Converting Training Classes To Online: How Hard Can It Be?

Moving Your Face-To-Face Training Online

Moving Your Face-To-Face Training Online

Moving Your Face-To-Face Training Online

Working in the higher education arena as a technical trainer and Instructional Designer can be challenging. Working in the Information Resources and Technology division pressures me to quickly master all new technologies adopted by the university. I must then be able to create communications, training materials, and training sessions to help the University community to quickly and easily learn the technologies and incorporate them into their workdays. I have also been tasked to convert our face-to-face training to “online” training. This generic term incorporates all the latest trends in Instructional Design and training, without much understanding of best practices or what it takes to actually create these different methods. You would think that being in the business of education we would inherently understand how to create “online” curricula, keeping in mind relevant learning theories, adapting to different learning styles and selecting the best methods for each individual project. Unfortunately, it is all too easy to fall into the trap of hearing about a new trend and thinking it will be easy to fit all future projects into the same mold.

With all this being said, the past three years have been exciting and challenging. We started off kind of slow and clunky, but have steadily increased our knowledge and understanding of these different formats of training. One of the main insights I have had is that inherent in adult education is the need for adults to know why they are learning. Taking it back to the basics of Knowles’ theory of andragogy, when creating my courses, I need to make the relevance to their jobs clear, why they need to take time away from their busy schedules to complete the training, how they can use their past experiences to master it and allow for sufficient self-directed learning (Knowles, 1970.) The methods of learning may be evolving, but the theories and motivations are still relevant.

Here is a quick synopsis of what we have accomplished so far:

Video-Based Learning

Microlearning

We began to explore the concept of microlearning. We saw the value in “chunking” the videos into smaller, objective specific clips (DN, 2018.)

Blended Learning

I began to conceptualize a blended-learning course. We were being directed to offer less face-to-face instruction and convert what we had to online learning. We were told to start to utilize other online materials, like the university-wide subscription to Lynda.com, to allow the trainees to engage in more self-directed learning. There were courses we were teaching that could also be converted to video. We needed a way to make the training both self-directed and interactive, but offering face-to-face training for the learners to come in and apply the concepts and skills they had learned on their own.

Interactive Video/Learning

Some of the issues we have encountered so far with the examples above have been the lack of interaction/engagement of the trainees. Having them watch a video, and then just answer questions showing they had memorized or understood certain concepts, limits the effectiveness of our online trainings. We now want to build in exercises that allow the trainees to demonstrate they have learned a skill.

Converting our training program to a fully online one may not come to fruition for quite some time; in fact, as we progress, we may decide that some aspects of the training are better served with some form of trainer interaction, be it face-to-face, webinar, chat rooms or other options. But as long as we keep the focus of the training on how best to convey the training objectives to the learners, we should continue to have a successful program. We are definitely in for an exciting learning experience.

References:

Exit mobile version