[Instructional Design Topic] - "Un-learning"

Great question, Bruce.  This is a topic that I've been thinking about a lot lately.

We've recently made a change to our internal systems - seemed like it should be an easy enough switch.  So easy, that my team really focused upon simple job aids addressing simple functionality.

Turns out that my team really would've benefited from contrasting the new methods of using features with the old methods of using features.  We're getting a lot of questions like, "As usual, I press X to do Y; but, when I press X on the new phone it does Z instead." (well, duh... -- but, I should've known that they'd default to the familiar and comfortable)

Perhaps attempting to unlearn the old system in order to create a clean slate for the new system would've made the transition smoother?

A big part of unlearning or going about learning the "new" ways of a system is to have an excellent change management policy and team in place to make sure the project leads are looking the training as all encompassing and not just a "here's what's new.

@Bruce - when there's a change happening, I usually include a "what's changing" which contrasts old/new, as Colin describes: "here's how we do it now/old way and here's what we'll do in the future/new way". 

Do you have other techniques for unlearning? I didn't think I had any specifically, so I googled it. This is an interesting looking site: http://www.schoolofunlearning.com/ that I might mooch around in.

Great question/topic!

Hi,

Not so much even in an "old way" vs. "new way" scenario.

Imagine standard Sales or Compliance (aaargggh!) courses?

There's plenty of opportunity to show some "Worst Case" examples, and ask people why/how they came to be doing things in a certain way, (expecially if you know that there are many people who need "Behavioural Modification"!

Bruce

I try not to imagine those.

One of our designers was tasked with creating training for an updated (streamlined) procedure. Instead of the all-to-typical start ("This course shows you the new way of doing it..."), she starts the course by immediately launching into a scenario exhibiting the current procedure - which everyone already knows is clunky and far from streamlined. The course then admits that this procedure is inefficient and cumbersome (we feel your pain!) and, as such, has been improved.

She felt this approach would be much better in grabbing their attention and thus would improve their buy-in to the change.

This actually might be taking a step backwards from Bruce’s initial question…

When I first learned instructional design back in the mid 80's, one of the "decision points" we had to make was whether training was an appropriate solution for whatever the perceived training need was.

This focused on what we called the “performance discrepancy” or the difference between what folks were supposed to be doing versus what they were actually doing. The procedure we used was called “Performance Analysis.”

Here’s a link where you can view a high-level example:

ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NEDC/isd/app.pdf

If you read through the flowchart, you’ll see that many branches terminate in non-training solutions. But to Bruce’s point, I think this kind of analysis can pinpoint those things that need to change, when training or reinforcement is the appropriate solution.

Now, does that mean that in our training we should describe the “bad” way of doing something before presenting the “good” way of doing it?

Perhaps… but carefully!

If, for example, we say to the learner, “you need to unlearn this behavior…” are we not telling that learner, “You’re doing it wrong?”

But consider whether the ENTIRE target population is actually doing it “wrong.” If not, then you run the risk of “calling out” one part of the population, and leaving the other part saying, “Well, I wasn’t doing it that way to begin with; this was a waste of my time.”

On the other hand, if we were to present a contrast between two methods of performing a task – not denigrating or promoting either one – you could put yourself in the position to be able to say, “Of these two procedures, which is (fill in the blank with): easier, faster, more efficient, less expensive, or more rewarding?”

I think the latter is safer than the former – but every job is different. I think the best path is to think it out for any given issue, and beware of unexpected consequences.

Good point Dave, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of a new process/system being introduced where old/new makes sense. In the situations where its more behavioural it has to be more subtsubtle/nuanced. Training/a course is a small part of a behaviour mod program. Feedback is critical in these situations isn't it?

This discussion brought to mind one of the ideas that was new to me when I took my ID courses (QUITE some time ago ), which was the idea of using examples and non-examples. I LOVED this idea, and I think it could apply here. In the process of Googling this just now, I came across a post by Connie Malamed (@elearningcoach) entitled "6 Proven Ways to Use Examples and Nonexamples."

In this post she discusses how you might use example and nonexamples in a course on sexual harassment. This is a great example of a common compliance course where some "unlearning" might need to take place.

I would add (along the lines of what Dave said) that we should be asking not just WHAT the current state is, but WHY.   If there’s no clear and “official” change happening (e.g., new software implementation) but behavioral change is desired, what is causing the gap between the current state and the desired future state?  The answer will – or should! – determine whether training is the right course of action. 

But maybe they're doing Y because they don’t understand the value of doing X – in which case I think maybe scenario-based training could address this.    As Bruce suggests, it could be helpful to show some "Worst Case" examples, and I’d suggest that in addition to addressing what led to people doing things the current way, we’d also want to emphasize the negative effect of doing them that way (or the positive effects of doing them another way).

TOTALLY agree on the upfront performance consulting to determine cause before designing training.

If we are sure that there are skill deficiencies, then I think the unlearning question is still relevant. One method that could be used to "unlearn" is to film them and use a progressive "reveal" type of reflection. I have used video in classroom sales sessions where we use it as a baseline and then successively learn-practice-film-feedback through various techniques. I'm not sure how this would be emulated in a fully self-directed e-learning option, but I could see it working as a blending learning solution. I suppose you could include instructions to leave the course, do filming/upload/connect with a "coach" as almost a graduated course offering. Can you see a way to do this in a self-directed course without blending? 

Holly

Hi Holly, 

Building on this, it would also be fun, and perhaps very productive to film some real people/actors using the old "pixelated face" output to show something being done incorrectly, or video of something being trained "...in the usual way...", and then pointing out the defecits.

Bruce

I think about this very issue in the development of every course, elearning or instructor led. My current course includes slides to re-educate people on past behavior as well as teach them about the newly introduced tools.  And I frequently use real-life scenarios that compare a less than successful past behavior with recommendations for using the new tools to effect a more positive outcome.

And also include some incentive for Why their past behavior should change. I always learned that this was one of the biggest challenges in adult learning. Kids go to school because they have to make a grade and its the law. But why should my coworkers take enough interest to actually learn the content (rather than merely click through the slides) or better still use the newly acquired info in their daily work?  I have an entire scene in my newest course that speaks to this issue: Why learning this content will translate into positive outcomes for their career and for the company.  I never assume that people 'want' to take a required course.

I used to teach to an EU Disaster Management Course where the students were mostly experienced field operators advancing to team leader roles. As you can imagine each country had its own way of doing things, the students knew what worked for them in a national but not necessarily in a multi-national environment and the European Commission preferred not to dictate solutions. The course was based on an enduring practical scenario interspersed with presentations to focus on particular issues (my specialisation was security and information management). No set doctrine to teach sounds great, but is open to heated debate, ego tantrums and a 'this is the way we do it' mentality in some.

To get the students on side, I found questions similar to the following often assisted and it may offer something to consider for an e-learning opening (survey?):

"How many of you drive a car?" (nearly all raise their hands).

"How many of you are good drivers - that is, you can get from A to B most of the time without an accident that you cause?" (most hands remain raised).

"That's great! OK, so if I asked you to take a driving test this afternoon and if you fail you lose your license for a year, how many of you are confident that you would pass?" (This regularly caused most - but not all - hands to fall).

The point that I made was that we all form bad habits or follow the custom without necessarily recognising those habits or considering whether there is a better way to do things. This at least opened minds to the exploration of alternatives which is preferable to closed minds and force feeding alternatives.

By the way, those students who kept their hands raised, frequently turned out to be the ones with closed minds and who were the most challenging during the course. No problem with that but peer pressure from those who were prepared to experiment often succeeded to open beligerant minds (comments, survey results, non-definitive feedback/suggestions or try this alternative branching may be appropriate mechanisms for e-learning). I saw my role as simply to facilitate learning, not to dictate solutions.

"Unlearning" is perhaps one of the most difficult things for a person to do, because the challenge lies in helping a person to recognize, as Sam pointed out above, that they haven't necessarily been doing it "wrong", but have developed "bad habits" along the way, and that those habits need to change.

In the latter half of my teenage years, I studied a form of Kung-Fu, and was routinely reminded that I had lots of "unlearning" to do.  After embracing the concept, and seeing results, it was easy to live in that head space.  ...but I'm not sure I could do it now.  Hmmm...but even in thinking about it, I see places for improvements already.

To apply such a concept to eLearning would be a FABULOUS idea...the trick, would have to be keying in on the right approach for a given scenario.

GREAT topic!

Sam, I really like your "bad habits" idea, because it's something most of us can relate to, and it feels less judgmental than just plain old, "you're doing this wrong, here's the right way." It removes a lot of the blame. We all get stale with routinely performed tasks, let's find out where those "stalemates" are and move forward. Thanks! That's a takeaway for me.