Total Learning

From Design and Delivery to Impact

 Our total approach to learning starts with initial design tailored to the learners’ needs.   We deliver the knowledge through group-based face-to-face interaction.   A range of cutting-edge e-learning methods and techniques are available to support the learning, which is accessed at a time and in a convenient place to the learner. Collaborative learning is encouraged through our shared learning spaces, which are both physical and virtual.  We evaluate the demonstration of knowledge by assessing individual achievement and collective impact on corporate goals and objectives.

 Training and development often take place in isolation from its application in practice.  In some cases, enthusiastic learners attend courses, discuss and network with colleagues and learn new ideas or techniques.  As some learners return to the organisation, having enjoyed the experience, the learning resources are filed or gather dust on shelves, and the lessons are rarely applied.  Learners continue their day job doing what they have already done. No one asks them, “How was it?”, “What did you learn?” or “How can we benefit as an organisation?”  Does this sound familiar?  In cases when the learning is applied and interest is shown across the organisation, both the individual and the organisation benefit.

Our total approach to learning (TL) flips the familiar story and builds on successful experiences of applied learning. TL concentrates on impact in the workplace as a primary goal by using learning approaches and techniques which develop the individual learner while also creating a culture of applied learning within the organisation.  At the core of the process is the collaborative applied learning challenge space (CALCs).  These spaces are both physical and virtual[1].  Learners’ personalised learning spaces align with what they do at work and how they and their colleagues’ benefit.  The learning and how it is applied is shared among individual but collaborating learners who share an interest in the topic.

[1] A learning space will be available to you either as a bespoke organisational space or as a discussion and application forum We discuss the Collaborative Applied Learning Challenge Space (CALCs) in a subsequent blog.

 

Six intelligent leadership questions ^[1] explore the options for improving the learning and development process through blended methods.  Total Learning comprises:

• Design (Why and What questions in defining and developing the context for learning)
• Delivery (How and Where questions in applying the mechanisms of learning)
• Demonstration (When and Who questions in assessing the outcome of the learning).

Why we need to change: the context for designing learning spaces

Global changes in the political, economic, and social contexts have resulted in technological disruption, which has led to new ways of thinking about learning and development and its application in practice. As the world responds to the dual human challenges of responding to the immediate Covid-19 pandemic and ongoing climate change, the legal and environmental contexts of organisational life must evolve.  Today’s virtual world of corporate meetings, negotiations and learning and development is supplemented by the practice of conventions and meetings worldwide.  Transforming our future for learning and development extends well beyond just the range and scope of media on the one hand and the classroom on the other.  The focus must be on learning spaces, why they benefit, and how they are designed, created, and led.  The need for and mechanisms of learning surround us at every juncture.

The reimagination of education technology (ed-tech) knows no boundaries in playing a significant role in influencing change to the mechanisms of learning in the workplace. The impact of the 2020-21 global pandemic is a primary driver for a shift to what is now considered the “new normal’ of learning, that of blended learning; some have (rightly) questioned this view of a ‘new’ normal.  The pandemic forced almost 1.6 billion children and students out of their schools and universities worldwide[1].  Some say this is a significant moment “for learning, and that ‘ed-tech was long overdue” ^[2].  On the other hand, opponents warned of a range of consequences, including a digital divide that further widens existing attainment gaps and inequalities faced by disadvantaged children, protection of pupil’s or participant’s data, and a booming direct-to-consumer ed-tech market amounts to privatisation by stealth. The consensus, however, is that a new paradigm will emerge but one that balances remote learning with engagement through face-to-face.  An appropriate shift to the blended learning model is one in which remote and digital platforms support in-person classroom teaching, not supplanting it.  There are early examples of different media supporting large-scale lectures ^[3] reinforcing the view that this is not new.

There are some giants in the past whose shoulders we can stand on in building the future of workplace learning and development.

We need to collaborate and choose our means of learning wisely.  Co-production (between the educationalists/designers and the commissioners/co-learners) will be essential.  It will bring the traditional concept of Training Needs Analysis (TNA) to the centre stage of change at the outset.  We propose that the idea of TNA morphs into a Learning Development Needs Analysis (LDNA) with development representing the specific learning of skills and the application of those skills to workplace outcomes.  The term ‘training’ is too limited.    Training is a short-term process that focuses on tasks and encourages changes of attitude and increased skills and knowledge in a specific competence area. As essential as this training is, it should be encompassed within an ambition for the sustainability of the learning based on the corporate and/or community vision and mission.   Development is a longer-term investment in improvement that combines human resource development (including training) with continuous professional and organisational development.

How and Where we Deliver: creating the mechanisms for Change

The rapid spatial transformation of corporate meetings, the practise of negotiation and learning and development underlines the need to reimagine and redefine the mechanisms of ‘learning and development’.  Total learning views education in its broadest sense. The focus is on supporting corporations and institutions to create a learning organisation that comprises individual but collaborating learners.  It equally concerns the systems of learning and improvement as well as continuous professional development.  For too long, learning and CPD have existed in a silo separate from organisational development and improvement.  The critical missing element is demonstrating how the learning improves the practice of skills in the workplace.  Desired outcomes span the long game and not just the quick wins.

In asking “Where does the learning take place?” a combination approach is critically important.

We know that research shows that only 10% of learning derives from the formal classroom and double that from socially based collaborative learning (through such processes as action learning and other peer-level group work). A massive 70% derives from applying the learning and building experience within the workplace.

For this reason, our blended learning approach places Collaborative Applied Learning Challenge spaces (CALCs)^[2] at the core.  The Challenge spaces draw on online and face-to-face learning through both physical and virtual learning and application.

 

 

When do we Demonstrate success, and Who validates the Outcomes?

Invariably, training is assessed through what is popularly described as ‘happy sheets’, addressing levels one and two (reaction and learning) in Kirkpatrick’s classic approach to training evaluation in isolation from levels three and four, which evaluate changed behaviours and organisational outcomes ^[4].

Adult Learners have a wealth of life experience to assist in making sense of the learning not just for themselves but also for their peers.  They are independent and carry this with them into their knowledge.  We build flexibility into their learning from the outset.  Adult Learners have many other commitments alongside the courses and development programmes in which they participate. “Learning at your own pace and your own place” is our mantra of the online element of our blended learning approach but supported by the need for the so-important face-to-face interaction where the learning is applied to practice with the support of peers and facilitators.

Our overall approach allows Adult Learners to fit the learning into their lifestyle at a time and pace that suits the individual.   We emphasise the importance of encouraging adult learners to discuss and share their experiences, so not only do they gather knowledge from the online resources, but they also learn from each other and compare their ideas, challenges, and frustrations. Therefore, it is vital to construct social interaction into online programmes carefully and deliberately, to enhance the online materials by encouraging analysis and synthesis of knowledge between participants.  We describe our approach and structure for blended learning in the next post.

 Who validates?  Validation of intended learning outcomes is where the LDNA stakeholders come into play.  We follow the lead from the stakeholders who determine the corporate priorities and investments, or respectively, the public value outcomes of public leaders, and tailor this to the TL environment.  Drawing from the work of Mark Moore^[5] stakeholders include:

• The authorising environment (those who commission the course or development programme)
• Those who receive the benefits of, for example, say the professional development programme (the corporate or public beneficiaries); and
• Those who take part in the programme (the Adult Learners).

Not only do the LDNA stakeholders play a crucial role from the outset in helping to define and design the programme of learning, but they also take a crucial role in evaluating the extent to which it achieves its intended learning outcomes.  Evaluation should apply throughout Kirkpatricks’ levels one through to four^[4] but also a suggested level five which seeks to determine the ‘Return on Investment (ROI)^[6]  or (in the public sector) the equivalent Public Value Test (PVT) but specifically for the benefits of the education. We can provide an example from the British Broadcasting Company (BBC):

Educational value: by offering audiences of every age a world of formal and informal educational opportunity in every medium, the BBC helps build a society strong in knowledge

and skills ^[7].

Conclusion

It is right to point out that the view of blended learning as a new normal is not new.  In 2003, the American Society for Training and Development identified blended learning as one of the top ten trends to emerge in the knowledge delivery industry ^[8]. More recently, studies have sought to assess the efficacy of different modalities of learning. The essential issues of student success, withdrawal, and perception of the learning environment across multiple course modalities were considered the most appropriate benchmarks ^[9].  To this we must add the application of the learning and the return on its investment to both the learner and the organisation.

References

1. Brookes S., The Selfless Leader: A Compass for Collective Leaders. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2016.
2. Fleming N., After Covid, will digital learning be the new normal? The Guardian. 2021 23 January.
3. Savkar A, Cardetti F. Pedgagogy in Large Lecture Calculus – Technology to the Rescue . EDULEARN11 Conference.; 4-6 July 2011, ; Barcelona, Spain.2011.
4. Kirkpatrick DL. Evaluating training programs: Evidence vs proof. Training and Development Journal. 1977;31(11):9 – 12.
5. Moore MH. Creating public value : strategic management in government. Cambridge, Mass. ; London: Harvard University Press; 1995.
6. Phillips JJ. Return on investment in training and performance improvement programs. 2nd ed. Amsterdam ; London: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2003.
7. Bunyan S, Duffy D, Lasslett K, O’connor K. The Application of Public Value in the BBC: Informing decision-making. Ulstern.d.
8. Rooney JE. Blending learning opportunities to enhance educational programming and meetings. Association Managment. 2003;55(5):26-32.

9.         Dziuban C, Graham CR, Moskal PD, Norberg A, Sicilia N. Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2018;15(1):3. doi

[1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/12/covid19-education-innovation-outcomes/

[2] Discussion of CALCS is included in a further blog.