Both asynchronous and synchronous e-learning use a computer to facilitate learning, and Piskurich (2015) leans into this detail in our instructional design textbook. I want to explore both of these key delivery formats in this post. However, I think in today’s learning landscape, it's a confusing way to distinguish them. Therefore, for the purposes of this discussion, I will use the term eLearning (with a more modern spelling) to mean the asynchronous variety and VILT, for virtual instructor-led training for the synchronous version. Synchronous learningI’d like to talk about VILT first, because as part of a strategy for teaching your audience, it should come first, at least as a pilot. VILT is less expensive and time-consuming to develop. Piskurich mentions that the design doesn’t have to be perfect for VILT, since there is a facilitator, who can talk through any gaps in the design. While VILT can reach a wide audience, the number of learners is best limited to around 15 (or 20 at most with the right support) in each session. (Let’s recognize here that a webinar with a larger audience isn’t really about actual learning; it’s informational, and any learning is an accident.) However, Piskurich does point out that since it is synchronous, all learners and the facilitator have to be present at the same time. Though Piskurich mentions that these sessions can be recorded and shared with people in other time zones, I share his doubts that learners get much value from a recorded VILT. But I also accept that whether due to fear of missing out (FOMO) or that a box needs to be checked that someone has “done the learning”, these recordings will persist, though they are a poor substitute for being in a virtual classroom together.
Frequent mini-interactions and discussions are important. If VILT doesn’t engage the audience, you may as well give them a video to watch or an audio to listen to. The value of the classroom, whether it’s virtual or face-to-face, is the interaction from both instructor to student and student to instructor, as well as from student-to-student. Student-to-student learning can continue asynchronously in a community, but Piskurisch also makes some key points about the effort and maintenance required for an effective learning community. Asynchronous learningA well-designed eLearning program, on the other hand, does require a complete design that considers not only individual interactions but the context in which those interactions live. These asynchronous learning experiences can reach many more learners, in any time zone, whenever they like to learn. Even though eLearning may cost more initially and take longer to develop than learning with an instructor, the cost per learner can be significantly lower, especially if there is a very large audience. (For example, my potential audience for my job at Snyk can be thousands of developers at an individual customer account, and we have lots of customer accounts.) Cost per learner for a program is one of the factors in tying a learning program back to the business need it is meant to solve. There are plenty of examples of poorly designed eLearning out there. A few clicks, especially if they are only navigational, do not help learners learn. In order to create an eLearning experience that learners might actually want to learn from, it’s best to create opportunities for thoughtful interaction and practice. I highly recommend Michael Allen's Guide to E-Learning (2nd Edition) (2016) for some examples of interactions that get learners to think beyond consuming information. The other aspect of eLearning to consider as part of the design is that good learning experiences aren’t enough. Getting people to the right learning experiences for their needs and helping them understand how to make the most out of that experience is an important consideration. As Avramescu and Derington (2020) have said “If you build it, they won’t come.” In addition to making a learning experience that people actually want to learn from, you have to promote those experiences and connect them to learners where they need them. Reflections on Project AWhat worked well for Project A is working on a project where I had quite a bit of knowledge and interest. It was unlikely that I’d find something that met the project requirements from my work at Snyk. The courses I design for Snyk are mostly asynchronous eLearning of 10-30 minutes each, and between our business needs and our learner audience, a 3-hour course is impractical. It was great to find a client and need that fit my interests and allowed me to practice skills that I need to work on.
I did a good job with making my workshop interactive, but some of the activities didn’t go as well, and some of them felt forced for the sake of the project requirements. When I develop this course further, I will leave out Kahoot! altogether. Even though it’s engaging, it wasn’t right for this audience. I’m working on a completely different type of project for Project B, but will bring what I learned about the process from analysis, through design, development, implementation, and evaluation. It will be a different challenge that I’m looking forward to! References Allen, M. (2016). Michael Allen's Guide to E-Learning (2nd Edition). Wiley. Avramescu, A. & Derington, D. (2020, July 27). Customer Education Strategy: 6 principles for success. Customer Education Laboratories. https://customer.education/2020/07/customer-education-6-principles/ Piskurich, G. (2015). Rapid Instructional Design: Learning ID Fast and Right, 3rd Edition. Wiley.
0 Comments
|
AuthorMichele Wiedemer has worked in software as an "accidental instructional designer" for many years. She is currently completing the MS in Learning Technologies at The University of North Texas. This blog represents reflections on specific assignments in the coursework. Archives
February 2024
Categories |