There was some consternation on Twitter about the results of the survey that Alison Rossett and James Marshall conducted with 968 ASTD and eLearning Guild members in mid 2009. As the authors point out, if you went by the themes of most l&d conferences, blogs and magazines, then you’d believe the classroom was in terminal decline and that self-paced e-learning tutorials were being fast replaced by games, sims, 3D worlds, and all forms of social and collaborative learning, much of it mobile.
Well, surprise, surprise, that seems like wishful thinking. In reality it’s very much same old, same old. According to the survey, these are the forms of e-learning that are most commonly used in practice:
- e-assessment
- using computers in the classroom
- e-tutorials
- narrated slide shows
And these are the least common:
- using forums to follow-up on classroom events
- e-coaching
- immersive 3D experiences
- use of virtual classrooms
- mobile learning
Actually, it wasn’t a surprise to me. In the various workshops I run, I meet l&d practitioners every week; I know what they do, what they think and what pressures they are under. What is for certain is that the climate has changed; there is much more pressure on time, on cost and, to a lesser extent, on being as green as possible. What there isn’t, is a large groundswell of pressure to change methods or media. That’s shouldn’t be a shock, because customers are not meant to determine the solutions; their job is to specify their needs and then rely on the experts to come up with appropriate solutions. The trouble is that, in many cases, the experts, i.e. l&d professionals, are either ignorant of the opportunities now available for relieving the pressures, unsure of what to do or just plain resistant.
We have to come to terms with the fact that we work in a conservative profession. New media have exploded on to the scene so quickly that a gaping skills gap has emerged; and until that gap is bridged, it is unlikely that we will see real innovations in methods and media. The reality is that l&d has come a long way already to be using computers for assessment, to support the classroom and to deliver self-paced content – and most organisations have not come this far. There is still a long way to go and, despite the unbelievable optimism expressed in most expert predictions, we’ll see very modest progress in the short term, perhaps even the medium term.
When faced with pressures on time and cost, the l&d professional has three choices: do less of the same, do the same less well, or do the same but in smarter ways. This new ASTD survey seems to indicate that not enough are choosing the latter.
? Students want to be in a classroom with others. Learning is inherently sociable. They are learning roles, values and relevance as much as content and if no one else is there, how will they learn?
ReplyDeleteOh they will learn something but will pertain to the world they know not to the world they don't know.
For example, if we ran an experiment where one set of students "making up classes" see a video of the lecturer & slides with no info about class reactions and another where they also see how the class reacted - where class noises can be head on the audio - which set will be the more confident? Of course we can vary the noise too to be disruptive or engaged.
First, great post. I think it is a good snapshot of the current state of the industry. Slow to change, significant skills gaps.
ReplyDeleteSecond, (and I'm going to veer off track here) I'm one of the people who writes a lot about new media and workplace learning. That's because (1) I'm trying to understand how it can help people do their jobs (if at all)and (2) report what I find. I think there are many, many other people doing the same and, by the very nature of the web, it gives the impression that everything is about social media.
Not a lot of people are writing about the same old, same old. But many people *like* the same old, same old. It's part of the reason why the Articulate Rapid E-Learning blog at over 50,000 readers (the other being good content). There's a place for e-training. There's a place for classroom training. And, I think, there's a place for new media especially when it involves complex communities of practice and niche networks.
I imagine it's pretty easy to be curmudgeonly toward new media, mobile learning, etc. I think a lot people waiting to say (about new media) "I told you so." I wish more people would write about the effectiveness they see in their self-paced e-training and classroom training vs. newer methods. We could use more discourse and experimentation.
What? Experimentation? Won't that potentially take away time and money from traditional methods? the curmudgeons say as they try new icebreakers.
I'm ranting and indeed, of course.
Again, great post. I'll be interested to see comments such as Jo's "if no one else is there, how will they learn?" To that I say, I can have 10 people in my college classroom or 1000 in my online community and I get a hella lot more out of the community.
It is indisputable that "learning is inherently sociable."
ReplyDeleteHowever that "learning socially with others requires everyone to be in a single place and at a single point of time" is another question altogether.
Maybe many students would prefer to be in a classroom. I've not seen anything other than anecdotal data to support that. Or in a 1-to-1 tutorial in Oxbridge format maybe even better. However, practical issues such as time and cost restraints (as Clive has pointed out), and limited resources, mean that we need to look to doing things in smarter ways where it's appropriate to do so.
The world of social media in learning is alive and flourishing.
Maybe developing 'confidence' - (as suggested in your thought experiment, Jo) is a good case-in-point for the need to get people together physically, but learning processes, procedures, techniques and many skills can be done just as effectively and a more efficiently using technology.
Don't lets confuse the medium with the message.
Learning is NOT inherently sociable I'd argue. Actual learning is as much about ACTION as INTERACTION as well as internal/reflective cognitive processes that are necessary to build confidence and cement new knowledge and skills. The social classroom model is a self fulfilling experience that is too often an acceptable veneer that camouflages the distressing fact that little sustainable learning has occurred.
ReplyDeleteLike Clive, it doesn't surprise me at the slow pace of change but like any exponential change things appear very slow (if not glacial) before rapid acceleration starts to become noticeable.
Social media and the wider access to self driven learning opportunities that the Internet provides (which can be both an individual and social experience) are I think raising the pace. The discrepancy between how we use technology at home and in the workplace/classroom becomes ever greater and can be ignored for much longer. though I suppose our L&D/education communities might be able to string it out another decade.
As a person who has worked for both online and traditional on campus colleges and universities I can say that learning is dependent on the person. The benefit to classroom instruction is the ability to feed off of peers. Two people can read the same book and take away different meanings. Classrooms can provide the interaction, the debate experience and the social structure that exist in the real world of work. Unless you work from home, or have your own office and business somewhere the chances are you'll need to be able to interact with others as a team and share learning material. Do I think one attending online school can't do this? No. I think they are capable, just as the person attending campus, of functioning in today's CA.
ReplyDeleteThe benefit I see to online is that it allows those who cannot quit their jobs, relocate their families, or attend college during the day or on certain nights, to be able to still learn and have the same opportunities as those who can do all of those things to attend college. Both options are viable, both are important, but neither is superior to the other.
The benefit I see to online is that it allows those who cannot quit their jobs, relocate their families, or attend college during the day or on certain nights, to be able to still learn and have the same opportunities as those who can do all of those things to attend college. Both options are viable, both are important, but neither is superior to the other.
ReplyDelete" entire education "