Post written by Lorri Weaver and Sue Hawkins
Problem Statement
Sue and Lorri need a way to engage faculty/instructors in learning because currently many are not interested in completing training or do not complete training. The faculty/instructors in our organization are the adult learners in this case.
Following our design thinking process, we focused on using the concept of “building your toolkit” to encourage engagement with learning material, focusing specifically on the use of microlearning. In both of our organizations, adult learners need to learn certain skills, in Sue’s case, to develop their expertise in utilizing the functionality of the LMS, in Lorri’s case, to learn basic instructional techniques.
Findings of Design Thinking Process
Through the interview process we gained a greater understanding of how we each viewed the main concerns, perspectives and the experiences of our learners (Crichton & Carter, 2017). The most important findings were our perception of why adult learners did not complete current training which included:
- Lacked time to complete training;
- Unable to complete training during regular business hours;
- No perceived benefit as current teaching practices are successful;
- Fear of failure;
- Lack of support; and,
- No incentives/rewards.
Our Solution
In an effort to create an online learning environment that promotes critical thinking, a safe place to learn and try new things, sharing and collaboration, we have come up with a design thinking solution that incorporates different types of microlearning with online discussion. Each microlearning would provide adult learners with one more tool for their toolbox. The adult learners would then be encouraged to respond to the learning socially in a forum, where they can engage in discussions on how to use a particular tool or ask members of the community about their experiences.
In Sue’s case this would involve the creation of a “sandbox”; a private space where learners can experiment with and evaluate the LMS. Imbedded into the LMS are a variety of resources such as, link to a survey to allow adult learners to check their comfort level with basic teaching technologies, a variety of microlearning opportunities, a forum for adult learners teaching similar subject matter to share ideas and ask questions, newsletters, instructional PDF’s, FAQ’s and direct links to a learning technologist for support.
In Lorri’s case, the microlearning and related forums would be hosted on a sharepoint site. The microlearning would consist of 2-3 min videos, infographics, short branching scenarios and short learning games. The community learning would happen in the forum.
Both solutions provide adult learners with the opportunity to customize their learning and sample new techniques that are consistent with their teaching philosophy (Bennett J & L, 2003).
Effectiveness
By keeping the learning short and the online interaction focused and relevant, we will address the perception that part-time employees do not have time to complete this professional development. Delivering the microlearning online will enable off-site learners to easily participate at a time that works for them. Incorporating videos that showcase instructional methodologies and their impact on students will assist faculty to observe the potential benefits (Bennett J & L, 2003).
Providing a forum for adult learners to give their own input and suggestions will increase intrinsic motivation to participate as they may anticipate feedback and recognition for their contributions (Paulini, Maher & Murty, 2014). This can be further supported by public recognition of adult learners that use the new tools or that help contribute to other’s learning during annual professional development seminars. Although adult learners will still not be compelled to participate in the training, advertising the benefits and providing public recognition for those that do should motivate participation.
References
Bennett, J., & Bennett, L. (2003). A review of factors that influence the diffusion of innovation when structuring a faculty training program. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 53-63. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00161-6
Crichton, S. & Carter, D. (2017). Taking Making into Classrooms Toolkit. Open School/ITA.
Paulini, M., Maher, M. L., & Murty, P. (2014). Motivating participation in online innovation communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 10(1), 94-114.
Hi Lorri and Sue,
Great post and well done using the Design Thinking process. I really think that the idea of having microlessons build towards a ‘toolbox’ for the participants will be successful in encouraging them to continue with their training.
You mention that you want to make their learning environment a safe place for them to try new things, share and collaborate and that “providing a forum for adult learners to give their own input and suggestions will increase intrinsic motivation to participate as they may anticipate feedback and recognition for their contributions”.
How will you ensure that they are participating in the online community and sharing their knowledge and providing feedback?
Hi Steve!
First of all, thank you so much for reviewing our post as our first critical friend. The question that you have asked is a very good one. Although we could make participation mandatory, we did not feel that this would necessarily lead to the desired results (the adult learners actually applying what they learned). As the training we want them to complete is not part of an academic course, we can not motivate them with marks nor are we in a position to influence their performance evaluations. In essence, we are not in a position to use negative reinforcement, so we need to find ways to motivate them positively (the carrot versus the stick). First, we tried to address any perceived barriers that might stop them from participating. Then we tried to set up the environment in a way that they would feel motivated to participate (letting them know the positive effect that employing the new tools could have on their students, allowing them the opportunity to gain recognition from their peers by sharing their ideas and providing public recognition to those who do contribute and participate). Admittedly this still does not guarantee that they will participate, however, research suggests that professional development that is based on the principles of adult learning; where teachers/instructors are able to reflect on their teaching experiences, share their professional knowledge and build collaborative relationships with their peers, is highly effective (Gregson & Sturko, 2007). That said, we would be happy to incorporate any ideas that you have as a critical friend!
Thanks again for your review and question, we would be interested to hear any other thoughts that you have,
Lorri & Sue
Gregson, J. & Sturko, P. (2007). Teachers as Adult Learners: Re-conceptualizing Professional Development. MPAEA Journal of Adult Education, 36(1), p. 1-18.
Hi Lorri and Sue,
Great work on your prototype! It sounds like you both work in different fields with dissimilar target audiences, yet you were able to come up with solutions to serve the needs of both of your learners.
When you refer to microlearning, this is a concept I (think) I’m familiar with as we use this in my workplace. However, is it assumed that the adult learners in your organization know what microlearning is and why it could be beneficial for them as they begin their online journey. Is there a part of the prototype that addresses what microlearning is and why this will help them get familiar with the online space? Is there a way to track the “tools acquired for the toolkit” to show progress and support the motivation to continue participating?
What I like about your write up was how you outlined the key characteristics about the learners themselves and how your prototype would address those specific attributes. For example, the inability to complete training during regular business hour was addressed directly in the solution.
More information on the microlearning itself would be helpful. What types of content would be part of the microlearning videos, infographics, etc? Would it be a general topic so the learners could get comfortable with the software or is it directly related to course content?
In terms of the sandbox concept, would the survey be done before the course started to evaluate what level each student is at with technology or will this occur once the course has started? Could this potentially derail the course work if the teachers find out at the beginning that nobody is proficient in online technologies and contribute to the fear of failure you noted earlier?
Lastly, you state that part-time employees do not have enough time to complete training and you offer a solution where they can complete the training at a time that works for them. If this training/prototype is housed on an internal LMS system, how would they gain access remotely? Or are you proposing this be housed on an open LMS system?
Great work ladies, I was very interested in what you brought to the table and I think it would be beneficial for various industries and fields. I hope you find my questions and feedback helpful for your further critique.
Hi Lorri and Sue,
I agree with you, it is hard to guarantee that learners will participate, some are very set against it. A couple of strategies that have worked for me have been modeling expected participatory behaviour in my online classes and as silly as it seems, using badging rewards in the LMS seems to help encourage participation and sharing of ideas.
Hi Steve,
I think your practice of modeling expected participatory behavior is excellent! When faculty show a high level of engagement it increases their learners confidence, participation and intellectual risk taking. Has that been your experience?
Although I am skeptical about badging increasing participation, it seems to work! I believe it must be strategically done in order to work well i.e. at the end of a unit of at other critical junctions throughout the course.
Thanks for sharing your “secrets of the trade”!
Hello Katie,
Thank you for your comments and thought provoking questions! You mentioned that you “think” you are familiar with microlearning. To clarify, microlearning is a teaching and learning method that delivers learning in short bursts (4 minutes or less). Essentially, it is a modern version of “chunking” which is thought to improve memory. The benefits of microlearning are its convenience and flexibility. Learners can choose what, where, when and on what they complete their training. Being able to self-manage their training by choosing what they need, rather than what we think they need may result in a shift in attitudes towards training (Spencer, 2016). Microlearning chunks generally stand alone which means the learner can focus on the most relevant or interesting topic to them at that moment (Job & Ogalo, 2012).
During the design thinking challenge, Lorri and I discussed sending an e-mail to faculty/instructors to inform them about the training option. The e-mail could include a link to a short video outlining how the training will be delivered, a tour of the learning environment, and the benefits of participating in the training. In addition, both of us have interactions with the faculty/instructors that could provide us with an opportunity to summarize the training face-to-face. Although the concept of microlearning is interesting, our communication would focus on the benefits of the new training (easy to access from anywhere, short in duration, directly applicable to a specific task) rather than microlearning in general.
At this point, we have not discussed a way to track the “tools required for the toolkit”. Although we did briefly discuss adding some gamification components such as badging to support motivation and continued participation, it is our hope that through the creation of a community of their peers, faculty/instructors will reflect, share and build collaborative relationships that will motivate them to continue participating (Gregson & Sturko, 2007).
The beauty of microlearning is that it allows us to incorporate many different types of assets. Some of the assets that we discussed are videos, podcasts, whiteboard animations, branching scenarios, learning games and simulations. The beauty of microlearning from a design perspective is that you can repackage the training by adding new assets as required. The content would be directly related to the training and specific needs of faculty/instructors. In Lorri’s case the content would be related to improving instructional techniques, in my case the content would be related to introducing faculty to the tools and functions of the college Learning Management System (LMS).
The sandbox is a replication of the LMS. Its purpose is to allow faculty to “play and experience” with tools and features they may wish to include as part of their courses. It is up to the faculty whether they wish to complete the survey, although it would be presented as a tool to provide them with feedback on their current comfort with technology and link them to microlearning modules that will meet their unique learning needs. There is no teacher assigned to the sandbox. The thought is that faculty will reach out to their peers or a learning technologists to ask questions, discover best practices and share their difficulties and successes.
The toolkit can be accessed from anywhere on any device. In Sue’s case faculty are provided with a username and password to access the LMS. The LMS can be accessed from the college home page or D2L app. In Lorri’s case the toolkit will be housed on a SharePoint team site which can be accessed by logging in to the SharePoint home page or app.
Thanks again for your questions! They were very helpful to draw out ideas that we can use in part B of the assignment.
Sue and Lorri
References:
Gregson, J. & Sturko, P. (2007). Teachers as Adult Learners: Re-conceptualizing Professional Development. MPAEA Journal of Adult Education, 36(1), p. 1-18.
Job, M. A., & Ogalo, H. S. (2012). Micro learning as innovative process of knowledge strategy. International journal of scientific & technology research, 1(11), 92-96.
Spencer, R. (2016, June 27). The eLearning must have: 5 Microlearning benefits you cannot ignore [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/elearning-must-have-5-microlearning-benefits-cannot-ignore
Hi Lorri and Sue,
First, I have to say I love the idea of microlearning for adult learners. It seems time is in short supply in all sorts of jobs these days, so your idea could definitely work in multiple contexts.
Next, I really appreciated how you structured your post – it was so easy to follow and understand, with the problem statement, findings, and solution being clearly outlined. Your rationale and logic made total sense to me.
One thing I’m curious about is how you might sell the benefits of the toolkit to learners to get them engaged initially. Most of the training I develop is mandated, so I never have to worry about encouraging learner participation from the outset, but in your case, participation is voluntary. Have you thought about how you might encourage voluntary participation, and/or what you might do if no one uses the toolkit initially?
I was also wondering if, through the design thinking process, you had uncovered any attributes about your learners that might affect how you encourage ongoing participation in the online community. (For example, you mentioned your learners felt there were no incentives or rewards for training. Aside from boosting learners’ intrinsic motivation to participate, how might your online community provide other rewards and incentives to encourage engagement and intellectual risk-taking?)
The last question I had for you is whether you have considered how micro-learning connects to adult learning principles. What learning theories might you draw on to strengthen your prototype and help sell your solution to your organizations?
Thanks again for a great post. I hope my comments give you some good food for thought!
Cheers,
Amber
Hello Amber,
Glad you enjoyed the post! I agree that time is in short supply. I know I could use a few extra hours each day!
Your question regarding encouraging voluntary participation is an excellent one. Our thought was that in our initial communication to inform faculty/instructors about the training we would include a “buffet” of what they can expect; a little taste test so to speak. It is our hope that this will pique their interest and they will be motivated to explore the toolkit. We also discussed appealing to their aspirations to inspire students and rationalizing the how the toolkit could help them to achieve this. This could be done through a testimonial from a student and/or another faculty/instructor who has piloted the training. It never occurred to either of us that no one would participate. You got us there! If this was the case, perhaps we could implement a survey to discover what discouraged the faculty/instructors from accessing the training and make adjustments to the prototype based on their responses.
Through the design thinking process, one of the attributes that we mentioned frequently was the importance of recognition. In addition to acknowledging faculty/instructors at an annual professional development seminar we discussed the possibility of highlighting their journey in a video or newsletter that could be incorporated into the toolkit or presenting an annual award(s). Integrating some gamification assets such as badges or certificates and payments (if viable) was also discussed.
We had not specifically considered how microlearning connects to adult learning principles. After doing some research on the subject it appears they connect quite nicely! There is a great info-graphic supporting these connections here.
• All the training is relevant;
• Opportunity to choose what they want to learn;
• Bridges the gap between what they know and what they need to know;
• Prevents cognitive overload ;
• Learning provides a solution;
• Collaborative;
• Variety of multimedia to increase engagement;
• Quick and convenient (Esaboyuna, 2016).
Learners and the ways in which they learn has changed significantly over the last decade. One of the biggest changes is, “the half-life of knowledge”- the time it takes for knowledge to become obsolete (Siemens, 2005, p. 1). Based on these changes, Connectivism learning theory seems best suited to draw from to promote our prototype to organizations. The theory is based on rapidly altering underpinnings; as new information continually emerges the importance of being able to determine what information is important, unimportant and valid is critical (Siemens, 2005). Organizations need to be able to manage and provide training that is valid, relevant and that reaches the right people in the right context (Siemens, 2005). Microlearning can assist organizations to connect their staff to relevant training that targets a variety of specific learning objectives, content that can easily be updated as new learning emerges, and provides a return on investment (ROI).
Thank you for your comments and challenging questions! I hope that we were able to answer them all. They provoked a lot of critical thinking which will help as we move forward with the next part of the assignment. Good luck with your paper!
Sue and Lorri
References:
Esaboyuna, S. (2016, October, 21). How microlearning support adult learning principles [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://blog.commlabindia.com/elearning-development/how-microlearning-supports-adult-learning-infographic.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning (ITDL), 2(1), p.
Hi, Lorri and Sue:
I echo the praises of your critical friends regarding your prototype. Microlearning seems to meet the needs of your adult learners.
Under your Effectiveness section, you state, “By keeping the learning short and the online interaction focused and relevant, we will address the perception that part-time employees do not have time to complete this professional development.” I took this to mean you are considering microlearning as one of many possible ways that these employees might receive their professional development. If this is the case, then digital badging or micro-credentialing might provide you with a way to track your employees’ progress should they decide to take up other professional development opportunities. Also, digital badging and micro-credentialing provide the potential to date when the professional development was completed, have students provide learning artefacts as evidence of learning, and may include an expiry date (Educause Learning Initiative [ELI], 2014a). These may be important factors as you have acknowledged the “half-life of knowledge” and the importance of updating your learning objects regularly.
My experiences with microlearning have involved informal, social, and flipped learning environments or as a tactic used in a larger strategy (ELI, 2014b; Spiglanin, 2015). For example, the Whole-Part-Whole Learning Model (Swanson & Law, 1993) includes opportunities for “learning in bursts” or microlearning (Trowbridge, Waterbury, & Sudbury, 2017).
Looking forward to reading more about your prototype.
References
Educause Learning Initiative (2014a). Seven things you should know about badging in professional development. Washington: Author. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2014/8/est1402-pdf.pdf
Educause Learning Initiative (2014b, October 15). Seven things you should read about microlearning in mobiles and flipped contexts. Washington: Author. Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/resources/2014/10/7-things-you-should-read-about-microlearning-in-mobile-and-flipped-contexts
Spiglanin, T. (2015, March 18). Microlearning: Fab or Fad? [Weblog post]. Retrieved from http://tom.spiglanin.com/2015/03/microlearning-fab-or-fad/
Swanson, R. A., & Law, B. D. (1993). Whole-Part-Whole learning model. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(1), 43-53.
Trowbridge, S., Waterbury, C., & Sudbury, L. (2017). Learning in Bursts: Microlearning with Social Media. (EducauseReview). Washington: Educause. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/4/learning-in-bursts-microlearning-with-social-media
Hello Deb,
Thank you very much for taking the time to respond to our post! We appreciate having you as a critical friend as well. Both of us have programs already in place that are not being well utilised. Sue has in-class (face-to-face) courses set up at the learning support center and Lorri has a blended Basic Instructional Techniques course operating. These offerings would remain in place for personnel who would prefer a more traditional course to microlearning. As you said, this is another good reason to implement badging or micro-credentialing.
Badging or micro-credentialing would not only allow the learner to track the learning, but also enable evaluation of individual learning activities. We could better monitor completion rates and more importantly link completion to behaviour change (what we are really trying to accomplish) or not. If the student has taken the training, but does not implement any of the learning in their job, then the approach would need to be reassessed. Through this evaluation, we might find that certain media or approaches work better with our target audience, which will assist us when we repackage the training.
Thank you also for sharing the interesting resources on microlearning. They are already coming in handy as we write our paper.
Lorri and Sue