2 Things to Consider When Defining Business Goals for a Course

learnnovators-business_goals

Just like good learning outcomes answer the ‘What’s In It For Me’ (WIIFM) for the learner, a sound goal answers the WIIFM for business. It helps explain the need for a training intervention, and sets the direction for the project once it kicks off, course correcting and providing guidance as required.

Having established that (it’s important to have a clear business goal at the start of a project), we advocate for learning outcomes which read as follows:

  • Ask questions to probe the customer
  • Uncover the customer’s ‘real’ need
  • Explain the benefits (not features) to the customer
  • Lead the customer towards the sale

And, these learning outcomes contribute towards a larger business goal, which should read like this: “Sales will improve 5% by Q3”.

The understanding is that if learners are able to successfully demonstrate the desired behaviors on the job, then the business goal will take care of itself (considering other environmental factors, of course).

It should, but I have a couple of issues around this:

1. The above approach works well for outcomes that directly contribute to a business goal. It is not difficult to imagine similar learning-outcomes-leading-to-business-goal situations in other contexts, such as:

  • Better hand hygiene (learning outcome) results in fewer infections (business goal)
  • Tighter password security (learning outcome) results in lessened security threats (business goal)
  • Better call handling and resolution (learning outcomes) result in improved customer satisfaction ratings (business goal)
  • Greater use of personal protective equipment (learning outcome) results in fewer safety incidents (business goal)
  • However, let’s say we need to create a course on ‘E-mail Etiquette’.

The learning outcome would be to write effective e-mails (e-mails that are addressed and copied to the right people, and are clearly worded and structured).

(Aside: There was a real need for a course. E-mails that were poorly worded, as well as those without proper structure or call-to-action were part of the folklore at this organization.)

How do we equate this with a meaningful business goal, a metric that is important to business? We could say that effective e-mails lead to better clarity and lesser confusion within a team, and therefore this might enhance the overall effectiveness of the team.

So, the business goal would be to improve team effectiveness? The goal seems contrived at best to me, and I’m not convinced that effective e-mail alone will contribute significantly to the effectiveness of the team. There are so many factors at play – the culture of the organization, team size and dynamics, the goals and challenges faced by the team, not to mention other forms of communication.

I don’t think we need to force ourselves into that circle. While there is no excuse for poorly formed learning outcomes (actually, they should be performance outcomes; i.e., outcomes that lead to a change in behavior), a business goal is something that can be bypassed, if the outcome doesn’t directly impact a meaningful metric.

2. The second issue that I have relates to the measurability of the business goal. “Sales will improve 5% by Q3”.

Sales will absolutely improve if learners are able to implement the actions they learned in the course. But what about “5%” and “Q3”? Let’s look at a scenario and see where this goes.

Say the sales division has a team of 100. The course is rolled out in January, and all 100 go through the course within a month’s time. If the course is designed well, with plenty of practice, spaced repetition, and post-training performance support, we can reasonably expect that at least 60 will be able to demonstrate the stated behaviors. And given a time gap of four months (March – June) in which to practice and hone their newly learnt skills, they will be more effective, and successful, salespeople than they were before the training.

So, if the team was selling 500 units a month in January, they should ideally be selling at least 560 (60 salespeople selling one unit more each) in July (Q3) – an increase of 12%. Now, we know there are other factors to consider – product pricing, market conditions, competition, etc. – which probably haven’t changed much in the last two quarters.

Looking at the above, a conservative estimate of “5% by Q3” does seem achievable.

However, my discomfort with assigning such numbers to our lofty business goal stems from the fact that there are too many variables unrelated to the design of the course. The course must be rolled out in January, people should finish taking the course in February, and market conditions, competition, etc. should not have changed. All of which are well beyond the control and influence of instructional designers. Considering these factors, I believe that assigning such targets seems arbitrary, and a bit frivolous, to me.

Cathy Moore has some good advice for us here. She says “Consider this only a goal, not a guarantee.”

However, I still feel that we would do well to focus on what we can influence (change in behavior), rather than chasing a target which we have no control over. Of course, we want to prove that we are valuable to business. So, the goal can read “Sales will improve as learners are able to…”. If it leads to a 5% improvement, great. If the improvement is 10%, why not?

What am I missing here? How can we improve our business goals in a way that they are meaningful, realistic and achievable?

Duolingo Gets Both Gamification and Learning Design Right

duolingo_gamification_learning-design

We were collecting examples for a gamification webinar we conducted last September, and I was intrigued to know about Duolingo, the gamified language learning app. I downloaded the app immediately, but though it listed over 20 languages, there was none that I specifically wanted to learn. The intrigue intensified as I read about its features and rave reviews, but at that point, I had no time to experience the app by learning a new language, so I went ahead and delivered the webinar, citing Duolingo as an example of gamification done right. I gathered this much from users and gamification experts alike.

But Duolingo remained at the back of my mind. Recently I came across an article which cited a research finding that the “brain networks [of those who learned a new language] had become better integrated, which means they’re more flexible and allows for faster and more efficient learning”. This caught my attention. Who doesn’t like to become smarter, better integrated etc. ;-)? So I decided to check it out.

I wasn’t particularly interested in any of the languages on offer (by the way, did I mention that Duolingo is entirely free?), so I randomly chose Spanish. English, of course, remained my source language, the language through which I would be learning Spanish.

And here’s what I experienced:

When you start, you get to decide on your goals – the amount of work you want to put in everyday; choosing from:
– Casual (10 XP per day)
– Regular (20 XP per day)
– Serious (30 XP per day)
– Insane (50 XP per day)

(XP, or experience points, are awarded to you for completing lessons.) I chose casual, which meant I would have to spend 5-10 minutes a day, completing a single lesson each day.

When you reach your goal a few days in a row, you get a streak, which you have to work to maintain. For example, if you miss a couple of days’ lessons, your streak goes down. Streak basically refers to your knowledge of words in that lesson, and if you don’t keep up, it means you are forgetting those words, therefore your streak weakens to indicate that. Makes perfect sense. Did I hear someone say forgetting curve :-)?

Duolingo sends regular reminders to meet your daily goal, encouraging you to reach longer learning streaks. These reminders are fun and personalized, suggesting what you will be learning next, and motivating you to keep practicing.

duolingo_1

As you complete lessons and gain XP, you level up, earning lingots. Lingot is a virtual currency that allows you to buy various things from a store, right from dressing up your owl (the Duolingo mascot), to power ups and extra lessons. Currently none of these ‘items on display’ sound interesting to me, so I haven’t ventured into any shopping as yet.

duolingo_2

Progress indicators are all over the place in Duolingo. The lessons are arranged based on a virtual skill tree, and keep coloring as you advance. Within each lesson, you get to see how many more questions you have to answer, as well as how many you got right in a row.

duolingo_3

I haven’t practiced for more than a week now, and here’s what my progress looks like.

duolingo_4

Duolingo is highly social. You can comment on and discuss specific questions from lessons, and get answers from others in the community. I’ve found this feature to be especially useful, in the absence of ‘why this works the way it works’ explanations from Duolingo.

duolingo_5

You can add friends from your networks, and have a leaderboard comparing your score (XP) with theirs. You can also see what they’ve been up to, including their latest comments, who they are following and who is following them, as well as levels gained.

Cross a certain level, and you get a badge, which you can share on your social network. For the record, I’m 7% fluent in Spanish as I’m writing this post.

A much-touted feature is the Immersion area, which asks you to translate some text in a collaborative space, thereby helping you practice your language skills even more, and awarding you XP incentives for participation and contribution.

The lessons themselves are designed really well. No theory, no grammar rules, just a multi-modal learning system which uses visual and auditory cues to help you learn new words.

You start on the lower end of a skill tree, learning really simple words first, and then naturally and effortlessly progress towards more complex terms and constructs.

Repetition, a huge factor for success of any learning, language learning especially, has been used very effectively in Duolingo. Words and phrases you learned in Lesson 1 reappear in Lesson 3, in newer avatars, and in new constructs. Unconsciously you begin internalizing them.

Having said all that, the app is not without its flaws. My biggest gripe, from a learning design perspective, is the blatant implausibility of distractors. Many a time, the correct answer is a dead giveaway, either due to the construct, or some silly reason like punctuation. Check out the screenshot below.

  1. Looking at the choices, I’m pretty sure the sentence has to start with ‘No’ because that is the only word which is in title case. (In this case, the word is obvious, in others, it’s not.)
  2. When I’ve dragged four words to form a sentence, it’s way too obvious that the fifth word is ‘cook’, since that is the only verb, amongst the remaining options.

duolingo_6

But despite such shortcomings, Duolingo is one fantastic language learning experience, neatly wrapped in a ‘gamified’ package. I hope and crave for more learning experiences to be designed so well.

¡Buen trabajo Duolingo! ¡Seguid así!

5 Ways To Avoid Overwhelming Learners

overwhelmed_learnerThe deluge is upon us! Run for cover!

Well, I’m not talking about an invasion or a natural calamity. I’m talking about the stuff that we are faced with every minute of every day – the torrent of information that keeps hitting us, threatening to sweep us off our feet and drown us, if we’re not careful.

Ah, the curse of social media, which constantly bombards us with information from all directions. Combine this with a heady dose of FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out), and we can be sure to get inundated in the oncoming flood, without retaining much that is useful.

I have a fairly simple practice for handling social media. There are a select few in the industry who I really respect and admire, and I therefore want to listen to their opinions. Over the years, I’ve ruthlessly eliminated any kind of distraction, which basically is any information that is not from this select few. Of course, I keep editing and pruning this list.

My challenge is, this ‘select few’ runs into a few dozens, if not more. So, what for many is typically a barrage of irrelevant information concealing a few precious gems, I have a steady stream of high quality, valuable content, which of course I don’t want to miss out on (this is real FOMO in action, you see).

Okay, having said that, this post is not about how I handle social media. It’s about we can ensure that learners don’t get washed away in a similar onslaught of information in the courses we design.

How many times do we end up having to include way more than the average individual can digest in a one hour course, or in a day’s workshop? Because the SME insisted “they have to know this”. Or the unit manager said “this part is mandatory”. We see their point, so we end up adding that piece of content.

A drop here, and a drop there. And slowly but surely, the drops add up to form the deluge.

We don’t of course want to overwhelm learners with too much information. Because we know that an overwhelmed mind is ill-equipped for learning. Scientists and researchers have time and again proved that cognitive overload (the situation when we’re faced with more info than we can handle) is actually detrimental to the learning process.

So what can we do to avoid putting learners in such a situation? Here are a few approaches I can think of:

1. Break up the information into smaller, byte-sized pieces

Content chunked into digestible units can go a long way in helping learners absorb the information easily, without feeling overwhelmed. We should, of course, take care to ensure that this is done well, and that the chunks are not too interdependent.

2. Distribute the information over a period of time

If it is not critical that the audience should consume the entire content in a short time (applicable for instructor-led courses where traveling is involved), it would help to deliver the content piecemeal over a stretched duration. Referred to as spaced practice, this approach has been seen to have tremendous benefits for learning and retention.

3. Create information loops

Chunking and spaced practice can only work well if sufficient repetition is built in to allow for absorption into long term memory. Therefore, whatever strategies are adopted, make sure to create these information loops, which are basically about summarizing and repeating content at varied intervals.

4. Cover each point in greater depth, or provide context

In a recent project, we were required to help learners recall safety precautions they had to take before undertaking any maintenance work. Learners had gone through in-depth training on these safety precautions, and the client insisted that it would be sufficient if we added a line mentioning this, along with a generic image indicating safety. We did, but in addition, we added a couple of lines containing a super quick overview of the safety precautions, and provided a link to the original course if they wished to review it. Result: the overview and the link helped learners better recall what they had learned in the original training.

5. Increase the duration of the course, if required

Implementing any or all of the above approaches might mean an increase in the duration of the course… which is okay, in my opinion. Ultimately, what counts is that learners have understood the content well enough that they are able to translate it back in their workplace.

What do you think? What other approaches can we use to make sure that we don’t end up overwhelming learners? I look forward to your comments.

Why I Still Love Bloom But Not His Verbs

I have a confession to make.

I’ve sat in scores of meetings with project stakeholders, painfully agonizing over the verbs to use for defining the objectives of a course. Should we use ‘Develop’ or ‘Construct’? Which one is better – ‘Describe’ or ‘Explain’? Would it be more appropriate to say ‘Classify’ or ‘Categorize’?

You get the idea. After all, objectives define the boundaries of a course, and we don’t want to get them wrong, right?

Yes, but…

It is absolutely important to define clear objectives. For designers, they set the boundaries of a learning intervention and decide on its level of sophistication. While for learners, they help (when presented well) set expectations at the beginning of a course. The catch lies in the phrase “when presented well”.

Benjamin Bloom and his colleagues provided the verbs as a helpful means to decide on the action to describe while defining objectives. However, we sometimes often fall prey to the notion that a verb has to absolutely be defined within the confines of the taxonomy level the course represents, failing which it can mislead learners.

For example, take the verb ‘Describe’. It appears on many levels of the taxonomy – Knowledge, Comprehension, and Evaluation. So, by just looking at the verb, you cannot understand at which level of the taxonomy the course belongs.

I agree that the taxonomy is complex. So while on one hand, there is a group of learning designers who insist on following the listed verbs to the T, there is another group who shuns the taxonomy altogether. This second group prefers to follow two things, not necessarily connected with each other:

1. That the taxonomy can, and should, be broadly classified into two levels – knowledge and performance
2. That all learning interventions, irrespective of type and level, should address performance, and not just knowledge

I agree with both the points above. No arguments there.

However. There is a middle path, which when tread well, can help us deliver courses at the right level and make it challenging and engaging for learners, without getting bogged down by the defined verbs.

The six levels of taxonomy in the cognitive domain are useful for deciding the level at which a course needs to be designed.

learnnovators_blooms_taxonomy

There are times when the fine distinctions between the levels are a useful measure on which to base a learning intervention. Let’s look at these (please note that I’m using the revised taxonomy here, while also providing a reference to the original one):

1. Remembering (Original Taxonomy Level – Knowledge):

Typically, no information should be presented at this level alone. It simply signifies rote learning with no understanding of the information being ingested.

An example of this would be when a person is getting started on the path to becoming a leader, they read quotes on leadership, and are able to repeat them.

2. Understanding (Original Taxonomy Level – Comprehension):

A few things can be taught at this level. Examples include:

a. Procedural information, such as the steps of a process which takes place in another department. The learner is not directly connected with the process, but it is something very useful for the learner to understand.

b. Conceptual information, such as how solar technology works. Again, the learner is not directly connected with applying the information in their day-to-day work, for example, someone in the marketing department of a company that produces solar energy, who is not directly involved with the production, but should be better informed about the company’s business.

The leader-in-the-making has moved one step higher, and she is now able to explain the meaning of the quotes in her own words. Most e-learning falls in this category; we are all too familiar with “By the end of this course, you would have understood…”.

3. Applying (Original Taxonomy Level – Application):

This level is typically at the center of most e-learning design, and for good reason. We want people to be apply their knowledge and skills to their jobs, and thereby showing measurable improvements in performance. This level, in a way, can also be considered to be the holy grail of e-learning, because if a person is able to do their job better as a result of what they learned in the course, then the course can be said to have achieved its goal. But the verbs to be used, that would depend less on the taxonomy and more on the job skills we are trying to impart.

An example of this would be a course that teaches solar technology to engineering students. Here, learners get to apply their understanding of the concepts to build a solar panel or some other equipment.

Back to the leader-in-the-making. She has taken a course on leadership, and she practices by applying the models she learnt in the course in her day-to-day work.

4. Analyzing (Original Taxonomy Level – Analysis):

This goes beyond the application of knowledge in a specific albeit wide set of contexts, and involves breaking down information into parts, or examining it and trying to understand its structure.

Here, the engineering students deconstruct the solar technology that they have learned, and examine its possibilities, applications and limitations.

The new leader is now able to analyze the models she has learnt, deconstruct them, and see the component parts of the whole.

At this point, we get into the realm of Higher Order Thinking, and it is difficult for a standalone e-learning course to transfer skills at this level and above, with the learner bearing more and more responsibility for their own development.

5. Evaluating (Original Taxonomy Level – Evaluation):

At this stage, people are able to validate information or ideas based on a set of criteria. They can present and defend opinions, using evidence as a solid basis for the same.

The leader is in a position to compare and contrast different models, evaluate and make a sound judgement on which ones are better, and for what reasons.

6. Creating (Original Taxonomy Level – Synthesis):

This is the ultimate level of cognition, where people are able to build new structures or patterns on their own based on existing information.

The leader is now an expert in her field, and she can create new models based on her experience and expertise.

While the levels build upon one another, they are not necessarily linear. In fact, many theorists believe that while the first three levels are in sequence, the last three levels exist parallel to one another, like this:

learnnovators_blooms_taxonomy_2

And, a course can be taught at several levels at the same time.

So, while designing courses, make sure to aim for the highest level on the taxonomy ladder that you can possibly go, without getting mired in the actual verbs to use, and you will have a learning experience that is engaging and interesting.

Forward Design

Forward Design

We design more information-based courses today than we would care to admit. Agreed, these courses can instead be called web pages, cheat sheets, information dumps, knowledge stores, etc. They don’t necessarily have to fall under the ambit of ‘courses’. But whatever we call them, the fact remains that these are designed by learning designers, and we would do well to keep a few good practices in mind before we set upon designing them.

Forward Design: E-learning’s Dirty Little Secret
The best learning programs are designed backwards. This means that you start by ascertaining the goals of a program, and then work backwards to meet those goals. (In case you haven’t heard this term before, here’s the definition of backward design by Wikipedia.) So, if a client comes to you stating the need to design a course for so-and-so topic, you push back a bit and ask them questions, as to what the actual goals are, what learners need to do, and so on. And then for those goals, design learning courses comprising activities and a series of support materials to help learners through the activities.

But many a time, what happens in reality is quite different. I hate to admit it, but we design ‘forward’ (there’s no such term, but I’m using it because what I am talking about is the exact opposite of ‘backward’ design) as much as we do backward, if not more. Consider these situations:

  • Learners are starting out on a new job, and there are loads of information to be covered
  • The subject is voluminous and complex, and learners will benefit from a sense of direction rather than being directly put into the proverbial soup
  • Learning is not directly tied to performance related goals (such as in higher education scenarios)
  • The client doesn’t have the time, or budget, or the inclination to get internal buy-in for a different approach (most likely it is all three!)

In such cases, where the purpose is to disseminate information, and not to change behavior (at least not directly), it is better to start out with what needs to be covered, rather than with the end goal in mind. Now the question is, how do you make the most of this approach? Here are some tips and guidelines:

1. Design your learning into the smallest units possible:

If the idea is for learners to obtain information from this course, make it as easy as possible for them. No one wants to go through a lengthy course that drones on endlessly. There is a lot of research pointing to the fact that learners have a short attention span (well, who doesn’t?), so you might as well keep it short and simple. Moreover, a short topic that addresses one or two learning goals is easier to digest and come back to than a long topic that covers dozens of goals. Which brings me to the next point…

2. Make it easy to search for content

If what you are designing is an information-based course, then is it not appropriate for learners to be able to come back to the course again and again? Let’s say you are trying to cover insurance related concepts for the employees of an organization. In that case, it would be safe to assume that learners will not just take the course once, but would come back whenever they have to refer to the concepts therein. In which case, there are two things you can do to make the course contents searchable:

  • Make your topic and screen titles simple and straight forward (remember, your learners should be able to look at the title and understand what is covered inside)
  • Enable the search feature inside the course (many authoring tools today allow you to do this; if not, you might have to take the help of course programmers to embed this functionality inside the course)

3. Do not narrate every screen

It can sometimes be tempting to do this, and many clients might even insist on this. But there are numerous research reports that point to the pitfalls of this approach. Narration without purpose tends to take control away from learners and reduce motivation. I’m not arguing against the use of audio narration. If used well, narration can really have a positive impact on the learning outcomes, but the key here is knowing when to use narration. Use only if one or more of the following conditions are satisfied:

  • You are describing a procedure or a complex concept, and you want learners to be able to follow it without having to read text on screen
  • You want to add a bit of emotion to what you are describing (for example, to provide feedback to a learner input)
  • You have one or more characters speaking as part of a scenario

There are could be other situations where audio narration lifts up the learnability of a course, but the key is to consider those situations carefully and then take a decision.

4. Do not lock navigation

This is one of the big afflictions of modern-day e-learning. In a well-meaning but futile attempt at ‘helping’ learners get the most out of a course, the ubiquitous Next button is locked down completely, and opens up ONLY when the learner has ‘completed’ the content of each screen. Result: Screen after screen, learners have to suffer through the agony of having to go through content that they cannot identify with, that they already know, or plainly are not interested in at that point of time. And if the entire content happens to be narrated, it is agony doubled for learners, since they need to wait for the entire narration to be complete before they can click the Next button. The answer: Do not lock the Next button, or any other button in the course.

To sum it up, my advice for those who want to design an information-based course: keep in mind that your learners are adults, and that they would want to take control of the pace at which they learn. In any case, isn’t that what you are designing for – so that learners can pull your content when they need it, instead of having it pushed to them?

What other tips/techniques/guidelines do you recommend for designing information-based courses? Thoughts?