The era of work-life balance has evolved due to changes in work flexibility and advances in technology. We now live in a world where the boundaries between work and life and the way we learn and grow, follows suit. To be a top performer in today’s world, you need to drive your own professional growth and development, while maintaining a healthy work-life synergy. The key question is, “How do you effectively integrate a personal learning strategy without experiencing burnout?”

I recently presented a 20-minute webinar covering an expanded definition of self-directed learning and presented a toolkit of steps learners can take to be more effective at owning their self-directed learning strategy. During this interactive webinar, I provided insights on:

• How to develop a personal learning strategy
• Best practices for integrating your strategy as an element of your work-life synergy
• Strategies that learning leaders can use to help support personal learning within their teams and organizations

You can download the full webinar session here. But if you’re looking for the abbreviated version, I’d like to offer a quick look at some of the key takeaways for creating a synergistic self-directed learning plan:

1. Clarify your learning journey
2. Integrate time to learn and reflect
3. Think beyond traditional experiences
4. Expand your moments of learning
5. Create a dynamic list of questions and topics
6. Incorporate brain science into your plan
7. Set smaller, achievable goals and track progress

Are you prepared to own your self-directed learning journey?

When designing technical training, face to face training experience is often the preferred method, but this isn’t always possible and with advances in technology, it may not always be the best approach. The challenge becomes, how do you take all of the information normally conveyed during face to face instruction and map the content to the right modality to get the same outcomes, including when to use hands on experience? Sheri Weppel, Director of Training and eLearning Development, addresses this challenge in our latest video: Rapid Technical Design.

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have been around for a while now and perhaps crested their peak on the “hype curve” with the “Year of the MOOC” as declared in 2013 by The New York Times. Yet MOOCs, or some variation of them, seem to be here to stay.

MOOCs have spawned a range of variants, including:

• BOOCs (Big Open Online Courses), which are similar to MOOCs but are limited to a smaller amount of students, typically 50.
• SPOCs (Small Private Online Courses), which are similar to BOOCs in that the class sizes are limited, but the teacher-student interactions are more closely modeled after traditional classroom interactions. SPOCs typically use the “flipped classroom” model.
• DOCCs (Distributed Online Collaborative Courses) are courses in which the same core course material is distributed to students at multiple institutions, but the exact administration of the material can vary. Students can also engage with each other across institutions via the online component.

At least two of the aforementioned variations specifically take the “M” (or Massive) out of the MOOC, and all models rely heavily on participation and collaboration among the participants.

Does a move away from “massive” place more focus on “meaningful”?

As the dust begins to settle around MOOCs, their efficacy is coming under increasing scrutiny, particularly by those in the academic field.

A September 2015 study by Patrick Lowenthal and Charles Hodges set out to hold MOOCs up against some of the same quality standards that traditional online courses are expected to meet. The study found that none of the MOOCs in the sample did particularly well in the standard surrounding learning objectives. The authors go on to point out they concluded that the failure of meeting the learning objectives standard is more about transparency than whether the course was designed around clear learning objectives. Finally, the study concludes that MOOCs have the potential to be high-quality online courses, at least in terms of course design. The authors state that high-quality (designed) online courses do not simply happen on their own; rather, they are the result of the intentional application of a systematic process of design and evaluation with a goal of improvement over time.

If the maturation of MOOCs is indeed moving from massive to meaningful, this might be evidenced in the rise of more collaborative and social learning platforms and experiences.

Whether it be through ad-hoc learning sessions on platforms like Jabber, Yammer, or Tribe, or more structured collaboration and curation systems such as Degreed or Learnify, knowledge transfer is becoming more and more learner-centered and driven; MOOCs have likely had a significant impact on this democratization of learning.

By opening up learning experiences to the masses, MOOCs have to some degree separated the wheat from the chaff in filtering out truly engaged and involved learners from the “window shoppers,” thus driving the move from “massive” to “meaningful.” So if the next generation of MOOCs do in fact evolve to “Meaningful Open Online Courses,” then they continue to make their mark in the learning ecosphere.

What have your experiences with MOOCs been? Massive? Meaningful? Mysterious? Please comment below and let’s continue the discussion!

In a recent webinar for ATD, Don Duquette, Executive Vice President, GP Strategies Learning Solutions Group, ranked videos as the second-strongest learning trend in 2016. Since most employees are very familiar with device-delivered video, and since the barriers of cost and production are quite low, it’s no surprise that enterprises are beginning to incorporate more video in their training and performance support offerings.

Our industry is buzzing about video.

The challenge for us as L&D professionals is when and how best to use video and to sustain effective offerings. So, I want to talk about theory and research, and follow it up with recommendations. I think you’d agree that this should be the foundation for all we do.

Theory and Research

Learning and performance is a psychological process that we can optimize. I like M. David Merrill’s work that defines several “first principles of instruction” from several instructional design theories. He says, “Learning is promoted when:

• Learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
• Existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new knowledge.
• New knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
• New knowledge is applied by the learner.
• New knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world.”

Video can play a key role, especially given the needs of truly global organizations. We just need to keep the overarching principles in mind, and key research, as we seek to use video. We should look for the most appropriate, sustainable opportunities to leverage this rich media.

Although there is some controversy, I think Richard Clark’s research is fairly sound: The media that exposes the learner to knowledge isn’t the determining factor. The way we use the media is the key. Richard Mayer’s work is worth a read, as well as the work done on cognitive load. If you haven’t already, I suggest you take some time to review the principles and guidelines from that work.

Recommendations

Given the great potential and accelerated adoption rate of video, I think it’s especially important to maximize our chances for success. At the highest level, we need to align video design and integration with what we’re trying to achieve—the performance and learning objectives and KPIs. Those are the ends we should always keep in mind.

I have a few recommendations:

• Perform sound business and training needs analyses.
• Research the current delivery modalities and media in use at the organization. How is video being used now? How well is it received and working? Are there any delivery or sustainability issues?
• Define the solution system—an optimal, feasible, and sustainable mix of training and performance support matched with the optimal modalities.
• Determine the most effective way to gain the support of your sponsor and stakeholders. What is your selling strategy?
• Base the instructional and performance support design for the way people learn. Stick to solid research and instructional design methods to keep on track.
• Start slowly with pilots to inform leadership and justify full-blown offerings.

Advantages of Video

Video is not always the answer, but I believe it does have real strengths over other virtual options such as text or audio, or still images. So, when deciding whether to use video, keep the following advantages in mind:

• Video is ideal for demonstrating a fluid sequence of physical steps with each important variation.
• Video works quite well for explaining and illustrating concepts and elements of a visual nature.
• Video is the best marriage of step-by-step verbal or written instructions and full-motion images.
• Video is very powerful in helping a sponsor establish a personal connection with the audience.
• Video is ideal in giving an immersive experience of a case study or simulation.
• Video can be very engaging and appealing, especially to younger learners.
• Video is ideal for delivery of informal, user-generated content.

Uses of Video

Of course, the potential of video is very great. Here are a few examples of how video can be used:

• Recruiting
• Onboarding
• Products and services demonstrations
• Technical demonstrations
• Instruction/education
• Coaching
• Performance support
• Meeting archiving
• Role playing
• Sales support
• Video conferencing

So, to me, video is like any other tool: I try to use it when it is the best match to a clear, evidenced-based design. As more and more organizations realize the ever-increasing ease of video production and delivery, you’re sure to have more requests for video and opportunities to use it.

Enjoy the ride, but keep the horse on the trail!

We live in the Google era, where a proliferation of content and data is available at our fingertips. We are a society of content creators, sharers, and curators. Everyday more and more people create content on-the-fly to help themselves and others to perform better, faster, and in the best way known to the authors.

As learning professionals, we are aware of the fact that it’s no longer a matter of how well we can write to create content; our ability to deliver is affected by many factors that add a lot of time to our cycles, even with an agile approach. We must be able to leverage the content created by others—enter Content Curation.

Content curation is like baking a cake; you can either start from scratch (traditional content gathering), or use a premade box mix (curated content). In either case, the outcome is similar: a cake (training). The benefit of the semi-homemade cake is that you saved time, work, and money…and you delivered your cake by the time it was needed.

Your technical teams likely have content available, such as cheat sheets, process outlines, step-by-step guides with screenshots, webinar recordings, and more, that has been created to fit their needs. This content can live in different areas many do not have access to. It’s our job to track it down and leverage it as best we can for learning. Here are a few examples that may already exist as content repositories in your organization today:

Our role as learning professionals needs to change to keep pace with the evolution of how people learn. We need to facilitate learning, not limit access and control information. This mindset requires us to be more flexible about:

• Our desire to control the full learning experience
• How we think about our role: developer of content or curator of content
• What quality is, and how much time we spend reworking material that may not be the best, but works
• The fact that “everything learning” won’t reside in the LMS

How can we approach content curation? You have options; here are a few “recipes” that address various types of content and the curation approach and risks/considerations.

Content curation does not come without effort. Here are a few tips you can incorporate when curating content.

5 Tips for Successful Content Curation:

1. Create a Cohesive Experience with learning plans that incorporate the existing content, and then build and extend so that learners leave able to do something they couldn’t do before.
2. Add Diversity by leveraging different content mediums, including video, software simulations, audio, practice activities, articles, and more.
3. Keep an Eye on Quality! You may not own the curated content, but you can influence it over time. Help your authors by creating tips, templates, and other tools to enhance the quality of content your people create.
4. Be Credible. Fact-check and validate curated content to ensure that it is timely and current.
5. Share the Love. Encourage others to exchange information and knowledge through internal and external sources.

The more we know about how the brain makes sense of information and instruction, the more likely we will be able to effectively design high-impact training solutions that lead to improved workplace performance.

During a recent webinar, I dove into a couple perspectives on brain-based learning. I explored a model for applying evidence-based practices to learning solutions to engage the mind and promote transfer to the workplace. I also provided insights on incorporating neuroscience into learning design and performance solutions training.

If you missed it, you can review a recording of the webinar here.

During the session, a number of questions came up, and while we were able to address most of them, we weren’t able to get to all of them due to time. Below are those questions and my best answers. This is an ongoing conversation, and I encourage you to keep the questions coming in via the comments section at the bottom of this page.

Q: Do you think it is always true that, regarding #10 [of John Medina’s Brain Rules], vision trumps all other senses?

A: Personally, I never align with absolutes. However, in my experience, I have seen that learning solutions that incorporate a strong visual component can be more effective than those without. Relevant visual imagery can engage the learner, efficiently convey a concept, and elicit an emotional connection to the content.

The strength of the design can be further bolstered when appropriately blended and integrated with text and audio. If you are a true learning nerd, you could explore the pros and cons of Paivio’s dual encoding theory.

Q: What are the challenges for neuroscience or brain-based learning?

A: The challenge for brain-based learning is building on the base of research to support the theories and avoid the “silver bullet” phenomenon where designers blindly apply a model. There are many theories that have reached a point of rigid application that are not supported by the research. For example, the 70/20/10 hypothesis emphasizes the importance of designing learning solutions that blend and extend beyond the classroom, which is good. However, I would argue that a blend of 40/30/30 or 25/25/50 may also be an appropriate mix for a given situation.

As most reputable neuroscientists will admit, they are just scratching the surface of understanding how the brain learns and applies information.

Q: How do learning styles fit into neuroscience or brain-based learning?

A: I believe it is a commonly held myth that neuroscience or brain-based learning research supports learning styles. However, to date, there is no scientific evidence that learners learn more effectively when content is presented to them in their preferred learning style (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc.) Many other design factors determine the efficacy of a particular learning solution. Here are a couple of articles on learning styles.

The concept of different “learning styles” is one of the greatest neuroscience myths

Learning Styles Challenge — Year Eight — Now at $5,000

Q: I find that compliance training…[and] software application training have different focuses. Do you think that the principles described in this presentation apply similarly?

A: I believe that the design principles do apply to both situations; however, the implementation could be different. For example, in a solution for a new software application, the visual component would be critical in demonstrating how a task is completed (think recorded system demo).

For a compliance program, visual elements can provide critical information about the performance context and/or establishing buy-in through emotional engagement (think anti-money-laundering practice scenario.)

Gamification has such a buzz in the industry, yet it is still very misunderstood. Some feel that gamification means making the entire learning experience a game with portals and avatars and scores. Others are implementing gamification on a smaller scale, creating game-based assessments. What does gamification mean to you, and which techniques should we employ and when?

I recently presented on these questions during a recent webinar, which is part of GP Strategies’ Learning Trends Series for 2016, focusing on using:

1. Portal-based gamification for motivation
2. Game-based solutions to communicate a message
3. Mini games to enhance retention and transfer

If you missed the webinar, a recording is now available. But if you’re looking for the abbreviated version, the following is a quick look at some of the key takeaways:

1. Remember that you don’t have to go “all in” on gamification. Try it out in different ways to see what works in your organization.
2. A pilot is a great way to see how gamification could benefit your organization. Make sure you pick a wide population to get a good representative sample.
3. Finally, there is a range to gamification—but it’s not for everyone and that’s OK! Consider other tools like coaching, on-the-job training, and other modalities instead.

After the presentation, a number of questions came up, and while we were able to address many of them, we weren’t able to get to all of them due to time. Below are those questions and my best answers. This is an ongoing conversation, so I encourage you to keep the questions coming in via the comments section at the bottom of this page.

Q: Can you explain more about “reducing option C” when referring to assessment strategies?

A: That’s the old standard approach that, at times, we forget to mix up the answers when we design multiple-choice questions and make all the answers to the questions C. Using gaming makes the experience feel less like a quiz and gives the learner an opportunity to think more clearly.

Q: Do you find certain generations/demographics are more open to gamification than others?

A: Yes and no. The younger generation definitely leans more towards gamification, but that’s not inclusive of every younger employee you may have. Salesforces also tend to lean towards gamification as well, but again, not the entire salesforce. It’s important to remember that all our learners are unique, and we need to consider a broad learner need.

Q: What are the best development gamification tools available for learning designers?

A: You can actually do an amazing job with mini games in Articulate Storyline. Adding a gaming engine behind the scenes amplifies the experience. Of course, you can also use tools like Unity or Flash for game development.

Q: Are there any easy-to-use authoring tools that you recommend to create the games?

A: Remember that behind the scenes, a game is just multiple choice. It’s all in your approach. Articulate Storyline would do a great job; it’s the creativity you need to bring to the table to make the magic happen.

Q: Younger audiences work well with gamification, but are there any conditions (kinds of games, mini games as opposed to portals, etc.) where older audiences particularly thrive with gamification?

A: For older audiences, the key is keep it short, simple, and relevant. If it gets too complicated to navigate or succeed at, they will lose patience (for the record, this also applies to members of the younger generations as well).

Q: What techniques do you recommend we use to know the audience, and what kinds of things are you looking for in your audience analysis?

A: A survey is always a good way to learn more about your audience. Find out things like what their hobbies are, what’s common in a region, or other anecdotal information. Leverage that information to craft training that will appeal to the population.

Q: Gamification is a very broad category—how would you define it?

A: Gamification, to me, is when you are applying badging and portalization of a learning experience. Unfortunately, that has been used as a sweeping description for anything related to gaming for instruction. Gaming for instruction includes adding gaming qualities to learning or using mini games as assessments.

Q: Is there a rule of thumb for maximum length of time a game should be?

A: It really depends on the game. You can have a series of levels in which a game could take up to an hour and be taken at different times throughout the year. Each level or mini game should be a maximum of 5–7 minutes.

Q: Do you find certain generations/demographics are more open to gamification than others?

A: Actually, no. I think stereotypically there are generalizations made, but there are exceptions to those rules. Gaming is a personal preference, and while younger generations may have more individuals who enjoy gaming, every young person does not fall into that category.

Join us for the next sessions in our Learning Trends 2016 Series:

Neuroscience of Learning: Incorporating Evidence-Based Practices Into Your Learning Solutions

Augmented Learning

Using Beacon Technology to Contextualize mLearning

How to Take Advantage of Learning Technology Trends in 2016

As we discussed in a blog with the following name, scenarios are one of “The Secrets to Developing Highly Effective, Interactive Courses.” Incorporating interactivity into your training is a key way to make content more engaging and memorable. Scenarios can help accomplish that, as well as provide relevance to your content and illustrate critical workplace skills.

In my estimation, however, one of the most compelling elements of any interactive training is the inclusion of realistic consequences. Rather than just telling a learner to select the correct multiple-choice option and then saying “correct” or “incorrect,” you can achieve far greater value by illustrating consequences. Scenarios provide a perfect opportunity for bringing consequences to life in your training content.

Mini-scenarios are great for effecting surface change.

There are two main types of scenarios that we’ll cover in this blog, along with a number of ways in which to employ them: mini-scenarios and branching scenarios. Mini-scenarios, as the name indicates, are far smaller than their counterpart in terms of scope and only encompass one particular scenario. Typically, these types of scenarios focus on surface change rather than aiming to effect deeper change.

Cathy Moore’s blog captures mini-scenarios perfectly: “In a mini-scenario, you make your decision, see the realistic consequence, and figure out if you made a good choice. You might then go to a very different scene representing a different situation. Mini-scenarios are great for covering a lot of possible problems, but they’re not so great for getting deep into a more complex situation.”

When you want to dive deeper into a situation, choose a branching scenario.

In contrast to a mini-scenario, a branching scenario will ask you to make a decision, and then that decision will lead to another decision to make, and another. Some decisions along the way may have short paths to failure to quickly point out the learner’s error. “Not-so-great decisions” may have paths that lead you to a better decision you can make to get back on the good path. In this way, you can walk the learners through the proper steps to lead them toward the goal.

In her blog, Moore suggests you provide at least seven decision points down any single path, even if it’s the not-so-great path. By using a scenario in this way, you show learners the weight each decision holds in getting them from Point A to Point B, you give them the opportunity to correct their path, and you communicate the consequences of each decision, thereby mimicking the process of making decisions in the workplace.

Scenarios use a lot of the elements that make any good game or flipped classroom scenario engaging. Namely, they allow the learner a degree of autonomy, have a degree of mystery/the unknown, and assume a degree of learner intelligence. Take, for example, Moore’s branching scenario for an ethics training session. It places the learner in a role probably familiar everyone reading this post. Namely, it places you at a project kick-off meeting with a client and guides you through dealing with client expectations.

In this scenario, learners are given the basic courtesy of an assumption of basic knowledge, letting them move through the scenario without providing endless instruction. There are also surprises as sometimes tempting choices don’t yield the best results, and names and personalities are attributed to those involved. This scenario also succeeds by not discouraging the learner with a draconian punishment upon a wrong answer. Instead, learners are allowed to go back to their previous choices and rethink their decisions based on the feedback they just received.

Transmedia scenarios offer another approach to scenario-based interactivity.

Learners don’t always have to interact with a story by being the main character, however. They can also comment on the actions of characters who reflect the environment the learner is in. Transmedia storytelling presents a perfect example of this style of interaction.

Essentially, a story takes place over a variety of social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.). The learner has access to the unfolding story and can comment on these social media pages, getting responses from the story characters. The learner also often has the option of participating in forums and discussing the story progression. These conversations might even extend out of cyberspace into the office. One such conversation might go like this:

Carol: “Hey, in this week’s scenario, why do you think Sally failed to disinfect the wound with soap and water before using Betadine?”

Tim: “I don’t know, Carol, but I think it’s a pretty common error. George almost did the same thing last week before I caught him.”

Carol: “That was a good catch, Tim! I admit I don’t always pay attention to the job aids posted on the wall, but this week’s scenario brought it to my attention.”

Tim: “I know what you mean. In the scenario, Sally got hepatitis C, but I checked the job aid the scenario pointed out, and that’s just one of the possible diseases you can catch!”

The ability of training to inspire further learner interaction and engagement with the material can be the key difference between success and failure in terms of learner retention. It is worth noting that transmedia is a very time-consuming way to encourage interaction because for it to be effective, posts have to be made and social media monitored and responded to in a timely fashion.

Simpler is always better when it comes to training design.

When surveying the three scenario approaches we’ve mentioned here, it’s important to consider that bigger, more complex, and more techno-savvy options are not necessarily better. What’s key is choosing the right tool for the job. With interactivity and engagement as the goal, you may decide gamification is your best vehicle, as we’ve written about in another blog post in this series. Or perhaps a simple survey at the end of a traditional training session can produce the results you need. The goal is to get to know the strengths and weaknesses of all of the tools in your chest and match the right approach to the job.

In a previous post titled, “The Secrets to Developing Highly Effective, Interactive Courses,” we discussed the most effective ways to incorporate interactivity into training. Gamification was identified as one of the key ways to make your training content more relevant, engaging, and memorable.

Gamification differs from video games in that it involves game elements being incorporated into training. As Karl Kapp points out in TD magazine, “Gamification provides the designer or trainer with the tools to think about instruction from the perspective of engagement and activity without the large-scale investment in the development of a full-blown instructional game…[and] without the heavy time commitment necessary to play most games.”

A straight video game is something played for enjoyment, while gamification efforts center on building mastery of a particular subject (one more related to a learner’s job than discovering which castle the princess is in). Building mastery is a key element in interactivity because it gives people a sense of accomplishment that, in the context of the workplace, holds more value for the learner than merely having fun.

Use structural gamification as a tool to move the learner through your content.

Although there are many subtypes of gamification, there are two main types for us to consider: structural and content. According to Kapp, structural gamification is “the application of game elements to propel a learner through content, with no alteration or changes to the content.” So, with this style of gamification, learners might earn points, levels, etc. as they progress through content.

We see this approach often, simply because it’s relatively easy to just add points in. However, just adding points to training isn’t going to maintain learner interest indefinitely. Extrinsic motivation is used when learners don’t have an interest in the content and should be used more heavily when a learner has low interest in the topic. There should be incentivizing around the points in order to give them value beyond simple numbers housed in the training.

Pep Boys demonstrated this highly effectively with their safety and loss training. Each day, employees would be tested on the monthly training they received with a quiz-type game that could win them cash prizes. The entire quiz required 30–90 seconds to take each day, and if a question was answered incorrectly, a short training intervention would occur. The program was highly successful with a voluntary participation rate of 95%, a 45% reduction in safety incidents, and a 60% increase in employee theft hotline calls.

Use content gamification to move the learner through increasing levels of understanding.

Rather than just moving the learner through content, content gamification is like scaffolding, helping move learners from one level of understanding to the next. This sort of approach should be utilized when you need a story to encompass your instructional message as opposed to just providing points for viewing created materials. In gamified content, the challenges start out easy with plenty of guiding hints for the learner to use as a crutch. However, the hints are gradually withdrawn and the challenges increase in difficulty as the learner progresses.

A deeper look into the Pep Boys example reveals that the company went beyond simple structural gamification to full content gamification. “Associates answered quick, targeted questions related to risk, loss prevention, safety, and operational policies and procedures—standard questions in these areas. If they answered correctly, they played a slot-machine game titled ‘Quiz to Win’ for a chance to win cash prizes. If they answered incorrectly, the system immediately presented a short training piece designed to specifically address the topic covered in the initial question. Questions repeated at various intervals until the associate demonstrated mastery of the topic.”

This is interactivity that is specific to learner input, making the learning more powerful and targeted. If learners have already demonstrated mastery of a specific type of content, making them go through training on a topic they already grasp is redundant. However, by redirecting a learner to additional training at the point where it’s needed, training is made more relevant.

Relevance is key when choosing gamification as your strategy.

In all gamification it’s important to have a clearly stated goal at the start, and as with all training, have things well-structured with a meaningful progression. Don’t get sucked in to making something “fun” for fun’s sake and then try to justify it by saying, “Oh, well it’s interactive.” Throwing game elements at training without considering how they can be used to further learning is ineffective.

Gamification is something that should be considered when you need to immerse learners in the context in which the actions they will be performing occur. As Kapp states, “For concepts to be retained and behaviors changed, the person learning the new information needs to be engaged, actively involved, and aware of how the learning fits into his daily demands.”

Just because gamification is new and shiny doesn’t mean you shouldn’t overlook simple solutions and go straight for the popular trend. As with all solutions, it’s important to start out by seriously considering alternatives. Scenario-based approaches can be just as effective, for example, as we have discussed in another blog about interactivity. Whatever option you choose, it’s always best to go for the simplest solution for achieving the results you want.

More often than not, interactivity and engagement are the primary ways of making training more effective, engaging, and memorable. While that statement may not be an earth-shattering revelation, the secret to executing the strategy successfully can be elusive when it comes to the kind of process and behavioral changes you want to introduce with your training.

Like with any training strategy, there are effective ways to incorporate interactivity into your training and there are less effective ways. So we’re going to hit on both in order to offer a deeper understanding of how to make it work for you.

Interactivity for interactivity’s sake is not effective.

To start, interactivity, when used in relation to instructional design and training in general, relates to the involvement of the learners with the material and the learning process. There are multiple levels to this participation, with training interactivity ranging from passive to highly involved.

Passive training would be exemplified by a page turner where learners just click “next,” or in the case of gated/locked training, distractedly look at their phone or check email until the audio stops, and then press “next.” The learners are interacting, but they are not engaged with the training, which is essentially just washing over them as they endure the time being taken out of their day.

An example of highly involved interactivity might be where learners are asked by the trainer to raise their hands whenever the name of a training exercise has the same first letter as the state in which they were born. While this is technically interactive and may encourage learners to pay more attention to the training, it does nothing to help them gain a better grasp of the material because the use of interactivity is not engaging or relevant to the course content.

Engagement is a key element in any interactivity effort.

Well-developed interactivity will naturally breed engagement, but that doesn’t mean the engagement element can be an afterthought. An instructional designer needs to create that engagement from the start, and then maintain it throughout the course.

Engaging learners from the get-go can be a tricky proposition and one for which I think we, as a collective whole, need to learn from the best—marketers. Instructional designer and author Cathy Moore wrote an excellent article highlighting three ideas employed by marketing that are often overlooked in the instructional design world:

1. Assume the learner is smart. Don’t lead them by the nose or talk down to them; instead, allow them to connect the dots and draw conclusions for themselves.
2. Establish a personality (other than “dry”) for your training. And instead of just name-dropping faceless positions, like “Line Cook 5,” give them a name and personality, too.
3. Keep things interesting with surprises.

To illustrate these three points, Moore shows us a commercial for Dollar Shave Club, and then takes that same content, removes all of the sizzle, and inserts it into your typical training page-turner. When you remove the personality and assumption of learner intelligence, the content becomes much less engaging.

While advertising and training are different animals, the same principles apply when it comes to engagement. After all, both training and advertising are modeled to inspire others to action. So these three points apply to the whole of training, and even in those cases where learners are not directly interacting (as with the Dollar Shave Club commercial), they are learning.

Three smart ways are available to bring interactivity into your training.

To really get the most from interactivity, it can’t be something you design into your program as an afterthought. It should be incorporated from the beginning. That said, there is one easy way to incorporate interactivity into an already designed training program to demonstrate interactivity’s ability to make training more effective.

Adult learning theory (and general common sense) indicates that when learners care about the material and are engaged with it, they are more likely to learn. So a simple debrief after training is a perfectly valid means of employing interactivity. It gives the designer the chance to get more learner insight into training for additional fine-tuning in the future, as well as giving learners an opportunity to progress to a deeper understanding of the material by talking with colleagues. Both the instructional designer and the learners come out ahead in this interaction.

The other two methods are more complex ways to incorporate interactivity:

• Bringing gaming elements into training is a hot topic these days for a reason—done well, it works on all levels. It’s engaging. It aids memorability. It’s fun, so people want to learn. And, ideally, it’s relevant to the learning content. There are two main approaches to consider: a structural application where content is unchanged, but learners earn points or badges as they progress through the content. And a content application where the difficulty level gradually increases as learners move through the content.
• Scenarios. One of the most compelling elements of any interactive training is a scenario incorporating consequences. You can use mini-scenarios where you make a decision, see the consequence of that decision, and then figure out if you made a good choice. This approach works for many instances, but not when you want to effect deeper change. For that, choose a branching approach where one decision leads to another decision, then another, and so on before you come to your consequence. Along the way, you can include branches that lead back to good decisions if learners are recognizing that they have started down the wrong path. This approach should echo the real-life choices and consequences a learner would face in the workplace.

It is a commonly held misconception that a high-tech solution is required to achieve interactivity, but that’s not always the case. Gamification may require some bells and whistles, depending on how you design it, but the scenario-based approach and the debrief do not. One of the most important things to incorporate into any interactive, engaging training intervention requires no technology at all—relevance. Make your interactive and engaging elements relevant to the training you’re trying to impart and you’re almost guaranteed success.

Create your effective, engaging, and interactive training with purpose.

The effective use of interactivity requires forethought and planning. Just “adding interactivity” as a series of mouse clicks isn’t enough. Useful interactivity encourages learner engagement with the material, is translatable to the skills they are supposed to be learning, and supports the absorption of those skills.

Likewise, making learning engaging goes beyond just adding elements of fun. The fun must be relevant to the learning content in order to build a sense of mastery and achievement. As Moore says, “Successfully making increasingly difficult choices in a realistic scenario is far more likely to build a sense of mastery. Building mastery provides the real fun…we should…design challenging, realistic activities that give people a sense of accomplishment.”

There are countless ways to incorporate interactivity and engagement into your training; some are more effective than others depending on the situation. What’s important is integrating interactivity in such a way that feels natural and furthers learner knowledge absorption. As you move forward with training, always ask yourself what’s the simplest and most effective approach. Don’t build just to build. Create with purpose.

Download our whitepaper, “Using Interactivity and Engagement Effectively in Gamification and Scenario-Based Training” for a more in-depth look at this topic.