Tag Archives: custom developers

Why Pay Attention to Games?

February 2, 2018Blogadult learning, behavior change, blended approach, blended elearning, business results, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning company, custom elearning solutions, elearning, instructional design, workplace learningClaudia

Games are masters at engaging us. The success of “The Legend of Zelda,” “World of Warcraft,” “Second Life” and “Candy Crush” bears witness to this.

Because of that success, gamification — the strategy of bringing elements of a game to real-world experiences — has become a buzzword in the learning world.

There is evidence that games, composed of goals, rules and interactions that involve mental or physical stimulation, have been around since 2600 B.C. They are present in virtually all cultures, precisely for their ability to engage. They engage us to learn, act, fail and repeat this process toward the achievement of a self-accepted goal, out of our own free will or volition. According to Jane McGonigal, author of “Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World,” this free will is manifested in the more than 3 billion hours a week people spend gaming globally.

Researchers say the main reason we engage in games is because of their ability to appeal to our intrinsic desires or motivators. Motivational factors can have a direct effect on learning transfer. Motivation involves self-efficacy, a cognitive force concerned with what an individual can do rather than what skills he or she may actually possess. In other words, self-efficacy is the judgment an individual makes about his or her abilities to perform a given task. In games, self-efficacy manifests when people continuously re-engage, even after failing repeatedly, because they believe they will succeed in the next round, life or level.

Game designers use strategies to leverage intrinsic motivators to attain long-term engagement. McGonigal classifies these motivators into four categories: achieving satisfying work, experiencing success or the opportunity of success, making social connections and having purpose or meaning.

Satisfying work is defined as work that produces desirable and visible results. The opportunity and hope of achieving success is a powerful stimulus that feeds our desire to improve. Social connections allow us to be recognized and appreciated, both powerful motivators. Having purpose or meaning is perhaps the most powerful motivator since, when something bigger than ourselves drives us, we are better able to overcome obstacles.

There is no doubt that awareness is growing about the benefits of appealing to intrinsic motivators to engage individuals in learning programs and ensure successful learning transfer. Our challenge in the corporate learning and development arena is to seize opportunities in which we can find creative, innovative and cost-effective ways to leverage intrinsic motivators.

To help learning and development practitioners in this endeavor, the first step is to continue to study how game designers creatively make participants learn, act, fail and repeat this process out of their own free will until they reach a predetermined goal.

A happy and successful 2018!

January 2, 2018Blogadult learning, blended elearning, blended learning, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, custom elearning company, training, training programs, workplace learningClaudia

Thank you for trusting us with your learning needs and for inviting us to collaborate and contribute to your success.

Wishing our Facilitador friends and family a healthy, happy, inspiring and amazing 2018!

Are you Encouraging or Discouraging Your Learners?

June 29, 2016Blogadult learning, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, custom elearning company, employee training, instructional design, training, training and development, training programs, workplace learningClaudia

I may learn something new but it doesn’t necessarily mean that I am ready to apply it. Many times I learned great concepts that made sense and was eager to use or implement. However, when I tried using them for the first time, reality hit. I was bombarded with all the variables that reality brings and it was not easy to actually apply what I had just learned.

When this happens, research tells us that this discourages individuals from attempting to apply what they learned again. As adult learners we are sensitive about making a fool out of ourselves and especially in front of others. The result is that the concept I was thrilled to implement goes to waste.

What do we do as instructional designers if we don’t have the budgets or the time to build full-fledged simulations that try to recreate reality?

I want to suggest that the key is to consider the following question:

How will the learners use the knowledge when they are back on the job?

Given the answer, you can then devise strategies for providing scaffolds that support the acquisition of competence in the application of the new knowledge. Think of training wheels for a bicycle so that the learner can feel confident they won’t fall or make a fool of themselves in attempting to apply the new knowledge. This way, you can prevent your learners from becoming discouraged to apply what they’ve learned.

Can a Question Demonstrate the Value of Learning?

May 31, 2016Blogaccountability, adult learning, assessments, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, custom elearning company, custom elearning solutions, custome elearning development, customized elearning, employee training, evaluation, instructional design, learning evaluation, measurement, surveys, training, training and development, training programs, workplace learningClaudia

If we start from the premise that any training or learning and development investment is an investment in the individuals that participate in that training event, then it follows that those individuals are the ones who are best suited to determine the worth and merit of that training event. Isn’t this obvious and don’t most organizations allow for that? The answer is sadly no.

Surveying the participants is definitely the right move but not before, during or immediately after the training event. It is about allowing a span of time to pass so integration or learning transfer occurs. It is only when the participants are back on their jobs facing the realities of unexpected challenges and ever-changing conditions that they can determine how the training investment better equipped them to succeed. This determination may change with time and this is why it makes sense to measure it more than once at different intervals.

Therefore, what is the question we need to ask at different intervals after the training event? The answers to this two-part question, when documented and systematically organized, can demonstrate the link between learning investments and positive business results. We’d like to suggest it is: Since you participated in XYZ training event, how have you improved yourself and what results have you achieved due to those improvements?

It really can be that simple.

To learn more about this approach, take a look at our new article in CLO Magazine on the value of documentation: http://bit.ly/1OtIqRd

Don’t Lose Focus: Optimizing Technical Training for the Business

April 7, 2016Blogadult learning, blended approach, blended learning, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, effective, instructional design, technical training, training and development, training programs, video training, workplace learningClaudia

Optimizing technical training for the business is a challenge that learning and development departments must meet in order to advance the goals of the organization. Usually a lot of technical information is available and it is not easy to discern and identify what needs to be taught to each of the different employee groups or stakeholders such as front-line leaders, marketing and sales departments or distributors.

Usually technical teams will have the best intentions and these are manifested in their desire to be thorough and cover everything possible about the given technical process, product or service. These good intentions lead to the creation of training programs that contain a lot of data and information. Essentially, I have seen these training programs become what I refer to as an information dump – and sometimes they can be pretty stinky!

Life can be easier for the technical team and for the training team if they consider the first question of our guiding principles when designing training programs. This question is: How will the learners use the knowledge when they are back in their job? Answering this question from the perspective of each different group of employees and stakeholders allows instructional designers to start identifying what will be most useful. In addition, by considering these different perspectives we can create guidelines for the subject matter experts (SMEs) to discern what of their expertise will be most useful. For example, if the stakeholders are managers, SMEs would put more emphasis on the technical knowledge needed to manage the technology and less towards understanding all the details of the technology.

As obvious as this sounds, it is important to focus on what is important for the “other”. It is not about the “I” (what I think is important as a technical expert), rather it is about what information is a “need-to-know” for the learner to achieve peak performance at their specific position within the organization.

Celebrity Chefs versus Celebrity Instructional Designers?

January 28, 2016Blogadult learning, behavior change, blended approach, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, effective, flow, instructional design, learning, live virtual classroom, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, training and development, training programsClaudia

It is not a secret that chefs have experienced a steep rise to celebrity status with their ability to reach millions of people through multimedia channels. By creating new dishes and combining new flavors, these chefs offer their craft as art, each infused with their own personality, to deliver unique eating experiences that adapt and evolve with ever-changing trends and tastes.

Instructional designers have experienced the rise of the Internet, mobile devices and an ever increasing array of software tools and platforms giving them the ability to reach more learners in different ways than ever before. There appears to be a parallel between the creative work of the chef and the creative work of the instructional designer when developing either elearning, virtual classroom, instructor-led training or any blended training and development program.

Let’s start with success. The success of the chef is delivering a great (delicious) eating experience. The success of the instructional designer is delivering an effective learning experience. Defining an effective learning experience can merit an article on its own but let’s extrapolate a definition from the model of personal development of the Center for Creative Leadership which states that you must strike the right balance between: challenging, supporting, and evaluating individuals. This would mean that instructional designers must deliver recipes that strike the right balance between these three factors.

The chef uses the best ingredients and brings them together to create palate bliss. For the instructional designer, the ingredients are the principles of adult learning and the subject matter. The instructional designer has to use the principles of adult learning and the subject matter expertise to deliver a learning experience that will strike the right balance between challenging, supporting and evaluating the learner. When this balance is achieved, the instructional designer can generate the state of flow in the learners. Otherwise, individuals will be either bored if not challenged, worried if not supported, or lost if not evaluated. As an illustration, here is a graph from Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi that depicts the emotional state of the learner depending on the level of challenge versus skill level.

Every time an instructional designer delivers a learning experience that generates flow within the learners, they have created learning bliss, much like the celebrity chef creates palate bliss when the delicacies are consumed. So to all the instructional designers who every day strive to become celebrities: bon appétit!

When you Ass-u-me: Adult Learning and Motivation

November 24, 2015Blogadult learning, Assume, behavior change, blended elearning, carl rogers, content development, custom, custom content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, custom elearning company, elearning, extrinsic, face-to-face instruction, Felix Unger, instructional design, intrinsic, lindeman, live virtual classroom, The Odd Couple, training, training and development, training programsClaudia

The Problem

Can you train an adult who is not motivated to be trained? Can you motivate an adult to learn? Anybody who has trained adults will tell you that when motivation is present learning occurs, one way or another, because the individual will be able to overcome frustration, disappointment or any other obstacle that gets in the way. The opposite is also true: when motivation is not present it is practically impossible to train someone.

So if motivation is essential, why do we forget as instructional designers to incorporate methods to motivate individuals to make the best of the training and development programs we create? In my opinion the culprit is assuming our learners are motivated to learn. As Felix Unger in an episode of The Odd Couple says: “When you ass-u-me you make an ‘ass of u and me’!”

The Research

The fact that motivation is important for adults is not new. E.C. Lindeman’s in The Meaning of Adult Education in 1926 noted that adults are motivated to learn as they experience needs. The late renowned psychologist, Carl R. Rogers, stated that adults will learn only those things they perceive will help them enhance themselves, clearly underlining the value of relevancy for the adult learner. Recent research has summed it up to two basic questions adults will ask themselves before they engage in learning:

Is it worth it?
Can I do it?

The first question hits on the concept of motivation, since the adult learner is asking if what they are about to learn is worth their time and effort.

How to Avoid It

As good instructional designers we have to start by understanding our audience and their motivation and can’t simply assume individuals are motivated to learn because the training program is mandatory, necessary for advancement, or a high-potential leadership development program, for example. We need to incorporate strategies that address the needs for adult learners to align their own needs, aspirations and desires with the objectives of the elearning, virtual classroom, instructor-led, game, simulation or blended training program we are designing. It starts with basic questions such as:

— Have we done a good job in sharing how individuals will benefit? (This question addresses the external or extrinsic motivators that may be leveraged).

— Have we shared how others have benefited and what they have been able to accomplish? (This question is intended to ensure the creation of a vicarious experience that leads the learner to determine that it can be done).

— Have we leveraged communication, recognition, or other strategies to stimulate positive behavior before, during and after the training? (This question addresses the internal or intrinsic motivators).

In summary, have we respected the need for the adult learners to question the importance of the training program and provided satisfactory answers along the way that align with their own agenda? Remember what Oscar said: never assume that these strategies are in place. Assume they are not and embed them to ensure your learners always find their motivation.

“Another Brick in the Wall”: Adult Learning versus Pedagogy

October 30, 2015Blogadult learning, blended approach, blended elearning, business results, business value, custom content development, custom developers, custom elearning, custom elearning company, custom elearning solutions, e-learning, elearning, employee training, facilitator, instructional design, malcolm knowl, pink floydClaudia

Adult learners have suffered under the spell of pedagogy for many years. It is time for instructional designers to take an active role in making sure executives and those around them understand the fundamental differences between adult learning and pedagogy.

The word “pedagogy” is derived from the Greek words paid, meaning child (the same origin as the word “pediatrician”) and agogus, meaning “leader of”. In essence, pedagogy means the art and science of teaching children. This model of education has been around for a long time (started between the seventh and twelfth centuries evolving from the monastic and cathedral schools in Europe) and it has remained the dominant model of education since. Still today, there are millions of adults being taught like children.

What is the problem with teaching adults like children? There are quite a few, but I want to focus on the most fundamental one in my opinion. In the pedagogical model, the teacher is assigned the full responsibility for the what, the when and the how of the learning that is to take place. It is a teacher-directed education where the learner essentially takes a passive role. And this is where the problem begins. As an adult, we have the need to be self-directed, as Malcolm Knowles emphasized, because being an adult in the first place, according to its psychological definition, is to arrive at the self-concept that we are responsible for our own lives.

In other words, if we break this paradigm and make the clear distinction between adult learning and the pedagogical model, we would start by shifting the responsibility of the learning back to the learner or the adult. We have seen learning and development departments designing eLearning courses, instructor-led training, virtual classroom sessions, and blended learning programs where little to none of the responsibility has been given to the learner. Basic steps to provide the learner with a sense of self-directedness are missing.

An effective instructional designer needs to start by thinking how the learners can take ownership for what is to be learned and how to facilitate* this process. Specific techniques, like allowing learners to pick and choose different delivery methods or engaging in different learning activities that are part of a bigger picture, make a difference and have an impact on the bottom line. Recently, we implemented a simple strategy in this direction at a global manufacturing company which resulted in increased productivity. We assigned ownership to the learners of creating their own support manual relevant to their own needs, thereby reducing their dependency on external support while improving their productivity.

To summarize and extrapolate from Pink Floyd’s Another Brick in the Wall, “Hey! Teachers! Leave them <adults> alone!” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR5ApYxkU-U

*Facilitator – We can’t force an adult to learn anything but we can facilitate the access to knowledge for those who want it. This concept is behind our name Facilitador, which means facilitator in various languages.

The King of eLearning: Blended

August 31, 2015Blogbehavior change, blended approach, blended elearning, blended learning, content development, custom developers, custom e-Learning, custom elearning, custom elearning company, customized elearning, employee training, face-to-face instruction, live virtual classroom, training and developmentClaudia

Have you heard the talk when it comes to eLearning that says: “It rarely lives up to its expectations“?

In the mid-90’s and early 2000’s the talk was clear: eLearning would take over the world! Then came the fact that it was self-paced e-learning that was going to give corporations an effective, efficient and economical way of distributing knowledge across the corporation. Then reality struck. Completion rates of self-paced eLearning when not mandatory were below 5% in most organizations and people were complaining left and right when told to take any eLearning course.

It appears that most people forgot that not all eLearning is created equal. There were many electronic page turners (EPT) that were given the name of “eLearning” and since many corporate learning and development departments who purchase and develop eLearning don’t actually consume it (or take it), these EPTs would make it past them. (We jokingly call this “the dog food syndrome” because the owner of the dog – who buys the dog food – doesn’t actually consume it). These EPTs reinforced the perception that eLearning was just not living up to anybody’s expectations evidenced by dismal completion rates and low satisfaction scores.

The bright stars in all of this were the organizations that invested in the right instructional design resources and built real online self-paced interactive learning experiences. This weeded out the organizations that were serious about leveraging the eLearning medium from the ones that didn’t. However, there is a way to ensure that eLearning lives up to its expectations even if we dare call EPTs eLearning, and that is to make eLearning or EPTs part of a blended approach. Obviously, a well developed, instructionally sound course will be able to support a blended approach better than an EPT but both can be designed into a blended approach that doesn’t rely exclusively on the eLearning or the EPT to be effective but on a blended strategy that leverages other mediums like face-to-face instruction, live virtual classrooms, and experiential learning opportunities to achieve tangible results. The concept is that in order for simple eLearning to be king and live up to its expectations, it has to be part of a more robust blended approach.