There’s a gap in the market. Today we have two options: high
quality face-to-face training and low quality e-learning. What’s missing is high
quality online learning.
By ‘high quality’ I mean only that face-to-face is generally
considered to be a good experience – and e-learning a poor experience. If you
don’t believe me, try running ‘e-learning’ through sentiment140 (or
twitterfall). Find out what people actually think of e-learning. It’s sobering
(warning: swearwords won't be filtered).
And yet online learning has taken off – in fact for most
adults in the Western world it is probably true that most of their learning
is now done online. Just not e-learning. They still hate e-learning. So where did
we go wrong?
We got off on the wrong foot. The dual premiss of e-learning
was cost-reduction and knowledge transfer: so the e-learning format ended
up as little more than powerpoint with a SCORM wrapper. The problem has
worsened over a decade or so, because our users have seen a widening divide
between their own, preferred technology, and the stuff their businesses would
like them to use.
Again – why? Because norms for e-learning costs have been
established at a very low level (i.e. based on the ‘pimp-my-slide’ model) and
because e-learning companies have resourced themselves accordingly, it is
near-impossible for them to produce apps, digital media (such as video,
infographics, imagery, interactives) to anything approaching the standard that
their audience will readily find elsewhere on the web. E-learning apps exist –
but ask yourself how they compare to the other apps on your mobile device (‘Now
your slides are an app! Yay!’). Where companies do offer ‘high end’ e-learning,
it turns out to be poor by comparison even to free apps & media. Take a look at Duolingo on the app store as an example of the latter.
So this is the central industry challenge/trend for the next
few years: whether e-learning companies will shift or whether the market will be
absorbed by the combination of digital media companies & ambient media
available for free (leaving only the compliance market). As learning professionals
we will need to both raise our game and reset the expectations of our
businesses if we want to be seen as worthwhile.
Of course there are times when quality doesn’t matter, specifically
when what you’re offering is really, really helpful - the kind of things you might
Google or YouTube today. But that’s a different set of challenges entirely (see The tragedy of L&D for more on this).
Great post Nic. I like to think that the mini MOOC Sam Burrough and I are running is 'quality' (http://ow.ly/sz4HP )! The experience so far, from the point of view of someone running it, is that the MOOC experience has a lot to offer as a learning experience but it will need some creativity to shape it too ie community skills are key here. Just accepting tech for what it is is not enough (even though the Curatr platform we are using is really interesting tech) - and there are better apps in the consumer market anyway, as you say.
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly what I feel. Mostly e-learning content is modified version of text books available. Maybe once online learning becomes more popular ,content generators will become aware of the need for thinking out of the box.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of what you say Nick, especially the growing divide between the quality of our own preferred technology and media and what's served up as e-learning at work. However, I'm not sure you can lay the blame at the e-learning companies' door. High quality e-learning costs more to design. We need to cultivate a market that will pay for it. How? I'm working on it!
ReplyDelete