raditional definitions of blendedlearning focus on the mix of face-to-face and online delivery within alearning intervention: essentially a

combination of two highly-contrastinglearning media.

By 'learning media' I mean the channelsthrough which learners interact withcontent, peers and tutors. Using thisdefinition, a typical blend might combinesomething face-to-face (perhaps aworkshop or some on-job instruction) withsomething online (maybe some e-contentor web conferencing).

The argument for blending media is that inmany circumstances it is difficult, if notimpossible, to optimise outcomes throughthe use of a single learning medium – a mixwill do the job better. There simply isn’t onelearning medium that works in anycircumstance, just as there is not a singletool that will work for all forms of DIY or a

single software application that can be usedfor all office tasks. Research from academiabacks up the idea that a combination offace-to-face and online learning worksbetter:

• Blended learning can improve learningoutcomes (studies conducted at theUniversity of Tennessee, and StanfordUniversity)

• Students are very positive about blendedlearning (Sharpe et al, 2006)

• Blended learning produced a strongersense of community among students (Rovaiand Jordan, 2004)

• Blended learning improves students’interaction and overall satisfaction (DeLaceyand Leonard, 2002)

• Blended learning maximises theadvantages of both face-to-face and onlinelearning (Schlager et al, 2002)

• Blended learning improves students’satisfaction (Dziuban et al, 2004; Wingard,2004)

• Blended learning improves the interactionbetween peers and instructors (Chamberlinand Moon, 2005)

• On average, students who took all or partof their instruction online performed betterthan those taking the same course throughface-to-face instruction. Further, those whotook blended courses appeared to do bestof all (meta-analysis conducted by the USDepartment of Education, 2010)

Workplace surveys yield similarly positiveresults:

• A structured curriculum of blendedlearning generated a 30% increase inaccuracy of performance and a 41-percentincrease in speed of performance oversingle-delivery options (NETg survey, 2003)

October 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 7

Welcome to the first feature

in a four-part series. Here,

Clive Shepherd defines the

characteristics of a successful

blended solution.

MAKING THE CASE FOR BLENDED SOLUTIONS

T

• For 89% of employees, blended learningis living up to users’ expectations ‘well’ or‘very well’ (CEGOS survey of 2,355employees across Europe, 2009)

• Some 86% of respondents are blendingfrequently or sometimes. Of these, 54% arereporting improvements in businessperformance (report from Kineo and TheOxford Group, 2013)

This is useful evidence but it does notprovide a clear picture of why blendedlearning works. As research from Sitzmannand Wisher (2006) has established, themedium has a relatively insignificantinfluence on learning effectiveness. It is themethods you use which will determinewhether an intervention delivers against itsobjectives; the choice of media, on theother hand, helps to optimise efficiency (theuse of resources, such as time, money,equipment and facilities) as well asproviding employers and learners withimproved flexibility in how, where and whenlearning can take place.

When you mix face-to-face and onlinelearning, you are doing much more thanjust shifting the medium. You are highlylikely to be using the two approaches forvery different purposes. For example, youmay be use online learning for self-studyand the classroom for practical groupactivities. The mix of different methods(self-study and group activities) is muchmore likely to be making the difference interms of learning effectiveness than thecombination of two delivery channels.

If you want to enhance the effectiveness ofa learning intervention, then you are morelikely to blend the social context (individual,one-to-one or group learning) or thelearning strategy than you are the medium.

Once you have established the right mix ofsocial contexts and strategies for learning,you can divert your attention to selectingthe learning media that will allow all this tohappen as efficiently as possible. Although,in most cases, a mix of media will workbest, it is also conceivable that a singlemedium will work for every element of yourblend. In other words, it is possible that areally effective blend could be implementedentirely online or entirely face-to-face.

As a result I put forward a new definitionfor blended learning:

A blended learning solution mixes socialcontexts for learning (self-study, one-to-one, small group, larger community) anddifferent learning strategies with the aim ofincreasing learning effectiveness. It may alsomix learning media (face-to-face, online,print etc.,) to increase efficiency. Thesechoices will be made in the context of aparticular learning requirement, audience

characteristics, and practical constraints andopportunities.

WHEN BLENDING PAYS OFF

The argument for blended learning is reallyvery simple. Each of the most commonapproaches to learning and developmenthas its own extensive array of advantagesand disadvantages. Take the examples offace-to-face workshops, one-to-onecoaching sessions and online self-studycontent – each is capable of contributing tothe effectiveness of a learning interventionand at the same time, getting in the way.Each has its efficiencies and itsinefficiencies.

In some situations, given the particularlearning requirements, audiencecharacteristics and practical constraints andopportunities, the disadvantages are notsignificant and can be tolerated. In otherscases, the compromise is too great and thesolution becomes unsatisfactory – only ablend of approaches will achieve thelearning effectiveness that you require,while making efficient use of availableresources, such as time, budget, skills, tools,equipment and facilities.

So what are those situations? A blendedapproach is most likely to be appropriate…

When…the learning requirement iscomplex and multi-faceted: You are muchless likely to blend if all your learningobjectives are of a single class – knowledgeand information, cognitive skills,interpersonal skills, motor skills, attitudeshifting etc. Conversely, when yourobjectives are wide-ranging, it could bereally hard to find a single approach thatwill cover them all.

Take a typical training task in which youwant someone to develop a skill and applythis on the job. This may involve conveyingsome background knowledge, such as facts,concepts and principles; it may demand thatyou demonstrate the skill in question; youmay want to provide an opportunity for safepractice of the skill; and the next step maybe to support the learner in their firstattempts to use the skill in a live situation.Chances are you'll need a blend here as youmove across the continuum from abstract toconcrete, from theory to practice.

When…the learning need is sizeable andthe intervention is therefore likely to beprolonged: Because there are moreingredients to be organised, blending comesat a price administratively, so you’re lesslikely to create a blend for a one-hourintervention than you are for, say, a three-week induction or on-boarding programme.A blended solution will, almost bydefinition, offer more variety and thereforehelp to maintain interest.

When…the target audience is relativelyheterogeneous in terms of their priorknowledge, motivation, preferences,independence: Blended solutions lendthemselves to a modular architecture,providing learners with more flexibility tomix and match the elements that meettheir needs. You can also design someredundancy into a blend, so elementsoverlap to some degree in the content theyaddress. This allows learners some scope toconcentrate on those elements that theyfind most helpful and/or most convenient intheir particular circumstances. Blends canalso be modified and extended while theintervention is in progress, to respond toproblems and opportunities that arise.

So, not all situations require a blend, but asizeable proportion does. It would be fair tosay that a great many current learninginterventions are attempting the impossible– because they employ a single socialcontext or delivery medium, when it clearlyisn't versatile enough to do the job.

BLENDED LEARNING IS A CONTINUUM

Sometimes it seems the more you thinkabout blended solutions, the harder it is todefine what is and what is not blended. Thisdecision is complicated by the fact thatthere are so many aspects of a solution thatyou can choose to blend:

Learning methods:

• You can blend the social contexts inwhich the learning takes place (the learneralone, the learner with ateacher/trainer/coach, the learner with agroup of peers)

• You can blend the educational andtraining strategies that you use (exposition,instruction, guided discovery, exploration)

Learning media:

• You can blend the primary medium usedto deliver your methods (face-to-face,online, print etc)

• You can blend between asynchronousmedia (which provide the learner with

8 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills October 2013

MAKING THE CASE FOR BLENDED SOLUTIONS

choice over when it is that they participate)and synchronous media (when all participantshave to be available at the same time)

I'm coming to the conclusion that blendingis a continuum, from not blending at all atone extreme, through to very significantshifts in methods and media within a singlesolution. Let's look at some points upon thiscontinuum, starting with the least blended:

1. You use a single method and mediumthroughout, e.g. a) reading from a book,b) coaching face-to-face.

2. You use a variety of methods, albeit withina single social context, but only a singlemedium, for example: a) a classroom coursewith case studies, presentations, discussion,role-play; b) an e-learning course includingdemos, simulations, quizzes.

3. You use a variety of methods, employingdifferent social contexts, but still deliveredthrough a single learning medium, forexample: a) within a face-to-face classroomcourse, you employ a mix of self-study, one-to-one coaching and group work; b) withinan online distance learning course, you use amix of self-study, one-to-one support,collaboration through an online discussionforum and live online group sessions.

4. You use a variety of methods, employingdifferent social contexts, but this time youuse a variety of media as well, for example amix of face-to-face workshops, self-studywith printed materials and CDs, onlineforum discussions, telephone tutor support.

Clearly example 1 above is not blended at alland number 4 is, from any perspective, butwhat about 2 and 3? They are blended insome respects but not others. And does itreally matter whether a solution can bedefined as blended or not? Surely the onlyimportant issue is whether it works.

It would be easy to argue that, with so littleagreement on definitions, the concept of ablended solution is not actually useful, but Ican't accept that. So many solutions,particularly in workplace learning, employ asingle approach throughout when thisdoesn't really deliver the results. Theapproach may work for some aspects of thesolution but not for all.

A good example would be a standaloneclassroom workshop that attempts to delivera body of knowledge, as well as provideopportunities for practice and discussion. Theclassroom may do a good job of the latterbut not the former. And it ignores the fact

that learning continues beyond theclassroom and into the workplace, and thismay need to be supported by coaching andreference materials.

The whole idea of blending is to use theright methods and media at each and everystep in a solution, whether the elements areformal, informal, on-demand or experiential.

MAKING THE CASE FOR BLENDED SOLUTIONS

October 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 11

Clive Shepherd is a consultant in learningand communications technologies atOnlignment.http://onlignment.com/http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.co.uk/Twitter: @cliveshepherd

Still to come in this four-partseries…

Part 2 (November): Ten Tips for BetterBlends

Part 3 (December): Measuring Timeand Cost of a Blended Solution

Part 4 (January): Implementing andEvaluating a Blended Solution

here is nothing inherentlywonderful about a blendedsolution. Making the decision todesign an intervention in a blended

format is just the first step – the quality ofyour end result depends on what youinclude in the blend, and when and howwell these decisions reflect the learningrequirement, the characteristics of yourtarget population and the particularresource constraints within which you arebeing asked to operate.

ANALYSING THE SITUATION

Tip 1: Don’t jump to solutions – startwith sound analysis

This one’s a bit obvious, but it needs saying.It’s oh so tempting when confronted with anew project to jump straight into thecreative process of selecting the ingredientsfor your blend without a clearunderstanding of what it is that you’re

required to achieve. There will be plenty ofroom for creativity later on in the designprocess, although you may find that the‘how’ becomes all too obvious once you’veanswered the questions ‘what’, ‘why’, ‘whofor’, ‘by when’ and ‘for how much’.

To conduct a thorough analysis you needto be systematic and persistent; systematicto make sure you fully explore all aspectsof the learning, the learners and thelogistics, and persistent, because projectsponsors may be reluctant to answer somany questions. A good test is how clearlyyou feel you could articulate therequirement to a third party; if you cannotexplain it properly, then you don’tunderstand it well enough.

Tip 2: Stop expert and client dictatingthe solution

A subject matter expert should be yourfriend and partner, but he or she should not

be your master. Their role is to ensure thequality of the technical content; yours is toensure that the learning objectives areachieved. Of course the SME may be ableto provide you with valuable insights intothe best ways to communicate theirexpertise, but they are not ideally placed tooffer this advice. Why? Because subjectexperts suffer from ‘the curse of knowledge’– they believe that every aspect of theirsubject is not only of vital importance butintrinsically interesting to just abouteveryone. They are wrong.

The situation is similar with clients andother forms of project sponsor. Try not tolet them dictate to you how their needsshould be met. Your relationship should beone of professional adviser, not order taker.The client’s responsibility is to articulatetheir needs. Yours is to help them to meetthese needs effectively and efficiently.

November 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 75

The following tips will not

guarantee great design

decisions, says Clive

Shepherd, but they will point

you in the right direction.

Welcome to Part Two of

Clive’s four-part series on

blended learning.

TEN TIPS FOR BETTER BLENDS

T

Tip 3: Focus on performance, notknowledge

Schools and colleges exist primarily tofoster learning. Employers are onlyinterested in learning to the extent that itinfluences performance. Employers investin learning interventions because theybelieve these will positively impact on theirkey performance indicators, but they havelots of other ways to spend their moneyand need reassurance that they are gettinga good return.

So, focus in on business needs and whatemployees need to be doing differently orbetter if these needs are to be met. Thenask yourself what employees absolutelymust know if they are to do the things thatthe business needs. This focus will ensureyou don’t overload employees withinformation they don’t need and that,instead, you provide lots of opportunitiesfor them to practise and build confidence.

DETERMINING METHODS

Tip 4: Don’t overdo the self-study

Self-study provides attractive benefits tolearners, particularly in the control that itallows them over what they learn, when,where and at which pace. It also puts asmile on the face of the finance director,because it’s so cheap, at least when thereare lots of people who require training. Butblends have to be effective as well as cheapand flexible. As we’ve seen, they mustdeliver in terms of performance.

Self-study works well in small doses, but

we are social animals and need toexternalise our learning, to reassureourselves of our progress, and to compareour thoughts with others. Not only that;after prolonged periods of self-study we arebursting with questions and commentsthat can only be adequately resolved bycontact with coaches and experts.

Tip 5: Build in lots of new skillsopportunities

We have already discussed how easy it is tooverload learners with information,particularly abstract theory, facts andprocedures. Another side effect of our focuson knowledge is that we allow far too littletime for learners to practise new skills.Imagine if you went to a tennis lesson andspent the whole time watching videos anddiscussing tactics: how frustrating wouldthat be?

Generally speaking it’s best to provide thelearner with the absolute minimumamount of information they need beforethey can start practising. You can top up onthe theory later, as they encounterdifficulties and are striving to get better;that’s why coaching can play a valuablerole in so many blends.

Tip 6: Use guided discovery to get acrossthe big ideas

Some tasks are rule-based – they arecarried out in accordance with clearly laid-down policies and procedures. But nearly alljobs also require the incumbent to makejudgements in highly variable situations.These tasks are principle-based; they rely

on the employee’s ability to make sense ofthe myriad of cause and effect relationshipsthat impact on them in their work.

It is rarely effective to convey principlesthrough exposition or instruction. You willnot be nicer to customers, stop eatingchocolate or finish your meetings on timejust because someone else tells you thesethings are important. You need to discoverthe big ideas for yourself, either throughhard experience or through a learningactivity that has been designed specially toencourage those ‘A-ha!’ moments.

SELECTING MEDIA

Tip 7: Keep a balance betweensynchronous and asynchronous

Asynchronous media work at your pace –there is no requirement for you to be ‘insynch’ with anyone else. You can consumethe contents of books, DVDs and iPods – ortheir online equivalents – whenever youwant. You have similar flexibility when youcommunicate using email, forums, SMS andsocial networks.

But there’s something special aboutparticipating in a live event in the companyof your peers. It focuses your energies andhelps to ensure you keep up-to-date withyour self-paced learning activities.Synchronous experiences, whether face-to-face, online or on the telephone, enrich ablend and provide it with momentum.Sometimes a blend can be too flexible – itmakes it too easy to put off those essentiallearning tasks until another day.

76 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills November 2013

TEN TIPS FOR BETTER BLENDS

Tip 8: Method first, technology second

Technology will rarely make much of animpact on the effectiveness of yoursolution. Yes it could make it faster, cheaper,more flexible and more scalable, but itwon’t guarantee that you achieve yourgoals. The first priority in any learningdesign – once you have a clearunderstanding of the requirement – is toestablish the strategies that will bestfacilitate the required learning for yourparticular population.

Once you have a strategy you believe in,don’t compromise. There is absolutely nopoint in going for a highly efficient solutionthat doesn’t work. So, take each element inyour strategy and ask yourself how you candeliver this efficiently and flexibly, withoutcompromising on the intended outcomes.Technology is a tool, not a goal in itself.

Tip 9: Face-to-face learning still plays animportant role

However fast your bandwidth and howeverhigh-resolution your webcam, you cannotfully replicate a multi-sensory, face-to-faceexperience online – at least not for now.There are occasions when learners really doneed to get hands-on with tools and

equipment (perhaps even with each other),explore a real physical space, be aware ofthe body language of others in the room orjust experience the magic of the occasion.

Most learning does not require you to beface-to-face with others – just like youhappily listen to music on your iPod, watchsport on TV or films at the cinema – butsome does. While face-to-face learning willincreasingly become the special case ratherthan the default, it will still have a valuablerole. Imagine if you never, ever got to go toa theatre, watch a live band or join thecrowd at a football stadium.

THE OVERALL PROCESS

Tip 10: Extend the blend throughout thelearning journey

For far too long we’ve deluded ourselvesinto thinking we can achieve meaningfullearning through a single live event or usinga single resource, however brilliantly theseare facilitated or designed. Learning is aprocess, a journey, which requires time anda wide range of initiatives, some byteachers, trainers and coaches, but many bylearners themselves.

One of the primary arguments for blending

is that it allows us to dispense with the ideaof learning as an event and look to providejust the right support to the learner at everystep they take from ignorance to mastery.This starts by helping them prepare for theirjourney, providing formal learning activitiesand resources, encouraging application tothe real work situation – and thenfollowing-up with additional input andguidance. That’s further than most learningdepartments currently go, but anything lessis a job half done, at best.

TEN TIPS FOR BETTER BLENDS

November 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 79

Clive Shepherd is a consultant in learningand communications technologies atOnlignment.http://onlignment.com/http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.co.uk/Twitter: @cliveshepherd

In future issues of Inside LearningTechnologies & Skills

Part 3 (December): Measuring Timeand Cost of a Blended Solution

Part 4 (January): Implementing andEvaluating a Blended Solution

he priority in any blend iseffectiveness, which is a product ofthe educational and trainingmethods that you select. In a blend

there is likely to be a mix of social contextsfor learning (learning on your own; one-to-one with an instructor, coach or facilitator;or with a group of fellow learners).

Often there are a number of strategies(simple exposition of information,instruction, guided discovery andexploration). These factors determinewhether the blend will deliver the requiredlearning and meet the underlying learningneed.

There is no point in implementing afast, inexpensive solution if it doesn't

work. However, once you've locked down amethodology that will deliver the goods,you still have plenty of scope.

For example, a group discussion could takeplace in a face-to-face workshop, a virtualclassroom or on an online forum; a video

could be distributed on DVD or streamedonline to mobile devices; a coaching sessioncould be conducted face-to-face, bytelephone or on Skype.

You also have options in terms of how youresource content and expertise: Do you doall the work in-house, employ an externalcontractor, purchase a solution off-the-shelf, or some mix of these? The choicesyou make will have a big impact on timeand cost.

To determine the best way forward in eachsituation, you need to be able to compareeach option on a directly comparable basisin terms of cost and the time required todeliver. That's not quite as simple as it mayseem.

December 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 67

Blended learning is not inherently quick or inexpensive. The efficiency of a blend depends

wholly on the ingredients of which it is composed, says Clive Shepherd – in Part Three of his

four-part series.

ESTIMATING TIMEAND COST OF ABLENDED SOLUTION

T

COMPARING COSTS

To compare alternative blends, you have totake account of all the costs, not just thecase that is directly expended on outsideproducts and services. You would beamazed how many learning professionalsonly recognise direct costs, such as travelexpenses, fees paid to freelance trainers orthe costs of using external developers.Chances are these will represent only asmall proportion of the true overall cost toyour organisation.

If you only measure direct costs, you canmake some bizarre decisions. I can’tremember how many times I have beentold that work carried out in-house is free,however long it takes or inexpertly it isexecuted. True, internal labour is typicallybudgeted a long time in advance and ispaid from an organisation's overheadbudget, but it is certainly not free. Salaries,taxes, pensions and other benefits, not tomention all manner of support costs, arepaid in hard cash by an employer, just asany direct expenditure on a trainingprogramme. If the labour was not beingexpended on designing, developing ordelivering blended learning it could bedispensed with – hard but true. The fact isthat many learning professionals do notinclude internal costs in their calculationsbecause they do not want to make visiblejust how much they cost, and you can seewhy.

The most important of all indirect costs isthe time it takes for employees to engagein a learning solution – time that couldhave been spent directly contributing tothe organisation's key performanceindicators (KPIs). To ignore these costs issimply madness. A blend that significantlyreduces the amount of time employeesspend away from the job (assuming thatthe solution is at least as effective as whatwent before) will make a significantcontribution to an organisation'sprofitability. In some circumstances itmight be necessary to incur more directcosts to secure this time saving, let's saysomething like the external development ofsome interactive learning materials, yet thenet benefit to the organisation could besubstantial. If you only consider direct costsin your calculations you miss out on thispotential benefit.

The following table provides a hypotheticalexample, looking at the first year of costsonly:

What's more, in year two the advantagewould be even greater, because the costs ofthe external materials will already havebeen absorbed. This makes the point thatcosts need to be viewed over anappropriate time horizon, typically the

realistic lifetime of a solution. Someelements in a blend may be expensive todevelop but relatively cheap to deliver –the classic example being self-studymaterials. You are not going to make theright judgment if you look only at theinitial period in which all the up-front costsare borne. Perhaps the useful measure hereis the cost per learner over the lifetime ofthe solution.

INVESTING NOW TO SAVE MONEYLATER

One of the greatest difficulties thatlearning professionals have is in comparingmethods that have different mixes of fixedand variable costs.

Let’s say you are thinking of implementinga development programme that exploresimportant new ideas for the future runningof your business. One option you have is tocentre your blend on a series of face-to-face workshops for groups of, say, ten.Quite probably there are few fixed costs

involved, just a modest amount of designand development time. The variable costs,on the other hand, are very high. Afacilitator has to be present at eachworkshop and all participants have to travelto the events.

In contrast, you could decide to run yourprogramme as a large-scale online course,with an unlimited number of participants.Let’s say you decide to invest aconsiderable amount of time and effort inproducing videos and interactive scenariosto provide a catalyst for assignments andonline discussions that pretty well runthemselves. The fixed costs are relativelyhigh.

If only a handful of people take the course,the costs would be much higher than theequivalent face-to-face offering. However,what if 100 enrol, or 1,000, or 10,000? Theincremental delivery cost for each newlearner becomes closer and closer to zero(although, as we’ve already seen, thelearner’s time is also a critical element).

68 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills December 2013

ESTIMATING TIME AND COST OF A BLENDED SOLUTION

Blend 1 – a largely face-to-face solution

Blend 2 – with a reducedface-to-face element,substituted by self-study

Direct costs (in the case ofblend 1, this is primarilylearner travel expenses; inthe case of blend 2, thereis the additional cost ofexternal development ofnew materials)

£10K £30K

Indirect costs (primarilylearner time away fromthe job; in the case ofblend 2, travel time isreduced and learning timeis accelerated throughinteractive self-study)

£100K £50K

Total £110K £80K

Option 1 – the blendcentres on face-to-faceworkshops

Option 2 – large-scaleonline programme

Development cost £5,000 £50,000

Delivery cost per learner £500 £500

Facilitator costs perlearner

£200 £50

Cost per learner if tenpeople take the course

£1,200 £5,550

Cost per learner if 1,000take the course

£700 £600

Cost if 10,000 take thecourse

£700 £555

TIME MATTERS TOO

As the example on page 68 shows, the morelearners enrol on the programme, thegreater the advantage of investing the£50,000 in the development of newmaterials (the fixed costs), as delivery costsdrop because of the reduced need forfacilitation (the variable costs). Thedifference would be much starker if youwere to set aside the £500 cost of thelearner’s time.

But the cost of designing, developing anddelivering a learning solution is not the onlyconsideration when choosing a blend. Inmany cases, time is every bit as important –or should we say timeliness?There is a realcost to an organisation of an employee notbeing fully competent to do their job. Thiscost keeps racking up day after day. So,while cost per learner may be a usefulmeasure, alongside this we also have toconsider how long it would take to deliverthe solution to the entire target population.

Going back to our example, if there was aneed to train 10,000 employees then youwould be seriously held back by the need tofind enough facilitators to run all thoseworkshops for groups of ten at a time. Let’s

face it; there simply is no way you can run1,000 workshops quickly. But you can runone very large-scale online programme. Andthat’s where timeliness comes into theequation. Getting the job done quicklymeans that there are less people in theorganisation without the skills needed to dotheir job properly or, to put it morepositively, more people out there doing thebest they can.

So, we’ve seen that while our first priority isto come up with an effective blend, we needa systematic way of comparing all thedifferent ways we could implement thatblend. That means taking all costs intoaccount, not just those that require anexternal payment; it means taking a longerterm view over the lifetime of a solution;and looking for approaches that get the jobdone sooner rather than later.

ESTIMATING TIME AND COST OF A BLENDED SOLUTION

December 2013 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 71

Clive Shepherd is a consultant in learningand communications technologies atOnlignment.http://onlignment.com/http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.co.uk/Twitter: @cliveshepherd

dopting blended learning as astrategy is anything but ‘businessas usual’. The ingredients youintend using in your blends may

be familiar to you, your clients and yourcustomers, but the blending process maywell be something new. Those involved maynot welcome it at first look.

To steel yourself to manage this process,it’s a good idea to remember why thischange is necessary. Far too much traininghas been seen as a diversion from the realjob, a necessary chore in some cases; inothers a welcome opportunity to get awayfrom the routine. The deal has been aconvenient one, from the perspective ofboth the middle manager and the learningprofessional. I, the middle manager, havedirect reports with training anddevelopment needs; you, the learningprofessional, can unburden me of thisresponsibility by ‘processing’ my people insome way so that the need is met. I canthen enter a big tick on my to-do list; youcan continue to do your thing with noquestions asked by me (assuming goodscores on the happy sheets).

Blended learning, designed in the way Ihave described in previous articles in thismagazine, breaks away from this cosyarrangement. It recognises the fact thatlearning is a journey, not an event. It workson the assumption that everyone benefitsfrom learning interventions that deliver interms of improved performance – not in aclassroom, but on the job. To do this, itmust blur the boundaries between formal,non-formal, on-demand and experientiallearning. And this process cannot occur in ablack box. It requires the ongoing

commitment of learners to do more thanjust turn up.

A blended solution starts on the job (thePreparation phase); it can include a widerange of possible learning activities (theInput phase); it ensures thatthese new ideas and skills areput to work back on the job(the Application phase). And itsupports the learner as theycontinue their journey (theFollow-up phase). P-I-A-F.Non, je ne regrette rien.

WHAT’S DIFFERENT ABOUTBLENDED LEARNING?

Blended learning is different from thestatus quo in some significant ways. First ofall, it is more complex to administrate. It isrelatively easy to schedule and monitorindividual learning inputs – a singlecoaching session, a one-day workshop, anhour’s e-learning. Most learningmanagement systems assume that each of

them up from a menu. On the other hand,a blended solution will contain a number ofelements, many of which will have to becompleted in sequence.

In some cases the blend will also dependon a single cohort of learners followingthrough all of these elements together – anormal practice in an educational context

but less usual for your typical corporateLMS. It is not surprising therefore, thatas blended learning has become morepopular, employers have started tomake widespread use of virtual learning

January 2014 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills 17

In the final part of his hugely informative four-part series, Clive

Shepherd says, adopt blended learning and there will be no regrets.

PREPARING THE GROUNDFOR BLENDED LEARNING

A

involvement of middle managers and the

these elements is discrete and simply serve

environments (VLEs), such as Moodle,originally intended for educational use. Thereason is simple enough – on the wholeVLEs are better suited to blends than mostLMSs.

We have already discussed the fact thatblends place a greater demand on themiddle manager. In the Preparation phase,they must engage with the learner, to agreegoals and priorities. In the Applicationphase, they must support the learner inputting what they have learned intopractice and supply coaching supportwhere necessary.

Outsourcing specialists KnowledgePoolconducted a study with input from morethan 10,000 learners and their managersover a three-year period. The data wascollected from an online survey issuedthree months after the completion oftraining, and focused on the degree towhich the transfer of learning had takenplace and the effect this had onperformance.

The results are summarised in adownloadable white paper, They Think It'sAll Over. Here is one of the main findings:‘Line manager support to help learners usewhat they had learnt was a major factorin tackling the lack of performanceimprovement. The study found that wherelearners did receive line manager support,94% went on to apply what they had learnt,and performance improvement invariablyfollowed.’

When assessing what made the biggestimpact on transfer of learning, Broad andNewstrom looked at three different parties:the learner’s manager, the trainer/facilitatorand the learner – at three stages in theprocess: before, during and after theintervention. They found that the greatestimpact was made by the learner’s managerin setting expectations before theintervention. Next most important was thetrainer’s role before the intervention, ingetting to know the needs of the learnersthey would be training. Third mostimportant was the manager’s role after theintervention.

So what’s in it for middle managers? It’ssimple really. An end to the dishonesty ofthe previous arrangement in which trainingwas seen to take place but nothing reallyhappened. In its place, the very realprospect of more competent and confidentemployees; people who will carry out theirtasks more effectively and efficiently, andplace less demands on you. As an addedbonus, blended solutions are likely toinvolve shorter periods of time for learnersaway from the job and more flexiblescheduling.

Blended learning also places new demands

on the learner. They have to be more self-reliant and more organised. It is, of course,much simpler to turn up at a classroomcourse on your allotted day, take as muchpart in the event as you feel appropriate,and then get on with your ‘real’ job as thewhole experience vanishes inexorably fromyour memory – simpler, but incrediblyfrustrating. Many courses are genuinelyinspiring and do have real application toyour work. However, you are typicallyprovided with little in the way of supportor encouragement in following up on yournew passions or cementing your new skills.

A well-designed blended learningexperience provides the learner with moreautonomy, a greater sense of purpose and achance to achieve mastery, the threepowerful motivators described in DanielPink’s fabulous book Drive: The surprisingtruth about what motivates us.

WITH BLENDING COMES TECHNOLOGY

When the term ‘blended learning’ firstcame into popular use about ten years ago,it was often used as a euphemism fore-learning. In the dotcom boom, self-studye-learning was over-hyped as a solutionwhich could replace all ‘traditional’ meansfor learning; a ridiculous idea, as was soondiscovered.

In theory, there is no reason why a blendedsolution should have to make any use oftechnology – a blend could easily consist ofsome reading from good old-fashionedbooks, some on-job instruction, a face-to-face workshop and a practical assignment.However, it is hard to imagine many blendsthat would not employ technology in someform.

When you learn in large chunks – let’s saysomething like a three-day workshop – it isquite possible to do so without exposure tomuch more than a few PowerPoint slides.On the other hand, when participating in arich blend – making use of a wide varietyof content formats, taking part in frequentlive sessions, and maintaining contact witha cohort of fellow learners – it’s hard not toemploy technologies such as webconferencing, discussion forums and onlinevideo.

A greater use of technology places strainon the learning professional, whosedevelopment we have sadly neglected overthe past decade, as the possibilities arisingfrom new learning media have exploded.While new, younger entrants to theprofession have grown up with computers,the internet and mobile devices, these stillrepresent a small minority. After all, mostpeople become involved in learning anddevelopment as a second or third career, sonot many can be regarded as ‘digital

natives’. As a result, most learners are moreenthusiastic and knowledgeable abouttechnology than their teachers and trainers,a situation that is clearly not sustainable.

The Towards Maturity benchmarkingstudies have shown that thoseorganisations experiencing the mostsuccess with learning technologies haveinvested in building the capability oflearning professionals.

We need capability in four areas: 1) thestrategic management of the use oflearning technologies; 2) the design ofblends that make full use of availabletechnologies; 3) the design of digitallearning content; and 4) the facilitation ofonline learning, both live in the virtualclassroom and with communities oflearners working at their own pace.Learning professionals with these skills arein short supply, an incentive if ever therewas one to take advantage of theopportunities to up-skill.

Introducing blended learning to anorganisation is an exercise in changemanagement. One thing we know is thatpeople don’t necessarily resist change –they resist being changed. While ourinherent aversion to the risk of loss meansthat we will not embrace change if we arenot confident of a significant personaladvantage, we are much more likely toco-operate if we are genuinely consultedthroughout the change process and ourhopes and fears taken into account.Whether we are line managers, learningprofessionals or learners, we want to beactively involved in shaping a future inwhich we can all benefit.

18 Inside Learning Technologies & Skills January 2014

PREPARING THE GROUND FOR BLENDED LEARNING

Clive Shepherd’s four-part serieson blended learning

October 2013:Making the case for blended solutions

November 2013:10 tips for better blends

December 2013:Estimating time and cost of a blendedsolution

January 2014 (this issue):Preparing the ground for blendedlearning

Clive Shepherd is a consultant inlearning and communicationstechnologies at Onlignment.http://onlignment.com/http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.co.uk/Twitter: @cliveshepherd