just wondering how anyone who does a blended offering positions it-- we say we deploy elearning as covering off on the theory & basic concepts and then use the face to face sessions as interactive workshops (as opposed to instructor-led)-- the value is that the learners all start more from the same place and that we can really crack into the business objectives in a workshop (are learners are very alpha learn by doing types)
In a previous life I used to promote internal (sales) eLearning.
My model was this:
1> You start Sales Conferences at 0900hrs (most have stayed overnight), but in reality people are still coming in at 1000hrs).
2> You break at 1030hrs for coffee. People disappear to take calls.
3> 1030hrs - 1230 hrs is "catch-up and repeat", and the rest of the "stuff
4> At 1230 people start getting restless doing emails, and thinking about lunch.
5> At 1400hrs you start the REAL day.
"...If you do all the "stuff" as eLearning, make attendance dependent on completion and testing (sorry - sad but true....), then you can start properly at 1000hrs, and anyone who is late is a disruption and gets sever peer-related disapproval..."
It did not always work, but by heck it improved the odds, and the 1030hrs start meant that in most cases we cut out $ overnight stay x number of attendees (@ about 85%). Much easier to keep hearts and minds corralled when they are in a workshop!
As you said - "...we can really crack into the business objectives in a workshop..."
Both e-learning and face-to-face has its own benefits. While E-learning saves lot of time and money, face to face interaction gives you a better understanding of any issue. Programs giving both options will be more beneficial.
Both e-learning and face-to-face has its own benefits. While E-learning saves lot of time and money, face to face interaction gives you a better understanding of any issue. Programs giving both options will be more beneficial.
Maybe....
A 5-minute online course to update the (small) business with ONE new message? Certainly costs more than the 2 x weekly Meetings that everyone attends.
The weekly meeting would not help anyone understand more......
BUT - there is a "one message for all" which is THE SAME FOR everyone, which is where the benefits are.
Programs giving both options will be more beneficial only if it is more beneficial (measured by what exactly...?) to do it that way.
Great topic and I'm a big fan of this method and I've done it a couple of ways. We had a 3 day training conference that included flying everyone in and then filling their heads with more information and instruction than they could possibly process. The team was very knowledgable in their field but they were trying to take everyone from novice to expert in this short time period. Some did ok. Most just got very very frustrated. We reworked the entire program to several eLearning courses that covered all of the concepts and basic processes. We scheduled some web-x Q&A sessions in between. After completing that part of the program we conducted a one day workshop to really crack into the business objectivesand build on the foundation that was already there. The difference was drastic. It was better for the learners AND saved the company a great deal of money.
Now I'm working on how to execute something similar with an international audience and a live, online workshop. Not every topic warrants international travel expenses but it's a challenge to completely replicate that in-person interaction.
We do this often. Most of the training I do is technical in nature and we use eLearning for over views, operational theory, and software simulations. This is frequently coupled with instructor led hands on training most often focused on hardware and true "screwdriver time" for our workforce. Sometimes the eLearning takes place prior to attending class and other times it happens in the classroom and is facilitated. We also use eLearning for a performance support tool for previously trained associates to communicate new information, adjustments and repairs on things they have been trained to work on.
What I really like about this method is that is gives the learner time to actually process in stages. My topics are also technical in nature and when every single thing you’re telling the learner is new- from terminology to basic navigation, it's much harder to get to the business objectives when they’re still trying to keep up with how you’re even getting to that screen. If they come to the workshops with just the most base level familiarity with the topic, it is a much more effective use of face-to-face time where we can then focus on the next level of instruction and build on what they already know.
Even if the topic is not technical, I agree with Bud in the value is that the learners all start more from the same place.
On top of that, the eLearning method at least gives the learners the opportunity to get to that place at their own speed.
This is why I LOVE this community-- highly insightful commentary from all! Thanks Bruce and Natalia-- I have made note of both your suggestions (scheduling and using webx as an interstitial learning component)-- great stuff! Many thanks!
One of the things you can do is have your students do some Pre-course work on line so that they do not come into the class without basic terms, policies, or information that will be needed to proceed with the classroom work.
One of the things you can do is have your students do some Pre-course work on line so that they do not come into the class without basic terms, policies, or information that will be needed to proceed with the classroom work.
I like the idea of having some pre-work organised in preparation for some intro activity-- will have a think about this!
I develop eLearning in a large community services organisation where the most common blend is currently as follows:
eLearning prerequisite task/s to create a context of theory, content and practice dilemmas for reflection
a task based on the eLearning context is set for completion with a selected client at their workplace requiring guidance and a sign off by a mentor
Powerful learning and reinforcement through facilitated face-to-face (sometimes even through video conferencing) group discussion, sharing of perspectives and reflection on professional practice.
yeah, there is much difference in eLearning and face to face. I face to face you can come up with full confidence and ask what ever you want but in the hidden camera you also disobey and your student-teacher relationship is not much batter.
11 Replies
Hi Bud,
In a previous life I used to promote internal (sales) eLearning.
My model was this:
1> You start Sales Conferences at 0900hrs (most have stayed overnight), but in reality people are still coming in at 1000hrs).
2> You break at 1030hrs for coffee. People disappear to take calls.
3> 1030hrs - 1230 hrs is "catch-up and repeat", and the rest of the "stuff
4> At 1230 people start getting restless doing emails, and thinking about lunch.
5> At 1400hrs you start the REAL day.
"...If you do all the "stuff" as eLearning, make attendance dependent on completion and testing (sorry - sad but true....), then you can start properly at 1000hrs, and anyone who is late is a disruption and gets sever peer-related disapproval..."
It did not always work, but by heck it improved the odds, and the 1030hrs start meant that in most cases we cut out $ overnight stay x number of attendees (@ about 85%). Much easier to keep hearts and minds corralled when they are in a workshop!
As you said - "...we can really crack into the business objectives in a workshop..."
Spot on.
Bruce
Both e-learning and face-to-face has its own benefits. While E-learning saves lot of time and money, face to face interaction gives you a better understanding of any issue. Programs giving both options will be more beneficial.
Maybe....
A 5-minute online course to update the (small) business with ONE new message? Certainly costs more than the 2 x weekly Meetings that everyone attends.
The weekly meeting would not help anyone understand more......
BUT - there is a "one message for all" which is THE SAME FOR everyone, which is where the benefits are.
Programs giving both options will be more beneficial only if it is more beneficial (measured by what exactly...?) to do it that way.
Welcome to the Heroes Community.
Bruce
Hi Bud,
Great topic and I'm a big fan of this method and I've done it a couple of ways. We had a 3 day training conference that included flying everyone in and then filling their heads with more information and instruction than they could possibly process. The team was very knowledgable in their field but they were trying to take everyone from novice to expert in this short time period. Some did ok. Most just got very very frustrated. We reworked the entire program to several eLearning courses that covered all of the concepts and basic processes. We scheduled some web-x Q&A sessions in between. After completing that part of the program we conducted a one day workshop to really crack into the business objectives and build on the foundation that was already there. The difference was drastic. It was better for the learners AND saved the company a great deal of money.
Now I'm working on how to execute something similar with an international audience and a live, online workshop. Not every topic warrants international travel expenses but it's a challenge to completely replicate that in-person interaction.
We do this often. Most of the training I do is technical in nature and we use eLearning for over views, operational theory, and software simulations. This is frequently coupled with instructor led hands on training most often focused on hardware and true "screwdriver time" for our workforce. Sometimes the eLearning takes place prior to attending class and other times it happens in the classroom and is facilitated. We also use eLearning for a performance support tool for previously trained associates to communicate new information, adjustments and repairs on things they have been trained to work on.
What I really like about this method is that is gives the learner time to actually process in stages. My topics are also technical in nature and when every single thing you’re telling the learner is new- from terminology to basic navigation, it's much harder to get to the business objectives when they’re still trying to keep up with how you’re even getting to that screen. If they come to the workshops with just the most base level familiarity with the topic, it is a much more effective use of face-to-face time where we can then focus on the next level of instruction and build on what they already know.
Even if the topic is not technical, I agree with Bud in the value is that the learners all start more from the same place.
On top of that, the eLearning method at least gives the learners the opportunity to get to that place at their own speed.
This is why I LOVE this community-- highly insightful commentary from all! Thanks Bruce and Natalia-- I have made note of both your suggestions (scheduling and using webx as an interstitial learning component)-- great stuff! Many thanks!
One of the things you can do is have your students do some Pre-course work on line so that they do not come into the class without basic terms, policies, or information that will be needed to proceed with the classroom work.
I develop eLearning in a large community services organisation where the most common blend is currently as follows:
yeah, there is much difference in eLearning and face to face. I face to face you can come up with full confidence and ask what ever you want but in the hidden camera you also disobey and your student-teacher relationship is not much batter.