Each time I teach the ASTD e-Learning Design Certificate courses, I’m reminded of how many organizations look to e-Learning as the vehicle for delivering compliance training — training that for legal or regulatory reasons the organization is required to conduct and document. Compliance training often is related to certification or accreditation, and failure to comply may result in hefty monetary fines or restrictions to even operate.
I presented a session last week at the eLearning Guild Learning Solutions Conference in Orlando. My session, Creating Value in e-Learning Design through Effective Instructional Feedback,was focused on issues related to crafting useful feedback structures within instructional interactivity. In preparing for the talk, I was looking through a bunch of learning examples and was struck by the huge variation in scope of feedback across a number of instructional applications, all of which I thought were good. In one case, the feedback was little more than a confirmation that a response had been made; in another example, the feedback involved an extended sequence of screens and follow-up questions and multiple levels of judgment. But both, in their own way, seemed exactly right. It got me thinking about how this was possible? Why don't learners feel either gypped in the first instance, or burdened by the second?