Breaking the 8020 rule: Enabling customized, personal learning

1
Breaking the 80/20 ruleEnabling customized,
personal learning
November 16, 2006
2
Agenda

• Background Biases, Assumptions
• Evolution Learning Technology
• Application How People Use IT
• Reality Check How do you use it.
• Resources Whats next
• Questions? Answers! maybe

3
Background

• Strategist/ Consultant/Teacher/Implementer
• Bias toward Motivated learners
• Experiential Perspective
• Not Selling
• No Brand Recommendations

4
Evolution
5
Role of e-learning

• To offer an inventory of resources, tools, and
  learning objects that can be dynamically
  assembled into personalized custom courseware
  that is engaging, efficient and produces the
  desired skill sets and behavior.

6
Early Models
7
Hybrid Model
8
CMS Model
9
Custom learning paths
User 1 Path
User 2 Path
Traditional Path
e-tools
e-resources
e-knowledge
Case studies
Self paced component
examples
Articles
Articles/References
Virtual class component
exercises
FAQs
Objectives
Chat/BBS
Engagement summaries
Processes
Help screens
Completion
10
Next Gen Model
11
e-tools

• Examples
• Exercises
• BBS/Chat
• Regulations
• Calculators
• Forms
• Help screens

12
e-Resources

• Case studies
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Ask the Expert sessions
• Articles
• References
• Best Practices
• Engagement summaries
• Additional courseware

13
e-Knowledge

• Course objects
• Course definitions
• Media levels
• Levels of interactivity

14
Learning Site Model
15
Future Model
16
e-Learning Integration
User Registration
Curriculum Assignments
User Profiles
Learning Mgt System
e-tools
e-knowledge
e-resources
Content Management
17
The Future Perspective
Organization Learning
Engagement Management
Operations
Knowledge Base
e-tools
e-knowledge
e-resources
18
Case Study ETS Software

• Large internal learner base
• Customer user base80 content overlap
• Evolving software functionality
• Certification potential

19
ETS Case Study

• Traditional Training
• Live with hands on lab
• Technical manuals
• On the job orientation
• Limitations
• Synchronous learning. Gap in time of learning and
  usage.
• 80/20 inefficiency, remedial and experienced
  learners
• Resource intensive

20
Example ETS Model
21
ETS Case Study

• RLO Solution
• Curriculum RLOs planning for overlap
• Assessments, knowledge based qualifyers
• Integrated links to work flow support
• Potential integration with technical training
  RLOs
• Benefits
• JIT training on the job. No gap in learning and
  application.
• Efficiency of curriculum, no wasted time
• CE tracking
• Cost effective development

22
Case Study Casewise Software

• Small learner base of 400
• Remedial to new orientation
• 3rd party training
• 400/learner 1200 per training day 12hrs
  training 6-10 per class 250,000 per year

23
Case Study Casewise Software

• RLO Solution
• Modular curriculum, preassessment
• JIT learning
• 12 hours conversion _at_ 12-15K 180,000 first
  year costs, minimal usage costs second year if
  not factored with other learning.

24
Case Study Learning Portals

• 1500 customers using client software
• Traditional approach same site with logo
• Customers had to choose or ignore other content
  not applicable to their configuration
• Changes to individual sites expensive and
  discouraged

25
Case Study Learning Portals

• RLO Solution
• Flexible design, one set of data to manage
• Learning modules tied to customers configuration
  automatically
• Individual sites customized and personalized

26
Reality Check

• Can it work for you?
• Non linear thinking
• Resource Gathering
• Acquire technology
• Offer strategic reasons for adoption

27
The Challenge

• Commit to a consistent modular blended learning
  model.
• Leverage existing technology to gain
  efficiencies.
• Consistent course design approach, yet flexible
  enough to accommodate functional implementation
• Accommodate multiple vendors with one consistent
  standard,
• One overall design and approach within each
  module

28
The Benefits

• Personalized, custom learning tracks
• Dynamic curriculum
• Context oriented help
• Future tie-in to knowledge base
• More effective personnel

29
Tools for Implementation
30
Reusable Learning Objects

•    Knowledge objects and tools
•    Interchangeable by criteria
•    Alphabet metaphorgranularity
•    Just in time assembly and learning
•    Design objects to leverage cross application
•    Key to customization, personalized learning
•        

31
RLO Functionality

• Dynamic Assembly
• Quizes also dynamically parallel
• BBS integration
• Additional course or references
• CE tracking

32
Future Functionality

• One Course-Many Applications
• Real Time Author, Edit, Update
• In-depth Feedback
• Customization of Courseware
• Personalization of Learning
• Access to addl Knowledge Resources
• Lower Overall Cost Development

33
Blended model-overview
34
Options for Training
35
Additional Information

• cognitivity.com

36
Scott R. de Ruyter 4520 East Thousand Oaks Blvd.
Suite 100 Westlake Village, CA 91362 818.530.5155
110 scott_at_gmpartnersllc.com