This is the last piece in the series of posts about how we’re transforming our learning function. My apologies for the delay in getting it out – it fell off my radar.
To bring you up to speed, we’re attempting a new way of creating L&D support at my workplace, using a format that we’ve developed over some months.
The last space in the model we’re using belongs to improvement. It’s the space that people in the L&D industry seem to gravitate to first when we talk about how we’re doing this, most likely because it’s the most comfortable – as far away from the informal and disruptive space we recommend first. It contains the parts that most find comfortable – the formal and sustaining activity that we recognise from ‘traditional’ learning.
Face to face courses
Put your feet up, take the weight off, you’re in familiar L&D territory in a formal course. Er…sorry, you’re not. Face to face courses now will be much more experiential activities. Take a fire marshal course for example. You won’t need to learn about the fire triangle, where to order your hi -vis vest from, how extinguishers work, the other marshals you’ll work with, etc as you’ll have completed that activity in the lead up (or scheduled after) the course. The classroom based activity will be an experiential event, taking you through the process in a live environment, dealing with a fire drill, managing a missing staff member etc. This isn’t going to be the typical classroom activity.
There are many more qualified people than me to comment on what makes a good quality elearning module. What we’re doing is applying some key design principles within anything that is published. The modules we use:
- Are no more than 26 minutes in length; this is to fit with our 52 minute guide
- Are authored by Subject Matter Experts and quality assured by us; we don’t have time to design and ‘own’ the content
- Are simple; if we can find the content anywhere else freely available on the web we remove it and link to it
- Have no policies within them – they’re linked out.
External assessment and Qualifications
There’s a lot of guff spoken about professional qualifications and professional bodies but they do have a place in validating someone’s performance to a verifiable standard. I don’t accept that they should become the driver for learning; they’re measures of performance, not learning.
This is where L&D can performance support much more effectively than solely through provision. If the business needs to develop/improve/review an area, use people who need to learn skills the situation required to develop it. It takes some input and regular moderation to check the expected performance standards are met, but is a way of making the learning activity part of the work and vice versa.
So that’s it, the way we’re approaching L&D. Feel free to look through this post and the previous posts here, here, and here to look at how we’re working and ask us about it. Comments, as always, very welcome.