 Does Rapid eLearning Really Save Money?
Written by Heather Tafel
Contributions by Simon Leanos & Molly Heilmann
The term coined ‘Rapid eLearning’ is the newest trend in formal eLearning. Rapid eLearning is usually referring to software such as Captivate and Articulate that allow an individual or organization to develop eLearning without an eLearning staff. Many companies have always developed training in-house. Software tools to accommodate this business need only make sense. The trend is also being furthered by tight economic times when there is less funding to have an outside eLearning development firm produce the programs.
However, Rapid eLearning softwares are not going to put high quality eLearning development companies out of business. There are limitations to how far the software will be able to take in-house training authors. Not because in-house authors are inferior but it is impossible for one person or a few persons to become an entire eLearning development team even with the best software. eLearning companies employ many specialists including: an IT Department, Instructional Designers, Project Managers, Creative and/or Art Directors, Video Production Team, Graphic Designers, Multimedia Designers, Audio Producer and Voice Over Talent. You get the poin… many hats for a software to fill.
Forrester Research released a study commissioned by Adobe, whose Rapid eLearning software is Captivate. The study does show trends that are promising for Rapid eLearning software. The studies shows that Rapid eLearning is best for content that changes often and has little to no budget to be disseminated.
The study does attempt to balance itself by highlighting problems with Rapid eLearning — one of the greatest problems seems to be that the learners do not take the courses seriously. A whopping 38% reported this as their main issue. Followed closely by the next issue — a lack of interactivity.
eLearning programs must meet a balance of cost, time, and quality to produce knowledge retention. Rapid eLearning programs tend to only factor in cost and time, leaving behind quality multimedia and instructional design. Ultimately what often is lost is knowledge retention or even primary understanding.
One glaring omission in the study is a direct comparison of professionally developed eLearning versus Rapid eLearning as well as, knowledge retention measurements. The effectiveness of the programs that lack interactivity (most Rapid eLearning) has been shown to be much lower than that of their professionally developed counterparts that include more interactivity. According to Edgar Dale’s ‘Cone of Experience’, page-turner programs (Rapid eLearning style) that can expect a maximum of 50% retention… versus interactive eLearning can expect rates as high as 90%.
One great example of the effectiveness of high quality, highly interactive eLearning is evident in the eLearning Centrax developed for the AMPM Franchise Training that won a Brandon Hall Award. Combining extraordinary 3D graphics and gaming components with sound instructional design, Centrax and our client created a course that franchise employees enjoy, while developing essential skills that they can transfer to the job. The Handling Food Complaints e-learning module is divided into two parts — the first immerses learners in scenarios where they respond to a customer’s report feeling sick after consuming a product from the store. The second part focuses on the food production process, or “flow of food”, engaging learners in food complaints related to how food is prepared and displayed. Although encouraged by positive feedback from the initial curriculum rollout, our AMPM client wanted proof that their innovative training was accomplishing their goals.
Our client hired Learning Gauge Inc. to conduct a statistically valid, thorough evaluation of the Handling Food Complaints e-learning module. The evaluation demonstrated retention with the drill being conducted a full two weeks after completing the module. The results speak for themselves. Eighty percent of pilot training participants were able to verbally explain the proper food complaint reporting procedures, while only twenty percent of employees who did not complete the training accurately performed the proper procedures during the drill. The bottom line? Employees who took the course demonstrated significantly greater knowledge of the food complaint process than employees who did not participate in the training.
The question remains how much is actually gained by cost savings of Rapid eLearning when the expertly constructed eLearning programs are giving far greater results. Individual organizations will have to gauge what makes sense for budgets and long term goals of knowledge transfer and retention. |
Centrax is offering a new service to fill the gap between professional training needs and Rapid eLearning. Not every company can afford to have a lengthy interactive eLearning program developed, Centrax is offering a new service for Rapid eLearning style needs.