USDLA Journal Bulletproof Instructional Design:

USDLA Journal
Bulletproof Instructional Design:
A Model for Blended Learning
Frank J. Troha
Corporate Learning Consultant and Adjunct Professor of Instructional Design

Allow me to apply the lessons of the previous post.

This well-written artcle calls for planning ahead of training, with the twist that F2F be considered and then online, divvying up the learning tasks for which each is appropriate. (Check out the original article for the full argument.)

Early on, the author cautions us that: "The following design model presumes a performance analysis has indicated the need for training, as opposed to another type of performance improvement intervention." That gets caught in my crap detectors. I always presume that performance analysis indicates the need for better performance, and generally it's unsound to assume that training alone can carry the load.

The author describes the necessity of having a transfer strategy to insure that the results of training are applied to the work. Since this isn't school, where we purposely wall off kids from the real world, why are training and work separate in the first place? All the bulletproof content is delivered in courses, i.e. the model presumes that all learning is formal. What of informal learning, where most of learning really takes place? For that matter, why is there no discussion of groups to accompany the focus on individuals? Furthermore, conceptualizing learning as a series of courses doesn't provide a pathway for future learning as the course content becomes dated.

The "Bulletproof" Instructional Design Document includes these topics:

    Course title Purpose Statement Audience Title Duration Prerequisites Learning Objectives Constaints Content/Learning Activities Outline Transfer of Learning Strategy Evaluation Strategy Content Sourcing

I can't go along with deciding that we have a training problem and then trying to solve it as if the larger organization that spawned it has ceased to exist. This is like the scientist who prefaces everything with "everything being equal," knowing full well that it's not.

Why would anyone take this "bulletproof" approach to stakeholders for review rather than a statement of the performance problem and how we'll know we've solved it. Better we should go back to Robert Mager, asking What are we trying to do? How are we going to do it? How will we know we've done it?


Posted by Jay Cross at July 10, 2002 09:28 AM | TrackBack
Comments

awesome !

Posted by: paris hilton photos at June 29, 2004 09:36 PM

30 Poppy Lane
Berkeley, California 94708

1.510.528.3105 (office & cell)



Subscribe to this Blog

Enter your email address to subscribe. We vow never to share your information with anyone. No Spam.

Subscribe Unsubscribe

Reference Pages

Articles
Blogs
Building Community
CSS, Semantic Mark-Up, and codes
Design
First Principles
Glossary
How People Learn
Knowledge Management
Learning Links
Learning Standards
Making It Work (Implementing)
Metrics & ROI
Presentations
Psychology
Social Software
String theory
The eLearning Museum
Time
Visual Learning


Search


Our Infrequent Newsletter
Sign up for our sporadic newsletter.
Email:


Entries by category...

Blogging
Books
Collaboration
Customer care
Design
Emergent Learning
handbook
Jokes
Just Jay
Learning
Meta
Networking
Outbound
Recycled from Blogger
Ref
store
The Industry
Time
Visual
Workflow-based eLearning


Blogroll


Internet Time Group



© 2004 Internet Time Group



Click for Berkeley, California Forecast
Berkeley, California


Recent entries

New Blog
Blogger Experience, Housekeeping, Something New
Loosely Coupled
Above all
Demographics is destiny
Are you setting the bar high enough?
Virtual Apps
Aerobic Learning
Work as Video Game
Oracle and Macromedia, Sitting in a Tree
The Blogosphere
ASTD Silicon Valley
Performance Support
Kingsbridge Conference Center
First Post by Email
Transition
Inactive Blog
RSS Feed for New Site
Comment Spam
Testing ... testing ... 1...2..3
IT Doesn't Matter - Learning Does.
All blogging is political
Mutlimedia Learning
Damn, damn, double damn
Nonverbal impact?
The New Religion
Shhhhh.....
Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!
Business Process Management (2)
Really Big
Business Process Management Conference
WorkFLOW
Don't Lose a Common Sense: LISTEN
It's only natural
Gmail!
Go with the flow
Time Out for the Fair
Informal get-together in SF this Wednesday
Repetition, reverb, and echoes
Who Knows?
Ur-blogging
Cognitive Mapping
Push vs pull
The Big Picture on ROI
Art Break
TDF Finale
New Community of Practice Forming
Dropouts
More TDF04
Training Directors Forum 2004
A Rare One-Liner
PlaNetwork LIVE 2
PlaNetwork LIVE
ASTD 2004 Leftovers
Googlism
Worker Effectiveness Improvement, not KM
Upcoming Events
eLearning Effectiveness?
Jay's Talk at ASTD
Mintzberg & Cooperider
Lest ye forget
ASTD International Conference & Exposition 2004
Knowledge Tips
What is Workflow Learning?
ASTD msg 1 of n
Look out, it's Outlook
Collaboration at ASTD Next Week
Tell me a story
User indifference
Interdependence
The shortest presentation on metrics you will ever hear
Back to Blogger
Windows fixes
The Alchemy of Growth
Grab bag
Very loosely coupled
E-Learning from Practice to Profit
Robin Good kicks off Competitive Edge
China Bloggers
Sonoma Dreaming
Upcoming Events
Emergent Learning Forum: Simulations
'Lanta
The Best Things in Life Are Free
Metrics and Web Services
OpEd: ROI vs. Metrics
e-Merging e-Learning
Loosely Coupled
Search me
Exercise?