Why do all the best writers use editors? Why does software development require such exhaustive quality-control reviews? Why do all skyscraper projects require extensive engineering oversight?
The answer is obvious. Whenever humans work on complex endeavors—whenever there are opportunities for mistakes and blind spots—systematic reviews by experienced experts are required.
Human learning is one of the most complex endeavors—because human cognition is so multifaceted—infinitely more complex than rocket science. Because of this complexity, it’s critical that we support our learning-development efforts with periodic systematic reviews. The need is made greater by the fact that many learning programs have substantial deficiencies in terms of learning effectiveness.
Almost every learning intervention can be substantially improved to produce stronger comprehension, enriched motivation, more long-term remembering, better supports for learning application, and/or an enhanced evaluation approach.
Let me use my own experience as an example. In my learning audits, I’ve looked at classroom training programs, elearning programs, and hybrids of the two. I’ve looked at one-on-one coaching, manager-directed learning, and learning in small groups. I’ve looked at learning programs that were highly sophisticated and one’s that were strictly low budget. I’ve looked at high-fidelity simulations and video-based case studies and I’ve looked at lectures and textbooks as well. Here’s the point: No matter what learning program I’ve looked at, all of them had strengths and weaknesses. Yet each one could have been significantly improved with some relatively simple and inexpensive design changes!
Learning programs can be deficient for a number of reasons. Here’s a short list:
- Decision-making stakeholders request poor learning-design methods.
- Resources are not available to produce more effective designs.
- Project timelines do not enable more effective designs.
- Learning designers are unaware of better learning methods.
- Learning designers are blind to opportunities for improvement.
- Legacy designs compel reuse of poor learning methods.
- Poor needs assessments skew content to wrong topics.
- Poor media choices limit motivation and learning impact.
- Adherence to rigid instructional-design rules hurts learning.
By doing a learning audit, deficiencies that are uncovered can be targeted for improvement. Sometimes these improvements can be made by the learning-design team itself. Other times the learning audit gives us the ammunition to convince stakeholders of the possibility and importance of making learning-design improvements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download the report, How to Conduct a Learning Audit.
Download the job aid, Job Aid -- How to Conduct a Learning Audit.
