Emphasis on instructional design
The guidance this table provides does not mean that a presentation tool on the low end of the scale can’t support a higher proficiency for a given skill or competency. With a skill that is fairly limited in scope, and given excellent instructional design, even a simple development tool that largely meets the definition in Category 1 can suffice. Conversely, more complex tools can be underused; something with the robust potential of a course management system (category 4) can be designed to create little more than an online lecture.
There are two main issues that affect the category in which an e-Learning development or delivery tool may best fit. The first is the tool’s ability to support an appropriate level of learner activity or performance to fit the desired proficiency level. On the table, this goes from simple multiple-choice and true-false questions up to an immersed simulated performance assessment. The second is the ability of the tool to achieve complex objectives (such as those on the upper end of a taxonomy) or its ability to support a complex network of objectives (such as a series of supporting, enabling, and terminal objectives). While both of these issues rely on the functionality available in the development tool, they are also both heavily dependent on sound instructional design in the use of the tool. This emphasizes the importance of strong designers and developers applying instructional design principles to well-designed tools.
Performance-Based Design Formula
My favorite formula for performance-based design is the following:
- Framework
- Performance
- Reflection
- Repeat
It may sound like the instructions on the back of your shampoo bottle, but its simplicity means it can apply to virtually any learning situation and any learning media. The intent of this particular formula is to get training to reach the higher end of the proficiency scale. Table 2 describes how it works.
|
Framework |
This is the structure and the expectations of the intended performance. In any given training session, this is probably the briefest section. It may include an introduction to how to use information and resources related to the performance, but note that this is not a teaching session or presentation on the content of those resources. This is an important distinction in today's society where information is readily available and easily modified. Information available to us can change regularly, but the work we perform remains much more static. Spending valuable training time learning (or attempting to memorize) the content of an information source that can change tomorrow is a waste when the real value comes from performance. |
|
Performance |
In performance-based training the information is not ignored or left out; it is simply learned within the context of the performance rather than in isolation (and reinforced in the next section on Reflection). This means that the "exercise" starts much earlier in the training than it would in an information-based course. This can be frustrating and uncomfortable at times for learners. They are intentionally being thrust into a performance situation for which they may not feel prepared, but that's precisely the point! Learners should be able to face this anxiety in a safe training situation first, and learn from it. |
|
Reflection |
This is an extremely important part of learning. It is an opportunity for learners to analyze and evaluate their own performance (and their peers, if applicable) to determine what they would do differently next time. This is the time for them to articulate what they have learned, and most importantly, to learn from their mistakes. Instructors need to coach learners to draw their own conclusions, but it is also the time when instructors can provide some help if those tips help them learn and apply them next time. You'll notice that this is probably the most valuable time for the instructor to provide actual instruction, in that it is now being provided in a meaningful context rather than in isolation. |
|
Repeat |
This is the "next time." Instead of being given just one (or few) opportunities to practice the performance, performance-based training affords many chances. Not only should the next time be a new opportunity to apply skills (not a repeat of the same situation), but new performance opportunities may also increase in complexity. For example: the Framework portion may include a new information source or tool, or the Performance portion may introduce new variables. |
Examples
Now consider how running an analysis for the best tool for performance, and having a performance-based design strategy, impacts your development. The following examples show different ways of using, and even combining, the e-Learning categories to aim for higher proficiency.
Example – Education accreditation training, online synchronous/asynchronous (e.g., a Course Management System):
- Framework – A synchronous discussion allows the instructor to introduce the resources needed, including policies on accreditation, checklists and standards they will need to follow, and instruction on what the expectations are for the first scenario.
- Performance – Place learners into small working groups in designated online areas with synchronous and asynchronous tools, and direct them to school blueprints, curriculum, teacher qualifications, and administrator qualifications for an elementary school that they will evaluate for accreditation. Learners work independently to study documents (taking any available training tutorial needed), and then work together to create and then upload their evaluation of the school.
- Reflection – Learners can now review the uploaded evaluations of the other groups to compare their work. The small groups participate in synchronous discussions among themselves to decide what they would do differently, what they liked best or least about other evaluations, and may even work to change and resubmit their own evaluation. The instructor also leads an asynchronous discussion with the entire class about the activity.
- Repeat – The next performance sessions will have new or more complex situations, such as a private school with children as young as 18-months old, or a state university.
Example – Flight Training, blended:
- Framework – This course is broken into an online portion and a classroom/field portion. The instructor provides an overview of the software required to download, the online environment and resources, and what to expect for the simulations and the actual flights when they arrive at the field.
- Performance – Learners individually complete a series of computer-based flight simulations and upload a self-evaluation of their flights. Tutorials about various equipment and procedures are available on the site for learners who need it.
- Reflection – Instructors lead asynchronous discussions on each flight with the entire class. Learners can also have synchronous or asynchronous discussions with other learners about their flights.
- Repeat – The computer-based simulations get more and more complex, and eventually, when the class meets at the airfield, they transition to live flights with the instructor where flights, checklists, and evaluations are live.
Example – Spreadsheet software, Web-based instruction (no instructor)
- Framework – This course has no instructor, so the course starts the Framework section by introducing the learner to the software environment, and provides an overview of how the scenarios will run and how to access help as they go along.
- Performance – The first scenario is to create a simple balance sheet, and it provides figures and criteria for the learner to use as a guide. Links to help and common questions are also provided in case the learner needs assistance.
- Reflection – This course has no live interaction with other learners or an instructor, so this phase is imitation. The software provides a list of common errors related to this scenario for the learner to browse and select any errors that s/he made. A software-based evaluation is also conducted. Learners are then given solutions for each error they made from the previously selected list – since there may be several possible solutions for each error, the learner selects which solution they want to use and can see a tutorial of the solution, or even go back to their scenario to apply the solution themselves. The software also keeps track of most commonly applied or preferred solutions based on other learner who have taken the same training.
- Repeat – Scenarios get more and more complex as the learner advances through the spreadsheet training. Common error lists and evaluations correspond to each scenario.
Conclusion
A point that has been made so many times that it sounds trite – the use of a fancy new tool does not automatically translate to a good end product. Like an unschooled architect building a home, someone could very logically use the given tools to build a structure that doesn’t end up having a logical function: for example, placing all of the doors on the first floor and all of the windows on the second floor. But even more so than houses, people are complex, and you can’t expect instructional miracles out of a simple Web-based slide show.
Competency models give us a way to associate learning with real business performance that gives our analysis and design a solid foundation. We have the potential to get past ROI that simply places value on counting courses taken and seats filled, or that subtracts travel dollars from the budget.
