonably well to quantifiable results, such as physical tasks, learned motor skills or simple(read uncomplicated, basic) mental tasks and much of this is addressed in the literature of human performance studies. This branch of learning theory and study tends to get the most attention from the corporate world (read manufacturing, sales, business skills, etc.) because of the relative ease of application to training. This is primarily because of its greater facility for measurement and the greater ease of training development (much of what is considered corporate online training is developed using principles of HP theory), yet it represents but one aspect of a very diverse field of study.
Part of the reason for more limited acceptance of other learning approaches in the corporate world is the greater difficulty in assessment, much of which is more qualitative than quantitative, and the greater associated costs (financially and time invested). Human performance theories have greater difficulty accounting for most higher order thinking, which also tends to be much more difficult to translate into online learning. Some examples of more complex online or computer based training might be simulations such as flight simulators, or medical diagnostic training. These are highly complex systems involving considerable development and expense. Regarding your questions, it is generally undisputed in most, more generalized circumstances that instructor led training provides better learning results greatly because of the ability for feedback and individualization of training. This tends, however, to be a less cost effective approach, hence distance learning, or online learning is often chosen as a cost effective alternative for delivery.
I don't believe there are any hard and fast rules that dictate universally when one approach is better than another. It depends on the prioritization of all of the variables. Likewise, while personality types may be factors in influencing effective learning styles or approaches, there is nothing conclusive to dictate one approach over another for a given personality type.
While this may not answer any of your questions directly, nor solve any learning problems, it should at least serve to remind us how incredibly diverse and complex we are as human beings. This is also what makes this field of education so challenging and interesting. And quite frankly, I wouldn't prefer it any other way. ;-)

▶ Reply to This

Don Farrell Permalink Reply by Don Farrell on February 24, 2009 at 9:42am
Paul Foreman said:
I would be very interested in your research and the response you receive on anything done prior to now or currently being done. I've looked over the years for supporting data to these same questions and have not found much of anything that was creditable. There are several “white papers” from the learning industry and groups like the Bob Pike company but I’ve never seen any in-depth valid unbiased source for the answers to your questions. I’ve even had some information from universities but they were from the “executive development” sections of the school and were marketing tools for the programs they were selling so could hardly be considered unbiased or truly based on research.

It may be that the military will have some work on this topic and could be considered to be unbiased as they are looking at it purely from a “what works” position and are not trying to sell or promote anything from the results. I found the included PDF of a PowerPoint delivered by the British a couple of years ago on eLearning that has some interesting clues to your questions. I’ve been looking a lot at these sources for information and data. The caution to this source is that it’s a “specific market” in the general type of “employee” that is being provided training. With that said, military organizations run very much like a business and there are valid comparisons.

Paul Foreman

▶ Reply to This

Don Farrell Permalink Reply by Don Farrell on February 24, 2009 at 10:04am
Thank you for your response. I plan to move forward with this research and will keep you in the loop as to how things progress.

Paul Foreman said:
I would be very interested in your research and the response you receive on anything done prior to now or currently being done. I've looked over the years for supporting data to these same questions and have not found much of anything that was creditable. There are several “white papers” from the learning industry and groups like the Bob Pike company but I’ve never seen any in-depth valid unbiased source for the answers to your questions. I’ve even had some information from universities but they were from the “executive development” sections of the school and were marketing tools for the programs they were selling so could hardly be considered unbiased or truly based on research.

It may be that the military will have some work on this topic and could be considered to be unbiased as they are looking at it purely from a “what works” position and are not trying to sell or promote anything from the results. I found the included PDF of a PowerPoint delivered by the British a couple of years ago on eLearning that has some interesting clues to your questions. I’ve been looking a lot at these sources for information and data. The caution to this source is that it’s a “specific market” in the general type of “employee” that is being provided training. With that said, military organizations run very much like a business and there are valid comparisons.

Paul Foreman

▶ Reply to This

Don Farrell Permalink Reply by Don Farrell on February 24, 2009 at 10:10am
Totally agree that it is a challenge, and we may not find absolutes....but we sure as heck need to find the right solutions, for the right reasons for the right initiatives for the right people. Too many people are assuming distance learning is the best alternative to all kinds of training needs because they are not thinking of what is most effective for the end user. Instead they are thinking about ease of delivery, cost etc vs ROI. We need to be student/customer centric in our research approach and this research will do just that.

Dan O'Connell said:
From my studies in the field of Educational Technology, one of the primary nuggets I realized was that there are no absolutes regarding how people learn, what works best, or how learning can be measured, let alone what learning really is. This is an incredibly complex field of study with subjects themselves that are shaped and influenced by incredibly diverse and complex sets of variables. Yes there are very good theories which account for small bits of the whole but none encompass all the ways that even one individual learns. There is also a lot of diversity in the fields of study and yes lots of controversy as well. Some aspects lend themselves reasonably well to quantifiable results, such as physical tasks, learned motor skills or simple(read uncomplicated, basic) mental tasks and much of this is addressed in the literature of human performance studies. This branch of learning theory and study tends to get the most attention from the corporate world (read manufacturing, sales, business skills, etc.) because of the relative ease of application to training. This is primarily because of its greater facility for measurement and the greater ease of training development (much of what is considered corporate online training is developed using principles of HP theory), yet it represents but one aspect of a very diverse field of study.
Part of the reason for more limited acceptance of other learning approaches in the corporate world is the greater difficulty in assessment, much of which is more qualitative than quantitative, and the greater associated costs (financially and time invested). Human performance theories have greater difficulty accounting for most higher order thinking, which also tends to be much more difficult to translate into online learning. Some examples of more complex online or computer based training might be simulations such as flight simulators, or medical diagnostic training. These are highly complex systems involving considerable development and expense. Regarding your questions, it is generally undisputed in most, more generalized circumstances that instructor led training provides better learning results greatly because of the ability for feedback and individualization of training. This tends, however, to be a less cost effective approach, hence distance learning, or online learning is often chosen as a cost effective alternative for delivery.
I don't believe there are any hard and fast rules that dictate universally when one approach is better than another. It depends on the prioritization of all of the variables. Likewise, while personality types may be factors in influencing effective learning styles or approaches, there is nothing conclusive to dictate one approach over another for a given personality type.
While this may not answer any of your questions directly, nor solve any learning problems, it should at least serve to remind us how incredibly diverse and complex we are as human beings. This is also what makes this field of education so challenging and interesting. And quite frankly, I wouldn't prefer it any other way. ;-)

▶ Reply to This

Laurie Donnelly Levine Permalink Reply by Laurie Donnelly Levine on February 24, 2009 at 10:25am
In my opinion and based on my experience and studies, distance learning is most effective as part of a blended learning model. I believe your research will find that to be true because a basic tenant of learning is the ability to have a social connection to others.

Would it be a good idea to consider the biological factors of learning in a computerized environment? If so, the following research may be of interest: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7898510.stm

All the best,
Laurie Donnelly Levine

▶ Reply to This

Don Farrell Permalink Reply by Don Farrell on February 24, 2009 at 10:54am
Laurie, in my experience you are exactly right. A blended approach using distance learning as part of the solution....distance is not the entire solution. The problem I see today is that too many people are not using a blended approach and think they are succeeding with their one dimension.

Laurie Donnelly Levine said:
In my opinion and based on my experience and studies, distance learning is most effective as part of a blended learning model. I believe your research will find that to be true because a basic tenant of learning is the ability to have a social connection to others.

Would it be a good idea to consider the biological factors of learning in a computerized environment? If so, the following research may be of interest: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7898510.stm

All the best,
Laurie Donnelly Levine

▶ Reply to This

Don Patrick Permalink Reply by Don Patrick on March 4, 2009 at 2:44pm
This is a great topic and I've done research concerning the exact questions. During my time as the Senior Instructional Designer, I interviewed about a dozen government vendors for training development and every one of them said the customer (person paying the bill, not the student) lets you know what delivery medium is appropriate for the curriculum they want, without any performance analysis, front-end work being done. I found that unacceptable. After about a year of trying to establish some sort of solid media analysis process I caved and went with a fairly generic process. It helped at the time I was going to Utah State University for ISD and had access to great professors. The process we set up is based on the students needs and the level of interactivity needed for the successful accomplishment of the objective. My organization focuses on task oriented training and not soft skills. It makes it fairly easy to match up the media with the needed knowledge and skills. We also do a lot of "blended learning" or what we call technology inserts. I'm now a project manager and we have put in to have someone from Utah State Univ come out and train our designers on how to find the correct medium for delivery. I'll post more when I find out how it goes. I'm interested to see what you find in your research. Don
Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Don Patrick Permalink Reply by Don Patrick on March 4, 2009 at 2:58pm
I agree with the article, however, was the same research done when the television or video games were in the infant stages of technology?

Don Farrell said:
Laurie, in my experience you are exactly right. A blended approach using distance learning as part of the solution....distance is not the entire solution. The problem I see today is that too many people are not using a blended approach and think they are succeeding with their one dimension.

Laurie Donnelly Levine said:
In my opinion and based on my experience and studies, distance learning is most effective as part of a blended learning model. I believe your research will find that to be true because a basic tenant of learning is the ability to have a social connection to others.

Would it be a good idea to consider the biological factors of learning in a computerized environment? If so, the following research may be of interest: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7898510.stm

All the best,
Laurie Donnelly Levine

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This

RSS

About Chief Learning Officer Network

Administrator Administrator created this social network on Ning.

© 2010   Created by Administrator

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy  |  Terms of Service