It could be said that we are living, in large companies, a certain partial transition from the traditional continuous training in the classroom, to the newest - e-learning - served by computer. Powerful platforms have been put into operation, corresponding online courses have been incorporated, and individuals have been urged to serve themselves. But, observing the market, more than a step from the traditional restaurant to self-service, it could sometimes be thought that we are dealing with fast food, of questioned quality. For example, we see how it promises to learn to negotiate successfully in just 30 minutes online, or how it is argued that, in e-learning, the quality of the content does not matter but the motivation of the students. It goes so far as to say that, in e-learning, success is measured by the people who finish the courses (end rate),without referring to learning and the consequent improvement in performance, a purpose that should not be subject to adulteration or corruption. What is happening with corporate e-learning in Spain?
Failing, perhaps, to meet the quality expectations of users, it is already said that e-learning must be complemented by classroom training, and blended learning is preached. However, it is not so easy for those responsible for human resources, because some argue that most providers who are excellent in e-learning are not in classroom training, and vice versa. Curiously, whoever maintains this, Carlos Pelegrín, director of training for Telefónica de España, also says that, in e-learning, the best results are obtained with medium quality content, since “excellent content does not guarantee absolutely anything, and even they can lead to failure. ” But perhaps the excellence, speaking of e-learning, is an exaggeration: users do not seem to be very satisfied with the transit.It has also been recognized in different forums that e-learning is much more powerful than what is being seen, although it is added that doing it well is expensive.
Reengineering in progress
Taking distance, it seems unquestionable that continuous training required a certain reengineering that pointed, synergistically and among others, to some specific objectives. This writer, although he introduces autotelia, does not really invent anything, and perhaps he forgets something:
- Boosting self-knowledge, self-criticism and permanent improvement. Intrinsic role and motivation of people, for solid and autotelic learning. Combination of task-oriented training with the development of technical and personal skills. Efficacy of applied efforts, which translates into business results. Strategic development of junior managers, ensuring the achievement of pending sociocultural changes. Taking advantage of technical and methodological progress. Attention to the short, medium and long term.
Perhaps elements such as computer-based learning, the competency movement, cultural changes in companies, the spread of the serendipitous network (Internet), the need to improve competitiveness, postulates such as learning organization and knowledge management contributed to this evolution., etc. In the paragraphs that follow, if the reader accompanies us, we will particularly refer to e-learning, and we will explain the farrier and the bank.
Corporate e-learning
Since Computer Aided Education appeared in the 80s, providers showed great confidence in the development of the modality, and also the large companies in the technology sector seemed to bet on it in our country (Telefónica, Alcatel…). Its development, however, was discreet quantitatively and qualitatively, until the explosion of the Internet came to reinforce expectations, and e-learning began to be seen (late 1990s) as a sort of unstoppable avalanche: providers associated (APeL, AEFOL) in 2001 in defense of their interests, large companies set up their platforms, and e-learning was already a loud buzzword on the neosecular stage.
What has happened in the period 2000-2003? Well, it seems that corporate e-learning is not being effective enough, and people are talking, for example, about its googlelization, that simulators are good, and that e-learning should be combined with face-to-face training (blended learning). We have already referred to them in other articles, but it is worth recalling here striking statements by José Ignacio Díez - CEO of FYCSA recently elected vice president of the Association of e-Learning Providers (APeL) - that identify the success of online training with the start rate and the end rate, without referring to Kirkpatrick levels; and that they relativized the importance of the contents, remembering that “who more and who less - here the author refers to the university and the notes we took,to support his argument - he has been forced to acquire complex knowledge with precarious means ”. Although FYCSA is dedicated to creating online, tailored and catalog content, Díez recommends companies to measure their investment in content well, and points to motivational elements as a factor of "success" (that is, to achieve a high participation of people in online programs). This provider declares that it achieves, in the online projects it manages, an overall end rate of 72.6%, and speaks of success in cases that exceed 75%.and points to motivational elements as a factor of "success" (that is, to achieve high participation of people in online programs). This supplier declares that it achieves, in the online projects it manages, an overall end rate of 72.6%, and speaks of success in cases that exceed 75%.and points to motivational elements as a factor of "success" (that is, to achieve high participation of people in online programs). This supplier declares that it achieves, in the online projects it manages, an overall end rate of 72.6%, and speaks of success in cases that exceed 75%.
On the other hand, it must be remembered that the participation of people in online courses is sometimes stimulated through point or credit systems with subsequent reward. One, who for years devoted himself to the design of off-line and on-line courses, and the function of tutoring on a virtual campus, believes that e-learning requires intrinsic motivation and that it must be autotelic; something quite different from what happened in the university, in which, in general, learning was more exoteric and the motivation more extrinsic: we studied, above all, to pass, and perhaps not so much to learn. In short, we consider, but do not fully share, Díez's analogy between continuing education and the university.
Blended learning
It seems to be argued, in general and as we have already mentioned, that, to improve the quality and effectiveness of training, e-learning should be combined, as a reinforcement, with classroom sessions. Well, but, would it not be more (or equally) proper to speak of face-to-face training that, to improve their performance or profitability, would be helped by individual online sessions, as well as and according to the cases, of interesting readings or individual exercises and collectives? Indeed, each case should be analyzed, and when we need an example, we will refer in this article to the development of so-called soft skills that, in reality, are necessary for managers, knowledge workers and other groups.
In the face of the need to develop strengths or skills such as conceptual thinking, systemic perspective, synthesis capacity, empathy, leadership, creativity, allegation, evaluation, intuition, oral and written expression, inquiry, Organizational awareness, integrity, initiative or self-control, one may wonder if this is possible; and, to answer it, it is necessary to think first of the risks and inconveniences that its lack generates. Indeed, it is possible to advance towards these goals and others like them, and also, it is worth trying. E-learning, which appeared concurrently with the competency movement, seems to have been insufficient for these purposes; but one doubts if the insufficiency is in the method itself, or, more likely, in the content offered.We join those who think that e-learning could give much more of itself, in terms of teaching effectiveness, through quality content.
If e-learning was not contributing to learning, it would be necessary to close and “remove the bank”, as if the farrier did not shoe; Or, in other words, if e-learning is not effective, it should clear the horizon and surrender to classroom training, or to the development of other effective methods. A moot phrase (own): “The continuous training of workers and managers should be entrusted, if possible, to teaching professionals in the corresponding fields, who will use the most suitable and profitable methods, taking into account the role of individuals and to the achievement of learning and performance improvement ”. The tone makes her suspicious, but it comes to say that effective training is a matter for expert teachers, and not for technologists or inexperienced: sometimes a truism is appropriate,if the reader allows me to think out loud.
Both the design of online courses, such as tutoring or classroom teaching, would have to be the work of good teachers, and I say this because, from my limited observation, I have missed the magic of good teachers on too many occasions, when I accessed e-learning demos. In fact, the formulation of pretentious objectives in online courses of just a couple of hours (or less) in duration, seems –as Javier Martínez Aldanondo, prestigious consultant in this sector– would surely say - a trivialization of learning.
Shoe or remove bench
Well, that: if e-learning did not demonstrate its effectiveness as an alternative and independent method, it would definitely have to be placed on the list of complementary or dependent methods, or learning aids. From my modest point of view, corporate e-learning should have already shown its independence in more than a few fields and at specific stages, because traditional distance learning, or that minority printed programming, have functioned as alternative methods for decades. E-learning must do it. E-learning must show its effectiveness (achieved through content well conceived by experts) and profitability in achieving concrete and realistic objectives.
But, if by horseshoeing we mean putting horseshoes on horses, and for that we needed the bank, what do we mean by e-learning? Basically, learning through content and services that come to us through the computer. Naturally, a search engine can take us to content of interest, but it seems more advisable to have it ad hoc, on the virtual platforms or campuses already deployed in companies. Perhaps there has been a tendency to turn online courses into a stage for multimedia technical boasts and showmanship of interactivity; however, depending on the objectives to be achieved, a linear text (even if it is output by printer) could be sufficient and satisfactory: it depends on the case, and without forgetting tutor consultations and participation in virtual and virtuous forums. The quality of the content seems inexcusable to us,and it also seems important to us to have a user-system dialogue, when it is necessary and well conceived, as in that printed programmed teaching. For the purpose of self-evaluation and didactic reinforcement, dialogue would always be useful, unless the system's questions or answers added little or no value.
Awaiting the reader's opinion, one opts for e-learning, catalog or customized products, with solid and effective content, with the necessary dose of multimedia and interactivity, that promote the achievement of specific and edifying objectives. There are, surely, objectives that can be achieved through e-learning, and there are also others that perhaps demand other methods, unique or combined; but each method must always be used well, since it is the content that gives meaning to the continent (another truism). Of course, there are many voices that are committed to efficiency and quality.
Concerned about the quality and effectiveness of e-learning
The demands for efficiency and user satisfaction are constant, and we only collect a small sample here. José Antonio Ortego, from Oracle, points out that "online training programs, to be successful, must meet minimum quality requirements". Angela Cruz, director of Alcatel University, says: "The content of the courses is of utmost importance for a positive experience." Antonio Peñalver, from SCH, is also concerned about the pedagogical aspect, and talks about “achieving harmonious and simple learning for the user”; and referring to the loyalty of users, Peñalver says: "The degree of user satisfaction with the training offer makes them feel more and more inclined to carry out teaching activities…". The UOC experts, María Teresa Arbués and Lluís Tarín,they seem to consider the teaching materials to be fundamental, and maintain: “In the context of virtual training, the creation, design and structuring of the teaching materials and resources are stages of a fundamental process, which must be rigorously addressed to ensure the quality of programs and learning facilitation. ” Carlos González, from Caja Madrid, says that "… technology is a necessary condition (…) but the sufficiency that can guarantee success comes from offering services and content from a customer-supplier perspective."that must be rigorously addressed to ensure the quality of the programs and the facilitation of learning ”. Carlos González, from Caja Madrid, says that "… technology is a necessary condition (…) but the sufficiency that can guarantee success comes from offering services and content from a customer-supplier perspective."that must be rigorously addressed to ensure the quality of the programs and the facilitation of learning ”. Carlos González, from Caja Madrid, says that "… technology is a necessary condition (…) but the sufficiency that can guarantee success comes from offering services and content from a customer-supplier perspective."
We continue. The Capgemini website reads: “The availability of quality, attractive and effective content, together with the use of a market-leading platform, allows you to start e-learning processes in your company, with ALL GUARANTEES OF SUCCESS ” Javier Martínez Aldanondo argues: “The reason why very few people are able to enjoy doing a course via e-learning is because whoever has designed it, has done it thinking about himself, what he knows and what he believes that others must know. " Marie Christine Jené, from ITACA: "But few people have stopped to think about the need to fill these powerful supports with content, and even less with quality content, adapted to the needs of the end user."
And more. We read on vnunet.es: “Second, the consultancy (refers to Forrester) draws attention to the disastrous effects of the use of poor or boring content, since it is one of the main enemies of the success of e-learning and leads directly to rejection by potential users. According to Forrester, the content that simply responds to the requirement to be read on an electronic medium is not the one that attracts the attention of users, and if it does not respond to the real needs of the students, it will remain unused. Given this risk, it is necessary to ensure that the content is well produced from a technical point of view and that its design attracts students,so carefully selecting the content that each employee needs to grow professionally in the long term is much more effective than simply purchasing content libraries with hundreds of titles; without forgetting that it is also essential to associate the selected content with the key competences of the organization's employees ”.
An example
We believe that the concern for quality is evident, but now we are going to see stages of development in which e-learning could be self-sufficient, without being accompanied by other methods. Often, when I send my texts to the people I quote, they ask me what I intend with my article, and suggest nuances that I incorporate; In this text and modestly, I try to defend the independence of e-learning as a method, without prejudice to blended learning when it is inexcusable, and always with due quality requirements. Understand well that I defend the independence of e-learning in specific cases and not universally, and the best thing, if the reader continues with me, is to give an example. Well, that: for example, e-learning could be independent (that is, self-sufficient), as an alternative to the classroom,in the first three or four steps of developing soft skills. Let's see the steps.
1. Full knowledge of the anatomy and dimensions of the soft skill.
2. Awareness of its contribution to performance.
3. Study of risks generated by the corresponding deficiencies.
4. Evaluation / self-evaluation of the individual, with feedback if necessary.
5. Improvement plan, established with tutor (coach).
6. Development actions for each dimension of the competition.
7. Tutorial monitoring of progress, as a coaching.
8. Reflection-introspection.
9. Settlement and interiorization.
10. Verification of performance improvement and results.
My modest impression, if this sequence is accepted, is that, for not a few cognitive and emotional skills, at least the first three steps could be solved through e-learning, as an ideal alternative (for more profitable and flexible) to other methods. Even, as I have already postulated in other articles, the development of soft skills could be undertaken by families. By referring to specific cases, I would recommend addressing, where appropriate and in parallel, the development of conceptual, systemic, analytical and synthetic thought; and I would recommend cultivating intuition, creativity and serendipity together. Perhaps some underlying attempt to exoterize the esoteric will be seen here, and also an acknowledgment of the overlap between competencies.
I conclude
In order to fuel the debate, I wanted to argue that quality e-learning can achieve solid and concrete goals, without the need to combine it with other methods; But, of course, if the goals are far-reaching and ambitious (for example, the development of soft skills in management, throughout all the necessary steps), a coordinated combination of actions and methods seems necessary. Of course, if the contents of e-learning were not suitable, it would be necessary to “remove the bank” and change the method… What I do not see well is that classroom training is made to appear as a mere reinforcement of e-learning, to neutralize their weaknesses; said be without intention of being right.
In sum and although it is surprising, if training providers truly specialize, organize or associate by methods, as is happening (APeL, for example), it would be useful to define the current possibilities (could be much more than what we see) of e- learning: what fields can it address, what objectives can it achieve, what users is it targeting, what forms do its contents take, what levels of quality are required, what must be done to achieve them, etc. The Telefónica training director will have solid foundations, by upholding his vision of the quality offered by training providers, because this great company is one of the main clients in the market, also willing to invest 10 million euros in e-learning in 2004, after previously proclaiming it;therefore perhaps the objective-method-content connections should be better defined. It is about - it seems to us - to achieve effective and autotelic learning that improves business results: this purpose should prevail over any hint of trivialization, adulteration or corruption of lifelong learning. Otherwise, we would not know what we are talking about.
To add something more from my own harvest, I would recommend something concrete: that there be “universal” products (and, therefore, at a better price) for the first three steps of the development of the main cognitive and emotional skills of managers and knowledge workers, and then each company would undertake the following steps more "to measure". Conceptual, or systemic, or empathy, or initiative, or penetrating conversation, or self-control, or leadership, or flexibility, etc., can hardly be understood very differently by different clients, although their competency models are not coincident. But surely there are other spaces in which e-learning can be effective and self-sufficient; and there will also be other spaces for a certain versatility of the content,that mitigate the cost of "made to measure". I leave it here. I hope I have contributed a little to the debate, and I will keep an eye on its evolution (that of the debate in the sector); Naturally, one does not intend to impose his claims, but only to nurture a more penetrating discussion.
