0000015b-d498-de9a-ad5f-ffffe80b0000-authorID

kathy-klock.jpg

Kathy Klock

I still remember the first time I used technology to support classroom training. I was in the process of developing a new one-week course for a team of credit specialists (the people who approve or decline those questionable purchases on your credit card). We had only been allocated 3 test accounts with a little more than 10 participants registered. Fortunately, I had heard that one of our technical writers had a license for some screen recording software. After spending about an hour with her to learn how to use the tool, I was able to create my own demo of a “block and transfer” process. From that point on, I’ve been in love with rapid development tools.Perhaps you would be surprised to know that not everyone shares my feelings…  Many feel that these tools are to blame for all of the awful training that exists in some organizations. While I agree that there is some pretty ridiculous training out there, I argue that this has always been the case – no matter what delivery method.Although rapid development tools such as Adobe Captivate®, Articulate Storyline®, Lectora®, and others get a bad reputation – much like PowerPoint – they really are pretty incredible. Someone with basic technical skills can integrate demos, podcasts, video, and other e-learning formats into training programs. These types of tools give us the ability to create in ways that we may not have otherwise been able.So, why do so many workplace learning professionals develop less-than-great training? Here are 5 reasons why e-learning sometimes misses the mark – and it’s not because of the tool:Lost sight of the goal. What is the specific need? Don’t use e-learning for the sake of having it. Don’t use it because you think it looks pretty. Don’t dump in all of your content. Put your training objective into words. What is the ideal result of your course? Write it down. Then, determine what you will need to help you achieve that goal. Action mapping (Cathy Moore) is a fantastic way to do this!Didn’t keep it simple. Have you ever completed e-learning and thought, “Wow. You could have just sent me an email.” Again, take a look at your goal and design/develop something that is the easiest way to achieve that goal. It may be that a simple job aid will suffice. Most e-learning is trying to be far more than it ever needed to be… and it is frustrating to the learner.Cheesy Templates. Do you really need to force it into a template? Focus more on consistent functionality and relevance. One of the worst e-learning traps is pushing content into an existing mold – especially when you know it is bad for the learner.Unrealistic expectations. Don’t depend on a tool to give you a special super power where you can bypass sound instructional design… and don’t allow your organization to expect that from you either.Neglected to evaluate and update. A project shouldn’t end just because your course is out on the LMS. Take the time to periodically evaluate what you’ve done and make adjustments as needed. If you are getting feedback that a course is useless, listen! Odds are that if you don’t evaluate your e-learning, you will be at risk for creating bad courses time and again.If I had only one wish for instructional designers, developers, trainers, or any combination thereof, it would be that we don’t lose sight of what we really need to accomplish – we are there to help people learn. We have a fantastic opportunity to leverage technology to help us “show our work.” Why not get back to the basics? Take advantage of rapid development tools to support knowledge-sharing in your organization!

Don't Blame the Tools

Last week at TechKnowledge 2013, I moderated a TK Chat on authoring tools and HTML5 with panelists Philip Neal, Thomas Toth, and Joe Ganci -- all individuals who are navigating the transition to HTML5 in the context of a reduced tool set, a still-changing specification, and ongoing browser fragmentation. The audience had some excellent questions about how our designers can build interactive, engaging experiences when our coding skill sets and our authoring tools are still, in large part, only getting off the ground.I know that there are many in our field who would respond that designers should not be also playing the part of developers; this would decrease our reliance on rapid authoring tools and make all of these waters easier to navigate. That is completely fair, though some would counter that it's not realistic for everyone.I've also made the point in the past that we need to focus on true interactivity instead of flashy video and animation -- in the form of branching, for example. Take A. Pintura, Art Detective, listed on Cathy Moore's excellent Elearning samples page. As Moore notes, it's not the strongest example of graphic design, but it's an excellent example of branching based on the learner's decision-making. This is true interactivity; it's not the learners' fingers or eyes that need the interaction, but their minds. And the good news is that branching can be created using the merely links. Links are the most basic building blocks of the web; they’re valid in every browser, on every device, and in every version of HTML, and they are the means by which learners make their own branching scenarios every day.Even still, Philip Neal took this idea a step further, and it's that message that I wanted to share. For designers who are confident in their design skills but perhaps not their technical skills, this getting-back-to-the-basics mentality is a good thing. That’s right. Your company is still using Internet Explorer 7 and you need to deliver learning experiences to both laptops and iPads? Then take this opportunity to shine with true interactivity and lowest-common-denominator tech. Let your interaction design skills come out, and your writing, and your ability to create a right-sized, easily accessed solution.On the flip side, for designers who are more accustomed to creating CCBB than true interactivity, take this opportunity to get your feet wet. Try out a simple tool like Twine (thanks again to Cathy Moore and Steve Flowers for sharing) to help with organization and even to produce simple HTML; you can then open it up and start getting familiar with basic web code. You win.Thanks to the panelists of this TK Chat and thanks to everyone who attended. Your participation made it a great session, and if you’d like to continue the conversation, please do so in the comments.

Kathy Klock

About