Building a Successful Blended Learning Strategy
By Michael McGinnis

There seems to be reluctance in transitioning instructor-led training (ILT) to a blended learning format. This may be due to resistance on the part of the organization or training department to change existing classroom session formats. Another reason I believe is more prevalent is not knowing how. The case study below is an example of how our training department made a very successful transition prior to knowing what blended learning meant.

The change began with a familiar story to most training organizations, a need for change, doing more with less, reducing the learning curve with better trained personnel. The change in this case began with our technical training programs. Our success in this area led to the transformation of the leadership development initiatives using the same format. The case study below describes the method we used and the results that were achieved.

Technical Training
Our facility manufactures and assembles high performance electronic products. This involves a highly technical and automated manufacturing process using complex component placement equipment, test platforms and robotics. The technical skill set for the machine operators, test and machine technicians, supervisors and engineers increased dramatically requiring comprehensive training on safety, operation, programming, fault recovery and preventative maintenance.

Training initially consisted of instructor led classes (ILT) and OJT. The classroom sessions were designed using the "Tell Me, Show Me, Let Me and Assess Me" format. Classes ranged from 3 to 6 days in length and were taught by technical trainers who had experience on these platforms. The "Tell Me" and "Show Me" sections of the class were often based on PowerPoint presentations filled with pictures and text showing the basic operational steps.

Operations made the request to reduce the length of time the participants were in the classroom. Ramp ups required shorter turnaround time and became the driving force for change. Our initial reaction was the typical response, "Are you kidding me?" However, with our positive relationship with our customer, we avoided this canned response and instead set out to see what we could do.

Over the past several months we had begun an on-line learning initiative primarily consisting of the presentations we used in the classes, adding audio, video, basic interaction and animation. The modules were provided as refresher material for those attending the training along with those who may be interested in learning more about the various platforms. On-line learning was received very well which prompted setting up our computer lab to access these modules.

Our training staff conducted a brainstorming session regarding the challenge mentioned above, to reduce the amount of time new hires were in training. Our first step identified the reasons driving the current length of the classes. Top of the list was the challenge identified by the technical trainers relating to the delays associated with slower learners. The pace of the class was dictated by the slowest learner which frustrated the instructor and those that learned at faster rates. Second were the dreaded lectures which were considered by the trainer and participants as dry and boring. It was not uncommon for the instructors to speak about participants dozing off or disengaged from the learning process. Instructors often responded by speeding up the delivery of the material, providing only cursory overviews of the material. Third was the agenda itself and the amount of time we felt was necessary to review each topic. Although we were open to revise the content, we also did not want to compromise the quality of training.

From this discussion we recalled a recent article stating that one of the benefits of on-line learning was its ability to be tied to the pace of each learner. After a broad set of ideas were input, an idea was born. This was to have the participants use the on-line learning modules during the classroom session. The on-line modules would replace the lecture segments of the current classes. The class itself would be revised to focus on brief reviews of the on-line material with the primary emphasis on hands-on learning. We decided to experiment with the design of one of our technical classes.

First, we would have to modify our current on-line modules to make sure they covered all of the required material that was presented in the class. To do this, the instructors used the instructor notes portion of PowerPoint to write down what they would have said in the class. This became the script and used as the basis for recording an audio file into each slide. We also added some basic interaction where employees had to select correct answers and were given an audio response whether they were right or wrong. We had learned by this time to keep each module to a maximum of 30 minutes in length. This kept the user from getting bored with the on-line training.

By this time we had basic pre and post testing functionality using the LMS test developer. Each test consisted of true/false and multiple choice questions based on the material in the module. We created a pool of 30 questions and randomly asked 10 questions for each module. Employees were required to meet minimum score requirements of 80%. The questions came from the knowledge tests that were already being administered after each topic in the class. This gave us a basic way of determining the effectiveness of this type of training and whether the individual gained the required knowledge.

Here is an example of our first experiment with a blended learning format using our soldering class.

Participants were welcomed into the class, provided with the usual time for introductions and housekeeping, and were then directed to our learning lab where they took the initial on-line module(s). Here, they were introduced to using the LMS and how to navigate through the modules. They were then provided with a set time to complete the pre-test, module and post-test and then return to the classroom. If they completed the module and passed the test prior to the designated time, they were rewarded with a break. If they needed extra time due to failing the test or simply needed more time to review the material, they could use the entire allotted time.

Once they returned to the class, the instructor briefly reviewed the material, focusing on those areas that tended to need more explanation or were more prone to questions. Then the focus quickly became on engaging the students into hands-on activities.

Our initial experience found that the on-line modules truly lived up to the concept of self-paced learning. The fast learners loved the opportunity to speed up this process and being rewarded with a break. The slower paced learned appreciated the opportunity to review the material and re-take the tests. The instructor enjoyed a break from the class, where they were able to use this freed up time to develop new training materials. This improved dramatically the productivity levels of our instructors. The overall length of the class was reduced since we found that employees were learning faster and in most cases demonstrating a better skill set than with the previous ILT only class.

Over time we modified this approach to require that current employees take some of the modules as pre-requisites prior to attending the class. This further reduced the amount of time needed in the class. The revised class agenda started with an overview of the on-line modules taken, a test was administered to ensure that they retained the needed knowledge, with the remaining time focused on hands-on activities.

Additional benefits we discovered were the following:

1. Consistent delivery of message

It was common to hear that certain information was not presented in certain classes, along with various twists. A common issue relating to instructor led classes. The use of the modules ensured that everyone heard the same message every time.

2. Ability to self-pace

Each user was able to direct their speed of learning. This alleviated the challenge of who does the instructor teach to in the class. As previously mentioned faster learners were rewarded with a break. It was typical that these learners returned to the class and began their hands-on assignments. In many cases they completed their requirements earlier and were released to the floor, which was met with gratitude on the part of their supervisors. Regarding the slower paced learners, they had more time to retake the modules and tests. If they did not complete the modules during the designated time, they were required to finish them during their breaks or lunches. These individuals were also easy to recognize on the part of the instructor, who would spend extra time with them during the hands-on activities as appropriate.

3. Refresher materials

Knowing that retention of materials presented is a challenge associated with adult learning, users were directed to the on-line modules for refreshing themselves on this material once back to the floor. We combined this with job-aids that summarized key information. We also launched quick reference guides which provided tailored information specific to a particular line that the employee could reference in more detail. These were housed wherever possible on workstations on the factory floor.

4. Reduced classroom time

Across the board we realized an approximate 25% reduction in classroom time for technical training classes. This appeared to be primarily due to the new blended format. Employees were more engaged in the learning process in part due to greater accountability for their self-paced learning. Classes were no longer run to the lowest common learning style. Over time the percentage grew as we pushed the sessions for existing employees to taking the modules as a prerequisite.

5. More effective training staff

Instructors now utilized the 25% savings in instructor time to focus on other training projects or working with the faster and slower paced learners.

Leadership Development

Prior to transforming leadership training to the blended format, we offered the traditional set of soft skill classes. Each was 1-2 days in length and covered various topics such as Time Management, Effective Communication, Coaching, Giving and Receiving Feedback, etc. The sessions covered the basic theory, skills associated with the topic and skill practice. The classes were well attended and we offered these sessions as a part of Silver, Gold and Platinum certificate series. These series included specified classes, lunch and learn sessions, assessments and finally a presentation relating to what they had learned and how they applied their learnings.

Attendance began to drop off significantly as our operation became more lean and shifts transitioned from 8 hours to 12 hours. These employees were still eager to attend leadership training, but no longer had the time to commit 1-2 days away from their day-to-day operations. Once again we were presented with a challenge and opportunity.

When the leadership instructors met, we first realized how deja-vu this was to what we had recently heard from operations with respect to technical training. This time we had the advantage of considering how to apply an already successful blended learning format. The question was how to do this with leadership development training.

We began by looking at the agendas and we noticed that each session had lecture segments. On-line modules were created to cover this material. Using the same philosophy from our technical training transformation, we identified the skill practice segments and created a shortened session focusing only on these areas. The result was a similar success story. We created what was referred to as "e-Follow Up Sessions." Each session was limited to 2 hours. Employees were instructed to take in most cases 4-5 on-line modules relating to each topic, which were pre-requisites to attending the follow up session. Each module was limited to 30 minutes in length which we learned was the ideal time so not to bore the user and allow them to fit this into their busy schedules.

Attendance quickly picked up and the feedback was excellent. In fact attendance actually increased from our previous levels. Those that were reluctant or hesitant to attend for a variety of reasons, now found that they had no more excuses. We asked them for their feedback and responded with a solution that met their needs.

Once again we found that employees were more knowledgeable upon arriving to the class and anxious to get started on the skill practice segments. We provided them with a quick recap of the modules they took, along with any questions they had. Then we quickly jumped into the exercises and within now time was able to let them go. Their activity levels in the skill practice sessions were also noticeably higher. Their concerns about having to be away from their jobs for a day or two gave way to excitement that it was only 2 hours now.

Reprinted from LTI Newsline, from Learning and Training Innovations Magazine