- Leverage your resources.
We live in an imperfect world where far too many courses are
needed for the limited number of trained instructional designers
available to design them. Leverage your resources to the activities
they are most qualified to complete.
Use the designers in the analysis phase.
Instructional (or technical) writers can use the design to
create the actual course content.
Then use an instructional editor to make sure that the content
truely supports the test items.
- Test items should be as close an approximation
of actual job performance as possible.
Sometimes it is not possible to recreate job conditions in
the classroom, but a close approximation should be sought.
Early research proved that using a cardboard replica of a control
panel to simulate responses was just as good as using a fully
operational mechanical simulator. The limitation of such technique
is that the replica cannot then produce the next job situation
that the trainee must respond to.
So, when you have to test at a lesser degree of simulation,
you can get reliable measurements of performance if you carefully
design the testing situation to be as close to the actual performance
environment as possible.
However, some jobs are not just about the tasks that are performed
in the job procedures. Sometimes the "environment"
is important. This is especially true of jobs that have emotional
content, such as social work or customer service. In these cases
you should either simulate the typical emotional environment
in the classroom, or provide supervised practice in the true
environment.
I developed a training methodology called Whole of Job Training
for a client. In this methodology, we used videos of typical
client interviews and simulated all the surrounding emotional
content of the job for each job task through role plays. The
training was used to train social workers.
- You should use the most reliable delivery
method presently available to you.
The need to closely simulate job conditions may limit your
choice of training methods. For example, on-line training may
not be able to fully simulate all job conditions. At the design
stage you must investigate the capabilities of the delivery
systems available to you.
Don't choose an untried delivery method (including the newest
development software) without allowing extra time to actually
trial the delivery system on the existing resources available
to you and at your projected peak capacity of usage.
In general, it is better to use an older technology, if the
new one is untried.
- Competency-based instruction can deliver
job performance improvements, but not all training that has a
set of written objectives is truely competency-based.
Truely competency-based instruction that is part of a job performance
system must be directly tied to a measureable job competency.
Sometimes, you will find that you cannot write true competency-based
objectives, test items and learning hiearchies based on the
level of analysis you were allowed to do. Or you are not dealing
with "compliance" training.
The most important thing for you to do is to admit this limitation
and be sure that the training is not included as an input to
any strict job performance system.
The training can still be entertaining and educational, but
it should not be expected to produce accountable skills and
behaviours in the students.
- Entry behaviours can only be accurately
identified in known audience populations.
One common case where audience prior knowledge of skills is
unknown is web based training.
This web page is a perfect example. I can only provide "education"
since I don't know what your actual jobs are, and I have made
an assumption that you have some prior knowledge of instructional
design terminology. Happily this is not the case in the IPISD
which is designed to be used by entry level personnel. Terms
and procedures are explained.
When you don't know the actual entry skills your audience possesses,
you should give some guidance in the course description as to
the levels of skill you were expecting the audience to have
before beginning the course. Then the student or their supervisor
can choose appropriately.
- Structure and Sequence for compentency-based
instruction is best determined by closely approximating the sequence
of events on the job.
The simplist way to determine structure and sequence is to
follow the learning hierarchies, beginning at the entry level
objectives, and then place each hierarchy in a sequence that
follows the procedural sequence of the performance of the tasks
on the job.
You can avoid duplication of training by examining the lower
level objectives in the learning hierarchies for each job task
so that the lower level objectives can be taught only once.
You would then ask the student to recall that lover level skill
when they approach the learning of another job task in the procedural
sequence that requires it.
If there is no procedural sequence on the job, then try using
the relationship of the lower level objectives to determine
the stream of training. Teach the lower level objectives as
"fundamentals" and then proceed to teaching the terminal
objectives.
Once again, if you don't have this information based on an
analysis of the job, other sequencing methods must be used.
The most sequencing common method is for the writer to choose
the sequencing that make most sense to them. It's not too scientific,
but an experienced writer/educator will often choose a workable
sequence. You may have a less efficient sequence, which will
become evident if most students "just don't get it".
The sequence of prerequisite objectives relative to the terminal
objectives is important for efficient learning. If a high number
of students have difficulty with with course on the first try,
but pass easily on the second try, your instruction is probably
out of sequence. On the first try they are attempting to learn
some skills without having first learned the enabling objectives
in the lower level of that skills hierarchy. Then, on the second
try, the student will recall the related lower level skill and
apply it mentally in it's proper sequence.
