By Carla Torgerson

Do you believe in unicorns?  It’s a safe bet that you don’t.  After all, unicorns are a myth, and everyone knows it.  But what about “learning styles,” the idea that each person is a certain kind of learner, and learns best when material is delivered to them in their own preferred style of learning?  The concept of learning styles has been around since the first half of the 20^th century.  It has had its ups and downs in terms of popularity, but it still hangs around despite the fact that the vast majority of scientific research on the topic has pretty soundly debunked it.

In this article, we’ll provide a quick overview of the learning styles concept.  We’ll also take a look at what can be useful—and harmful—about it.

The Learning Styles Concept

Over the years, different versions of the learning styles concept have been developed.  The one that has gotten most of the attention in recent decades is known as VARK, developed by researcher, Neil Fleming.  In short, it posits that each person can be grouped into one of four different types of learner:  Visual, Auditory, Reading, or Kinesthetic.

As you might expect, Visual learners supposedly learn best when information is presented to them visually, with heavy use of pictures, diagrams, demonstrations, etc.  Auditory learners supposedly learn best by using their ears.  Reading-oriented learners allegedly do better when they can read information.  And finally, kinesthetic learners supposedly like to get their hands on things, learning best when they can get physically involved by manipulating objects and so on.

According to this concept, instructional designers should develop programs that cater to each learner’s individual preferred style of learning, providing options that are matched to each style.  Doing this, the idea goes, will result in more effective instructional programs.  Unfortunately, the research does not support the idea that teaching in different ways for different people produces superior learning.

The Reality

Here’s the reality:  Assuming that we’re literate and that all of our 5 senses work correctly, we are all Visual, Auditory, Reading, and Kinesthetic learners.  Each of us has the capacity to learn in each of these ways.  While it’s true that some people have greater reading comprehension skills, or perhaps a preference for receiving information visually, these abilities and/or preferences do not represent different learning styles.

In fact, the most effective method for teaching new material doesn’t depend at all on the learners’ alleged individual learning styles.  It actually depends on the nature of the material being taught.  Furthermore, using a combination of methods is usually the best approach (Visual, Auditory, Reading, and Kinesthetic), even though one of those approaches might be dominant in any given case.

For example, if you want to teach someone the difference between classical music and hip-hop, you’d probably let them listen to multiple examples of each type of music.  You might also provide the learner with some reading materials and show the learner some pictures of famous classical and hip-hop artists.  However, auditory learning will factor most heavily in this situation.

In another example, training someone to service the brakes on a car might involve verbal instructions (auditory), the use of diagrams and demonstrations (visual), and written instructions (reading).  However, letting the person actually get their hands on the car will be the primary—and most impactful—approach.  In this case, the kinesthetic approach is where the magic happens.  We are all “kinesthetic learners” in this sort of situation. Of course, that approach is best when supplemented by all the other approaches too.

Key Takeaways for Learning and Development Pros

Given all this talk about learning styles, what are some key takeways for people who develop and deploy learning programs?  Here are a few that we think are useful:

1. People do not have preferred “learning styles” – Each person can learn in a number of different ways. People may have differing abilities or preferences, but no person is beholden to any single learning style.
2. It can be harmful to tell a person that he or she has a learning style – Telling someone that he or she is a “Visual Learner” (for example) might actually hold them back from a learning standpoint, as it can encourage them to pigeon-hole themselves and not take full advantage of their ability to learn in multiple ways. You never want to hear someone say: “I’ve been told I’m a Visual Learner, so I just don’t learn very well by reading things…”
3. The nature of the content will dictate the dominant approach – Per the examples above, the content itself—and not individual learning styles—will determine the best teaching or training methods.
4. Most learning programs should use a combination of instructional approaches – Even though a given topic might work best with a given instructional approach, a combination of approaches is almost always the way to go. Make full use of learners’ abilities to absorb content and skills visually, auditorially, via the written word, and kinesthetically (if possible).
5. To achieve a given learning or performance objective, one well-designed program is usually best for all learners – The idea that each learner requires a program customized to his or her “learning style” is just plain wrong. A well-designed program that uses a mix of approaches (with the content dictating the dominant one) is usually best for all learners.

So, that’s the story of learning styles.  It may be true that here are elements of the idea that can be useful.  On balance, though, we’d like to firmly enshrine the concept in the Book of Myths, right between elves and unicorns.

As a parting gift, we thought you might like this article on learning styles from The Onion.  Maybe you’re a nasal learner!  Until next time!

The post Learning Styles and Unicorns appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

As we’ve discussed in previous articles, microlearning techniques can be extremely useful for a range of training applications.  These include preparing learners for live training events, post-event reinforcement, stand-alone training programs, or performance support.

But, microlearning isn’t devoid of challenges.  The Association for Talent Development (ATD) did some research on the key barriers that prevent organizations from embracing microlearning.  In this article, we’ll look at four of the most common ones.  If a Learning and Development (L&D) team adopts microlearning approaches without a plan to deal with the issues below, then it will get push-back.  Furthermore, programs are more likely to fail, and people could easily get the impression that microlearning doesn’t work.  So, without further ado, let’s take a look at those common barriers.

Barrier 1 – Learners are not held accountable

Learning programs will have no impact if the intended learners don’t actually use them.  For learners, the top priority is doing their primary jobs.  Participating in learning programs will always take a back seat to that.  As a result, it can be tough to get learners to engage with informal or non-mandatory learning programs.

So, how to get around this barrier?  Well, the company could make it mandatory to participate and then track utilization.  That generally gets people moving.  There are, however, other ways to drive participation.

One way is to make the training as relevant as possible to the learner’s number one priority: His or her day-to-day job.  “Just in time” learning or workflow learning are prime examples of this.  Those types of learning resources are specifically designed to help the learner do a part of their job, right when they need it.

Other techniques for driving participation include:

• Enage with the learners’ managers so that they will help hold learners accountable (e.g., by asking learners questions about the program(s) in one-on-one meetings or staff meetings, etc.)
• Send e-mail reminders to learners about the program in question, using messaging that puts learners’ priorities first and makes it relevant to their jobs (i.e., “Got 5 minutes? Here are 5 tips to help make your next sales call a smashing success! Click here.”)
• Use incentives, like contests or drawings to drive participation (i.e., “Everyone who completes the module by next Friday gets entered to win a …!”)

Barrier 2 – Not easy enough for learners to access microlearning from anywhere

Microlearning must be easily accessible to learners when and where they need it.  If you want to deliver your microlearning solution to mobile devices and your LMS is not mobile-friendly, then you might need to find another means of delivering the program.

Don’t try to deliver a program using a platform that isn’t suited to it.  Find work-aounds if needed.  For example, could the content be e-mailed to learners?  Everyone has access to e-mail on their phones.  Alternatively, could a portal be created through which learners could access the material using mobile devices?  Or, for the case in question, is mobile absolutely necessary?  Could learners actually grasp the material just as effectively from their desks using the LMS?  If so, then resetting management expectations may be required.

Barrier 3 – Fitting microlearning into employees’ day

This barrier is very closely related to Barrier #1 above.  If the microlearning resource is viewed by learners as relevant and useful—and it serves their work priorities—then they’re more likely to make time for it.  The key is to design learning that actually helps learners do their jobs, and then communicate those benefits in ways that help the learners answer “What’s in it for me?”

Barrier 4 – Inability to tie learning to performance

We’ve heard this barrier before. The challenge of quantifying the links between learning and performance is not just related to microlearning.  It’s the primary challenge facing all of L&D in general.

But with microlearning it can actually be easier to measure the link between learning and performance than it is with longer-form approaches.  Changes in performance can be much more easily linked to a 5-minute, highly-focused microlearning module than to an hour-long e-course.  For example, if you measure an improvement in metrics related to X, and you had just delivered microlearning specific to X, then it’s easier to make the connection.

What’s Next?

Keep checking back with us for more articles on microlearning.  In our next installment, we’ll cover some key pitfalls to avoid when developing microlearning resources.

The post Barriers to Creating Effective Microlearning appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

In previous blogs, we’ve discussed how microlearning can be used to prepare learners for learning events, and as follow-up after learning events.  In this article, we’ll consider how microlearning can be used as stand-alone training.

Key Benefits

Of course, using microlearning as stand-alone training can provide all the core benefits of elearning.  For example, microlearning is:

1. Asynchronous, meaning that learners can access it any any time. There’s no need to get everyone together at the same time.
2. Self-paced, enabling each learner to progress at a rate that personally works best.
3. Accessible any place, through a mobile device or computer.

But, microlearning provides added benefits.  It also:

1. Maximizes flexibility and minimizes disruption to each learner’s work day.
2. Increases retention. Think about this question - Which is more effective at driving up retention: A one-and-done hour-long training session or a series of five- to eight-minute mini-modules delivered once per week for 5 weeks?  In many cases, it’s the latter.

Example

Here’s a brief example to illustrate how you can use microlearning as stand-alone training, and get a better result than using traditional approaches.  Imagine that a training leader needs to get a large number of call center workers “up to speed” on a new product or service offering.

Traditionally, this might require scheduling a training session that all call center employees would have to attend.  Call center workers need to be covering the phones, so it would be impossible to get all workers at the same training session simultaneously.  So, the training leader would need to schedule several alternative time slots, for which call center workers could register.  This would enable everyone to cycle through the one- or two-hour session while still maintaining at least partial call coverage during session times.

Needless to say, that approach would be disruptive to the workers and to customer service.  In addition, the “one-and-done” nature of the training is less conducive to learning and retention.

Now, let’s consider a different approach…one that uses microlearning.  The training leader could divide the content into 4 or 5 “bite-sized chunks,” each of which could stand on its own.  Then, the training leader could create a series of brief “mini-modules” that call center employees could go through at their own pace.

Each module would cover a discreet topic related to the new product or service.  For example:

• Overview, defining the new offering, the target customers, and why it’s important
• Features and benefits
• How to engage potential customers
• Questions customers frequently ask

Learners are much more likely to retain information that is given to them in pieces over a period of time, rather than all at once.  Sure, those call center employees still need to be scheduled off the phones to take this training, but it’s far easier to schedule a 10 minute “learning break” than it is to find 1-2 hours when half the agents can be taken off the phones to attend a session together. That makes this approach far less disruptive to the business’s normal operations.

What’s Coming Next?

In our next installment, we’ll identify the top barriers to using microlearning effectively.

The post Using Microlearning for Stand-Alone Training appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

In the last installment, we explored how to use microlearning techniques to prepare learners for live training events.  But what about after the event?  Can microlearning techniques help learners retain what they learned, as well as perform better in their jobs?  Yes, they can.  Here’s how.

Why Reinforce Learning After Live Events?

Most L&D professionals know about the “Forgetting Curve” – an estimate of how quickly people forget content learned in a formal learning environment. While we can debate how quickly people forget new information, one thing is clear: Learners do have a tendency to forget recently-learned information pretty rapidly.  That’s why it’s important to reinforce learning in the days, weeks, and even months following a live training event.

We typically reinforce learning for two key reasons:

1. Increase retention of key concepts
2. Make it easier for learners to apply what they are learning to the job (i.e., performance support)

Why Microlearning for Post-Event Reinforcement?

Microlearning is great for post-event reinforcement because it meshes so nicely with the reality that most learners face – that they don’t have a lot of time for long-form reinforcement activities.  They can much more easily fit short, “bite-sized” learning activities into their work day.

In addition, some types of reinforcement are meant to be used just-in-time, as learners perform job-related tasks.  “How-to” resources for using a piece of software or operating a piece of equipment are great examples.  These resources must quickly hone in on the task at hand, and enable learners to use them in real time. To be most useful, they must focus on what the learner needs at that moment and nothing more.

Examples

Here are a few examples of microlearning tools and techniques that you can use after an event to reinforce learning and/or to be used as performance support. We’re confident you can come up with many more ideas:

1. E-Mail Campaign – You use e-mail to deliver short pieces of information to learners over time, reviewing and reinforcing key things they learned in the training. It’s important to focus on the most relevant information and determine the optimal cadence.
2. Pulsed Knowledge Questions – The idea is to ask the learner a series of multiple choice questions over time. This technique adds reinforcement which leads to retention. It can also push learners to more thoughtfully engage with the information.  High relevance and proper cadence are also important for this technique.
3. Wallet Cards – Reference cards and similar tools are great for reinforcing key points. They can also be used for performance support, if the content is a checklist or other job aid.
4. Infographics / Job Aids – Infographics can be highly useful, whether static (printed or electronic) or interactive. If an employee posts one of these things on his or her bulletin board and refers to it regularly, you know it’s making a difference for him/her.  A good example of a job aid might be an objection handler:  A tool that outlines common objections a sales rep might experience, as well as the proper responses.  It’s important to note that an infographic is not a discrete item on this list, as you could incorporate an infographic into a wallet card, detail aid, etc.
5. Detail Aids – Sales reps often use printed or interactive detail aids to communicate with potential customers. These resources can really help sales reps structure narratives, recall key facts and messages, and communicate more effectively.
6. Video Clips – “How-to” video clips can be very useful, particularly for performance support. Remember the example we gave earlier about using a piece of software or operating a piece of equipment?
7. How-To-Guides – Short “how-to” guides can really help people get a task done quickly and accurately. Think of the Quick-Start Guide that came with your last laptop computer, DVD player, or other electronic gadget.

How about you?  What other microlearning tools and techniques have you used for post-event reinforcement or performance support?

What’s Coming Next?

In our next installment, we’ll explore how you can use microlearning techniques for stand-alone training.

The post Using Microlearning for Post-Event Reinforcement and Performance Support appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

In previous articles, we defined microlearning and we described how long (or short) microlearning materials should be.  Now, it’s time to move into application.  We previously defined microlearning as short content that could be used as preparation before a learning event, follow-up to support a learning event, stand-alone training, and performance support. Here, we describe how you can use microlearning techniques to prepare learners for longer form, live training events.

Why Prepare Learners?

As anyone working in Learning and Development (L&D) knows, live training is expensive.  It often takes a lot of time, energy, and money to get everyone together and to plan and execute an effective event.  Naturally, L&D pros want to make the most out of every minute of live training to ensure that money is well spent.

So, it makes sense to prepare learners ahead of time.  Ideally, learners should come to a live event with enough baseline knowledge and awareness to ensure a productive session…or series of sessions.  Learners will get more out of the discussions, role-plays, and other live activities if they’ve done some useful prep work ahead of time.

Why Microlearning for Event Prep?

Most L&D professionals are familiar with having pre-work before a class. But we’re also equally familiar with low completion rates and low impact to the class environment. By its very nature, microlearning is well-suited to the task of preparing learners for live events.  Our learners are busy and don’t have a lot of time to do complicated pre-reads or other long-form activities.  However, everyone can make time to go through some short-form learning to prepare.

Using microlearning increases the chance that learners will actually review the material and show up ready to roll.  In some highly formal environments (like the pharmaceutical industry, for example) learning activities are usually mandatory and tracked.  So the learners are likely to go through the materials ahead of time regardless of length.  However, they’re much more likely to truly engage with the material and learn something if it’s delivered in ways that work for them.  And that usually means in short, bite-sized chunks.

Examples

Here are a few examples of microlearning tools and techniques that you can use to prepare learners for live events.  These are just some examples to warm up your thinking, going from simple to more complex.  We’re confident you can come up with many more ideas:

1. Short Reads – Short articles, fact sheets, or other pre-reads can be very helpful. In the “old days”, we might have sent complicated long-form articles.  Nowadays, we know it’s more productive to send short pieces that are thoughtfully distilled to the most important pieces of information.
2. Infographics – People really like infographics. They can contain a lot of information in an easy-to-comprehend format.  They can be static or interactive.
3. Voice-Over Presentations – A brief, annotated PowerPoint can be helpful, as long as the information is relevant and thoughtfully delivered. Again, shorter is better with this non-interactive format.
4. Videos – Video clips are a great way to share information quickly.
5. Mini-Modules – Mini eLearning modules add interactivity and can create more engagement.

What other approaches have YOU used?

What’s Coming Next?

In our next installment, we’ll explore how you can use microlearning techniques after a learning event to reinforce key learnings and help drive performance on the job.

The post Using Microlearning as Preparation for Live Learning Events appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

If microlearning can be any learning and the common thread is its length, then the next natural question is, “How long is a piece of microlearning?”  The answer really depends on the content you’re teaching and the use case.

There are no hard and fast rules regarding length, but we generally think of microlearning as any learning content that can be consumed in about five minutes or less.  But, that five minutes is not a rule.  It’s just a guideline. The only “rule” is that microlearning content should be “just long enough” to give the learner what they need at that moment.

Let’s consider some different situations and use cases and see how they might impact length.  There are times when good microlearning should probably be less than 5 minutes, and there are times when it should be a little longer than 5 minutes.

Less Than 5 Minutes

Keeping microlearning content to less than 5 minutes is generally best when:

• The learners already have a solid foundation of knowledge in the subject at hand – If no new concepts need to be taught and you simply need to add new information into an existing mental framework, then you can keep it very short.
• Learning content is to be used “just-in-time” – If the learners must be able to reference content in real-time to perform a specific task, then it’s best to keep it short. Cut right to the core of what the learner needs at the time, avoiding extraneous material.  There’s a sense of urgency, after all, so get right to it.  Wallet cards, short “How to” videos (perhaps even 2 minutes or less), and similar tools will get the job done.  A lot of performance support content would fall into this category.
• Learning is informal, and not required – For informal, voluntary learning, people generally respond better to content that is 4 minutes or less.

More Than 5 Minutes

Microlearning can be longer than 5 minutes when the learners have no solid foundation of knowledge in the subject.  It’s not advisable to try to insert bits of microlearning content into a mental framework that doesn’t exist.  With “green” learners, you need to build that framework, and that takes more time.  If you can apply microlearning to a situation like that, then individual pieces of content could easily run 7-10 minutes.

Formal training—which is mandatory and tracked—can also be longer (generally speaking).  Examples of formal learning might be new hire training or a POA meeting.

The Bottom Line

A piece of learning content that is just five minutes long—but that’s not useful to your learners—is a waste of five minutes¹. A piece of learning content may need to be trimmed to three minutes to give learners just what they need.  Or, it may need to be expanded to eight minutes to give the depth and clarity the learner needs to properly grasp the content. So again, the five-minute length is a guideline.

What’s Coming Next?

In our next installment, we’ll explore how you can apply microlearning to prepare learners before a learning event.

1. Thanks to Diane Elkins, owner of Artisan E-Learning, who has been saying this for years!

The post How “Micro” Does Microlearning Need to Be? appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Carla Torgerson and Sue Iannone

“Microlearning” is a huge buzz word in learning and development (L&D) these days.  It seems like everyone is doing it or wants to be doing it.  The problem is, people often have a hard time defining just what “it” is.  In addition, there’s even less certainty around how to use microlearning to make the most positive difference for your organization.

The good news is that microlearning can be a powerful tool in the L&D organization’s toolbox.  It just needs to be used in the right ways.  In upcoming articles, we’ll spend some time covering different facets of microlearning.  In this “micro” article, though, we’re going to start building the foundation by providing a standard definition of microlearning.

Definition of Microlearning

To cut right to the chase, “microlearning” simply refers to a piece of educational content that can be consumed quickly.  In many ways, microlearning is just a mash-up of lots of things we’ve been doing in the past: just-in-time learning, performance support, and many others.  But, it’s presented in a short form.

Microlearning content can stand alone or support other learning activities (like instructor-led classes, eLearning modules, simulations, etc.). It can be used as:

• Preparation before a learning event
• Follow-up to support a learning event
• Stand-alone training
• Performance support

Those options pretty much cover any time someone could be learning.  If you teach something—or augment other teaching to enhance retention with short-form content—you are “going micro”.

What’s Coming Next?

In our next article, we’ll answer a common question:  How “micro” does microlearning need to be?  After that article, we’ll explore how microlearning can be applied as preparation before a learning event, follow-up after an event, stand-alone training, and as performance support.

The post What is Microlearning? appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Sue Iannone

You’ve heard about the “Modern Learner” before.  It’s a hot topic in the learning and development (L&D) space today.  Who exactly is this Modern Learner, and what should be keep in mind as we think about creating training solutions?  In this article, we’ll take a brief look at the ten characteristics of Modern Learners and see whether the stereotypes hold up.  Then, we’ll outline six tips for reaching them from a training standpoint.  Throughout, we’ll draw examples from the world of biopharma L&D.

Ten Traits of the Modern Learner

As we outlined in our previous article, so-called Modern Learners are biologically no different from 18^th century learners, 10^th century learners, 1^st century learners, or any other human learner since Homo sapiens were…well…Homo sapiens.  However, our modern world has conditioned many of us to process information and learn in different ways.  Based on our experience, the “typical” Modern Learner:

1. Processes data quickly, but not deeply
2. Has a short attention span and distributes attention thinly
3. Is highly visual
4. Is easily distracted
5. Is found in all age brackets (it’s not just Millennials!)
6. Uses more systems and devices than ever and can rapidly switch from device to device
7. Is overloaded with information
8. Forgets things more easily
9. Seeks instant gratification
10. Expects frequent rewards

It’s important to note that not every Modern Learner exhibits all of these traits.  However, these 10 traits are far more prevalent among learners today than they were even 25 years ago.  Our web-enabled, instant-response world has brought huge benefits and increased our productivity greatly, but it has also conditioned us to learn differently than we did in the past.

Reaching the Modern Learner

So, how can L&D tailor its learning programs to best reach Modern Learners?  Below are six tips that we’ve found to be very helpful.

1. Make it Useful – Learners must be able to apply learning to their jobs. A learning program that isn’t truly useful to the learner—and that only exists to impart less-than-practical knowledge—will not capture a Modern Learner’s time and attention.  Examples of useful training topics might include techniques for handling new objections, a new selling tool that will really help increase effectiveness, or interesting new data that reps can present to their customers.
2. Keep it Brief – If you can accomplish your training goal in 5 minutes, then don’t take 50. No one ever said, “Hey…Please give me a longer program to sit through!”  It’s always best to focus on the core thing(s) the learners need to know and minimize extraneous or “nice-to-know-but-not-vital” information.  Deploying a series of mini-modules that leverage microlearning principles might be more effective than a full-day workshop, for example.  The learning must be able to be consumed quickly, whether it’s to be used before a learning event, after a learning event, or as a stand-alone module.
3. Go Visual – Avoid a lot of text-heavy information in your materials. Where possible, incorporate images, icons, photographs, video, diagrams, and so on.  It’s also important to make sure that visuals are attractive and well-organized.  Messy visuals and ugly color combinations will drive learners away, but visually appealing design will suck them in.
4. Keep Learners Active – Involve the learners, making them active participants rather than passive consumers. From a digital standpoint, this can be done with drag-and-drop activities, interactive rollover / mouseover elements, quizzes, scenario-based questions, and more.  In live workshops, you can use role-playing exercises, flip-chart activities, worksheets / work mats, and the like.  While interactivity is important, you should also be careful not to overdo it.
5. Make Learning Available Everywhere – Modern Learners should be able to access their learning materials in a variety of ways. This includes laptop computers, tablets, and mobile devices.  Consider a field-based rep who might have a few minutes here and there to access his learning materials:  in the car, while sitting in a waiting room, on a laptop over lunch, or at home.  This requires flexible availability at any time.
6. “Sell” It – Learners need to know why a training program is needed. L&D must be able to answer—from the learner’s view point—some key questions.  Why do I need this?  What’s in it for me?  How will this help me?  It’s also important to “sell” learners’ managers on a program because they can also help sell it to the learners.

Bringing It All Together

A quick example can show how many of these tips can be deployed at once.  A customer of ours asked us to update and revamp their disease state training materials for a portfolio of products within a therapeutic area.

The materials they gave us basically consisted of a 90-page PDF document that was very text-heavy and provided extremely in-depth information on the disease state, it’s mechanism of action, and the related anatomy and physiology.  It certainly was thorough, but it wasn’t exactly exciting—or quick—to get through.

We took those materials and did the following, all while using the tips above to make the material much more accessible and engaging.  We:

1. Reduced the volume of content to focus on the important stuff while cutting the extraneous information.
2. Broke the content into “bite-sized” chunks.
3. Created a series of microlearning digital “mini-modules” that were each brief, highly focused on a core concept, used interactive components to create engagement, and made heavy use of attractive visual elements.
4. Made the mini-modules accessible on a variety of devices.
5. Structured the mini-modules so that experienced field reps could use them in any order they chose, while suggesting a specific order for new hires.

Needless to say, the revamped training was a big hit.  The fact is, the Modern Learner is here to stay, so it makes sense to take that reality into account when developing training.  That doesn’t mean L&D needs to cater to “laziness,” but it does mean that L&D needs to be mindful of their audience and develop training that matches how many of us process information these days.  Why?  Because business outcomes depend on it!

The post Six Tips for Reaching the Life Sciences “Modern Learner” appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Nathan Pienkowski

It’s almost a given these days that learning programs need to be interactive.  Instructional designers are constantly looking for ways to boost interactivity as a means of increasing engagement, uptake, and retention.  To be sure, there are very good reasons for this.

But, are there times when interactivity is counter-productive?  Are there times when it’s best to just give learners the information they need and dispense with the interactive techniques?  Yes, there are.  In this article, we’ll shed some light on times when less interactivity is better.

Why—and When—Interactivity is Good

The Learning & Development (L&D) function does many things for the business.  In some cases, L&D helps learners develop new skills while in other cases, L&D must efficiently communicate corporate policy, provide training to comply with regulations, and so on.

Interactivity is most effective when the goal is to build new skills, which requires practice, feedback, and mastery.  It’s also useful for keeping learners engaged when teaching more conceptual things and when trying to determine the extent to which someone has mastered what you’re teaching.

Basically, interactive content demands more of learners.  It makes them become more actively involved with the content, forcing them to work harder to get the underlying knowledge.

Interactive training can be a lot more effective than methods in which the learner is a more passive participant.  When done right, that added involvement can boost knowledge uptake and retention.  It works, and that’s why interactivity is good in a lot of cases.

When Interactivity is Less Useful

So, interactivity is typically a good thing.  Now, here comes the “but.”  There are some learner populations who already have a substantial knowledge- or skills-base in the area in question, and a learning program is just adding to that.  Think of a doctor and his or her knowledge of a familiar disease, it’s mechanisms, and the current treatment paradigms.

In such a case, the learners have strong, well-founded mental constructs in the domain.  Those mental constructs allow them to easily assimilate new knowledge in the domain and make it actionable.  With these people—in the domain in question—instructional designers don’t need to do a lot of work to help them form a mental construct.  In other words, the instructional designer doesn’t need to do the work of translating raw information into an actionable form (something in which good instructional designers take pride).  The learner can do that for him.  And in many cases, that’s what these types of learners prefer.

There is a lot of behavioral research to support the idea that experts in a field are better able to assimilate and make actionable new knowledge.  In my own experience, I’ve seen that experts in a given domain typically prefer less interactivity and have little tolerance for anything they consider fluff (this includes gaming, themes, and a host of other interactive techniques).  Often, they feel that such techniques interfere with them getting to the meat of the issue.  In addition, they can get frustrated and angry at times when they must do a lot of interactive things in order to get what they want.

People with in-depth experience in a given domain are far better able to direct their own learning and to know better than anyone else what they need, so it’s best to give them that control.  Think of it like this:  When a raw beginner shows up to his first guitar lesson, that person has no idea what they actually need to learn or what their pathway to mastery should be.  Asking them what they want to learn or giving them a lot of control over their learning pathway at this stage just impedes their progress and increases their own anxiety.

On the other hand, when an experienced guitarist shows up to a teacher for the first time, it would be a mistake for the teacher to establish a high degree of control over their learning pathway.  In this case, it would be best to give the learner a lot more control over his or her learning pathway.

It should be said that I’ve recently read a couple of articles that dissent from the viewpoint I’ve described above.  Instead, they argue that interactivity is best for experts and not as good for novices.  Certainly, this can be true in some cases.  In my experience, those cases are rare.  Most of the research on this topic is in line with my own personal experience.

“Something is Better than Nothing”

Now, there is one more reason supporting the “interactivity is not always good” argument.  We’ll call it the “something is (usually) better than nothing” principle.  Another way of expressing it is, “Don’t let perfect get in the way of progress.”

Transforming content into an interactive learning experience takes time, effort, and dollars.  No one has all the resources they need to address all their training needs at the perfect level, so L&D teams must prioritize.  And of course, you can’t list all training needs as “Priority 1.”

In those cases, L&D (acting as the performance consultant) must ask itself, “Is something better than nothing?”  A lot of times, the answer will be “Yes.”

Let’s say we have 10,000 healthcare workers across Africa, many of whom lack the skills needed to administer vaccines to the people in their care.  If all L&D can afford to do is send out some booklets, knowing that it won’t completely build the skill, should it?  Is doing that better than leaving it to their own devices to figure out?  In my view, the answer is, yes, something is better than nothing.

In sum, as an L&D performance consultant, you absolutely should take your high-priority items up to the best level you can, but you can’t do this for every item.  Further, it’s not just about limits in your resources.  It’s also about the limits of your learners’ time and attention.  People can’t train all day every day.  They have work to do.  So, every training manager has a finite amount of time they can pull people out of their work to do training, so L&D will need to make trade-off decisions.

All of this adds up to our key takeaway:  Sometimes, interactivity is not the best thing.  Its usefulness depends on a combination of factors, including the learners’ current level of expertise in the domain, the training resources available, and the amount of time learners can devote to training.  It’s up to the performance consultants in L&D to make the determination.

The post Is Interactivity Always Best? appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Sue Iannone

For any learning and development (L&D) program, training managers and directors will create learning objectives.  These objectives articulate the discreet things that learners should be able to do after participating in a program.  Learning objectives are extremely important, but they’re only part of the story.

Ultimately, L&D efforts are about driving behavior change in the field, so behavioral objectives are just as important.  Unfortunately, learning professionals often fail to develop behavioral objectives.  In this article, we describe the differences between learning objectives and behavioral objectives.  We also explain how they should work together to drive business results.

Learning Objectives

As mentioned above, learning objectives articulate the key things that learners should be able to do after completing a given training program or learning experience.  L&D professionals usually take great care to properly write these objectives for a given learning resource or training course, as well as for units within a  course

Each learning objective relates to a specific capability or skill and is expressed using an action verb.  For example, after completing a course, learners should be able to:

1. Describe the mechanisms that underlie disease X
2. List common treatments for disease X
3. Articulate the mechanism of action for drug Y
4. Handle the most common customer objection to prescribing drug Y.

Learning objectives can relate to “lower order” (e.g., knowledge-based) thinking skills as well as higher-order (e.g., evaluation-based) thinking skills.  L&D professionals the world over are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy, which arranges the “action verbs” for learning objectives into various levels, from lower-order to higher-order.  Figure 1 shows this taxonomy.

Behavioral Objectives

Behavioral objectives articulate the specific behaviors that learners are supposed to exhibit in the field after completing a training program.  To perform a desired behavior, a learner might need to absorb and master numerous individual pieces of knowledge and multiple skills.  So, while a single behavioral objective might have only one or two learning objectives, a behavioral objective may often have many discreet learning objectives embedded within it.  Another way to look at it is this:  Behavioral objectives can focus at the “macro” level while learning objectives focus at the “micro” level.

Putting it All Together

Ultimately, we create training programs and learning experiences because we need to achieve some business result.  If you find yourself getting hyper-focused on only the learning objectives, it may be time to take a step back and ask yourself:  What is the business objective which needs to be met?  What are the associated behaviors required to meet this business objective?  To guide program development, L&D pros must:

1. Articulate the desired business result(s).
2. Determine which behaviors will deliver the desired business results, then develop the behavioral objectives.
3. Develop discreet learning objectives for each behavioral objective.

Below is a hypothetical example of how these three components relate to one another.  Note that multiple desired behaviors might be needed to achieve the business result.  We have limited it to one desired behavior in each example, just to keep it simple.

Desired Business Result:  Increase the number of “product X” prescriptions written for new patients.

For Sales Representatives:

• Desired Behavior 1: Articulate the unmet need for patients suffering from disease Y to healthcare providers.
• Learning Objectives for Behavior 1: List the hallmarks of disease Y; Describe the burden of disease for patients suffering from disease Y; Relate patient dissatisfaction with current treatment options

For Field Reimbursement Managers:

• Desired Behavior 1: Remove reimbursement barriers that may impact a new patient’s ability to access product X.
• Learning Objectives for Behavior 1: Identify the most common access challenges encountered by new patients and office staff; Recognize common problems related to billing and coding; Recognize common problems related to prior authorizations; Describe the fulfillment pathway for product X

From all this, one thing becomes crystal clear:  Learning objectives are important, but they may be only part of the story.  They are a vital component in a cascade of things that begins with the desired business result(s), moves through the behavioral and learning objectives, and then culminates in effective program design.  All learning professionals create learning objectives, but the BEST learning professionals consider the business need and the desired behaviors.  Adopting this approach is one key to becoming a true performance consultant!

The post Behavioral Objectives vs. Learning Objectives appeared first on Bull City Blue.

By Nathan Pienkowski

In recent years, a lot of ink has been spilled regarding the idea of the “Modern Learner.”  In this article, we discuss whether the so-called “Modern Learner” is really that much different from any other learner.  The answer is yes…and no…and that has implications for Learning and Development (L&D) professionals.  Let’s dig a little deeper.

What is the Modern Learner?

Basically, our concept of the Modern Learner is as follows:

In the western world today, people are highly distracted by cell phones, televisions, computers, tablets and a host of other things.  Individual tools—such as the cell phone—contain many distractions within themselves, such as e-mails, texts, social media, web browsers, and more.

As a result, learners today have become conditioned to think differently, interact with the world differently, and have different expectations regarding how they learn.  By extension, it’s hard to get their attention (and even harder to hold it), they want their information delivered in easily digestible “bite-sized” chunks, and they don’t want to immerse themselves in long-form training that requires concentration for extended periods.

That’s the concept, and L&D professionals have taken it to heart, working to develop learning programs that cater to the needs and expectations of the modern learners.  But, is it right?  Does it make sense to apply it in all cases?

The Modern Learner Concept:  It’s true, but…

It is true that, in general, westerners today exhibit the characteristics of the modern learner.  It’s important to remember that these characteristics (shorter attention span, limited desire to concentrate, need for instant gratification and frequent rewards, highly visual approach to learning, etc.) are the result of psychological conditioning and not any physical changes.  Modern learners’ brains are biologically no different from those that were learning things back in the 1850s, for example.

The mechanisms through which people learn are biologically-based and fundamental to humans.  They change at the rate of evolution so, in other words, very slowly.

However, the psychological conditioning evident in modern learners is real, and L&D professionals deal with that in numerous ways.  For example, they might apply microlearning techniques, breaking learning content into small chunks that require very little time on an individual basis.  L&D pros might also use gamification, often enabled by mobile technology, to help make learning more experiential.

A host of techniques like the ones above can be deployed to reach modern learners.  This is good.  But, it is possible to get too much of a good thing, as these techniques are not appropriate in all cases.  In fact, there are times when they can be counter-productive.

Too often, we are asked to apply these techniques because the training leader believes “that’s how training is done these days.”  The idea is that learning always needs to be broken into small, discreet chunks or that mobile technology needs to be leveraged, and so on.  That idea is wrong, so let’s see when it’s appropriate to cater to modern learners vs. when it’s not.

When (and When Not) to Cater to the “Modern Learner”

Generally, training techniques that cater to the Modern Learner concept are best used when the training needs to:

• Explain concepts
• Impart bits of information or easily learned skills that are relatively discreet or independent from one another
• Reinforce more complex learnings that were delivered during other training (i.e. performance support)

For example, we once had a customer that needed to train its sales force to use a range of new functions within its customer relationship management (CRM) system.  Most of these functions were independent of one another and relatively easy to learn by themselves.

So, we created a series of very short modules, one for each “skill.”  In addition, we created a game for each skill that encouraged competition between sales reps and enabled them to practice.  In this case, chunking the information into smaller pieces—and leveraging tech-driven games—was just the ticket.

In other cases, catering to the Modern Learner concept is not appropriate.  For example, it’s not usually appropriate when training learners on complex skills, which themselves are often amalgamations of multiple interrelated sub-skills.

Modern Learner-oriented approaches are useful as reinforcement or for performance support in some of these cases.  But, the fact remains that learning complex skills requires attention, concentration, time, and practice.  One doesn’t typically learn to be a great sales rep by going through a series of short e-modules.  It’s tough to train a manager on how to have difficult conversations with subordinates via these approaches, either.  Effectively having those conversations requires a complex array of interrelated skills that need to be imparted and practiced.  Sorry, Modern Learners, sometimes you just have to put the phone down and concentrate.

Applying the Modern Learner concept in the wrong situations will, at best, provide a sub-optimal result.  In some cases, it can also cost more for less.  Sometimes, training vendors are all-to-willing to create a series of short e-modules because it’s the “cool” thing to do, rather than a more appropriate form of training for a given situation.  The irony is, the “cool” thing to do can cost more money for less total training time and less impact.

Summing Up

So, the key takeaways of all this are as follows:

• Modern westerners typically exhibit “Modern Learner” characteristics.
• These characteristics are the result of psychological conditioning, but learners’ biology has not changed a bit.
• Techniques for reaching Modern Leaners can be effective, but they must be used when appropriate.
• In general, these techniques are appropriate when imparting bits of knowledge (or skills) that are relatively independent of one another.
• They are less appropriate for complex skills training.

Good luck out there!

The post Are “Modern Learners” Really That Different? appeared first on Bull City Blue.

Part Two of a Two-Part Series

By Nathan Pienkowski

In Part I of this series, we discussed the fact that we humans have limits on what stimuli or information we can perceive and absorb.  Those limits manifest in three areas:  perception, attention, and cognition.  First, we have limits on what we can perceive.  Our brains do us a favor sub-consciously, shutting out stimuli that are not relevant to us.  Second, we consciously devote our attention to things that matter most to us.  Finally, comes cognition, our ability to retain and use information that we’ve perceived and to which we’ve given our attention.  In this article, we’ll outline some ways Learning & Development (L&D) professionals can deal with human limits on cognition.

The first thing to understand is that human limits on cognition exist and they are biologically based.  We can’t change them or “fix” them.  If a learning program attempts to cram too much information into learners’ heads, then they will be overloaded and some significant percentage of the information just won’t be retained.  The learners will prioritize for themselves what gets retained and what doesn’t or worse, they’ll just shut down altogether.

So, how can L&D pros work around these limits?  Below, we’ll review a few helpful tips.

Tip 1:  Don’t Overload Your Learners

Research has shown that most humans can only handle about 7 units of meaningful information at a time, plus or minus two.  For example, if someone were to read to you a list of 20 random numbers, and then ask you to recite them back, you’d most likely remember somewhere between 5 and 9 of the most recent ones.

Now, it’s highly unlikely that any of your learning programs will consist of having your learners remember random numbers.  However, the key point here is very important:  When teaching new material, try to set a limit of about 7 new ideas at any one time.  Any more than that, and you might outstrip your learners’ abilities to absorb the information.

Tip 2:  Organize Information into Clusters

This tip flows from the last one.  It’s a way to expand the amount of actual information that learners can retain, even within the “7 units” limitation.  To illustrate, let’s go back to the example with the 20 random numbers.  Now, suppose someone were to read a list of 20 different years to you (e.g. 1865, 1976, 2014, 1534, etc.).  Once again, you’d likely recall 5 to 9 of them.  However, within those 5 to 9 years would be somewhere between 20 and 36 digits.  By “chunking” the information into larger clusters of meaning (i.e., 4 digits get chunked into one year), we are able to increase the total amount of information a person can retain without violating any “laws” of human cognition.

L&D professionals can incorporate this technique into their programs in a wide range of ways.  For example, acronyms can be used as memory aids.  Remember how ROY G BIV taught us all about the colors of the rainbow?

Breaking explainer videos, presentations, or lectures into thematically linked units or sections is another way to use this technique.  The key point is this:  Organize related bits of information into clusters so that learners will have an easier time fitting it into their minds and retaining it.

Tip 3:  Make Learners Think About It

Assuming you’ve organized information into clusters, it pays to incorporate methods for “cementing” the information into learners’ minds at the end of each cluster.  One time-honored method of doing this is the quiz.  After a unit is done, learners are required to answer a few questions about the material they’ve just completed.  Quizzes are better than nothing, but they’re not ideal.  Mostly, they just push learners to recall information, and do very little to make them engage with it.

For maximum impact, we want learners to engage with the material and truly process new concepts.  Instead of quizzes, L&D professionals might ask learners something like: “Think of a time when you’ve seen Concept X in the real world.  Explain what happened and how it was resolved.”  Exercises like that go beyond simple recall and provide opportunities for learners to engage with the material in more meaningful ways.

Tip 4:  Spread Learning Out Over Time

Learners need time to engage with, process, and absorb new information or concepts.  It’s a mistake to pack too much information into one session or even one day.  The key point here is to design learning programs that take place over a time period that’s appropriate to the volume of new material.

Tip 5:  Use Repetition

Using repetition may sound like an “old school” learning technique that fell out of favor long ago.  However, we must never forget the “wisdom of the ancients.”  In certain cases, repetition works very well.

In particular, repetition is key when it comes to mastering a new skill.  “Practice makes perfect” is a truism because it’s…true.  The key is to deploy repetition when it’s appropriate.  Even then, don’t overdo it.  Too much repetition can turn any learning program into a mind-numbing experience.

The idea of using repetition goes beyond the workshop, e-course, or whatever.  Performance support efforts are, after all, a form of repetition to help cement new skills and encourage their continued application in the field.

Tip 6:  Associate New Concepts with Familiar Things

When teaching new concepts—particularly abstract ones—it is wise to help learners associate the new concepts with things that are already well-known and familiar to them.  Any time a learner can “fit” a new concept into a pre-existing mental framework, they will be much more likely to understand it.  For L&D professionals, it’s best to start with the familiar concept first, and then associate the new one with it.

There are a number of techniques that learning programs can use to put this tip into action.  Some examples are visualization techniques and analogies.

Tip 7:  Limit Visual Stimuli to Those that Relate to Your Goal

This tip takes a little bit of explaining.  In a way, it relates to Tip #2 (Organize information into clusters).  In particular, it’s relevant for learning programs that use visual aids, such as presentations, explainer videos, and so on.

Often, we want to teach concepts to learners in a sequence (i.e, First A, then B, then C, and so on).  Before moving on to B, we must first ensure that the learners fully grasp A, because B is likely dependent on A.

To help learners understand A, we might use a visual aid, diagram, etc.  That visual element may be on a slide in a presentation, a frame in a video, or something similar.

It’s important that everything in the visual aid act in service to explaining the concept.  In other words, don’t cram too much stuff into a given visual aid.  Everything in the visual should work to communicate and reinforce a key point or concept.  If you design a visual aid to do more than that, then you run the risk of overloading the learner, and you reduce the chance they’ll grasp the key point.

Overloaded visual aids force the learner to make decisions—either consciously or sub-consciously—about what they will see and retain.  In most cases, that’s ceding far too much control to the learner.  Good instructional designers will retain that control, and design aids that make it easy (automatic) for the learner to focus precisely on the key message, point, or concept at hand.

All of this may sound a little abstract, but the point is this:  Don’t ask too much of any single visual aid.  Focus it on one key point or concept, then move on to the next.

Conclusion

So, we all know that humans have cognitive limits.  As L&D pros, we need to find ways to work around those limits and, in some cases, even use them to our advantage.  Obviously, there’s no way a single article can provide a full exposition of human cognitive limits and the techniques for addressing them.  So, please feel free to share your thoughts, ideas, and techniques in the comments.

The post Dealing with the Limits on Human Perception, Attention, & Cognition, Part Two appeared first on Bull City Blue.