Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Focus on ‘do’

8 October 2012 by Clark 6 Comments

I’ve been working on a project where we’re reviewing the curriculum before we design the learning outcome.  The level of detail is admirable: courses are defined by objectives, which then drive learning objectives, from which are extracted key concepts to present.  And I’m finding one approach that’s making this go really well.

There are problems with the existing content.  Some of the learning objectives are too specific, leading to an interpretation that won’t lead to transfer beyond the classroom.  Some of the coverage in objectives or concepts is biased, so some topics are not covered enough, and others too much.  Some of the learning objectives are focused on tasks that were clearly designed to incite learner interest, but not in an intrinsic way.  And I’m not a domain expert, but I can still apply enough real world knowledge to make this determination (and we’ll review with SMEs).

What’s providing a very useful lever in identifying these gaps, even prior to remedying them, is a rabid focus on ‘do‘. That is: “what will the learner be able to do with this after the class”. Implied are two things: 1) that the learner will care about , and 2) that will let them have an impact somewhere.

This focus is letting me see that some things are so specific that they won’t generalize anywhere interesting; to identify that some of the goals are not really relevant anywhere else (e.g. a focus on ‘celebrity’ examples).  That the coverage is spotty and some topics that have applicability have been skipped.

Such a focus will, I think, help in the discussions with the SMEs, and provide a way to work with them to get good outcomes for the learning and the learners.  It’s a learning-centered approach (I think that’s a better phrase than learner-centric) that helps us meet the client’s goals in ways they understand.

What  do you think?

Comments

  1. Kathy Sierra says

    8 October 2012 at 9:21 AM

    Agree with you on “do”. I do think, however, that your wording of “what the learner will be able to do” still does not imply your core/crucial assumption that they will *care*. I have seen far too many objective shifts from knowledge/understanding-driven to performance-do based, but with no significant change in post-learning actual behavior. It (focus on do vs. know) gets us closer, though, and at least gives us a fighting chance. But without a massive change in responsibility from WILL BE ABLE to WILL ACTUALLY DO, we’re still wasting everyone’s time.

    Taking responsibility for post-learning results in terms of actual doing not just capability of doing is– as always– challenging when we lack the capability to push on the systems that inhibit the action in practice. But until we embrace that all the enabling in the world means nothing if they still do not DO the now-enabled thing, we won’t make the necessary shifts in what we actually deliver.

    Even if we cannot change the systems that inhibit behavior, we can still (at least sometimes) raise the likelihood it will happen, but if anything has changed for me personally over the last decade, it has been a slow steady shift in balance AWAY from “what to do” moving through “how to do” then moving to “why to do” then all the way to “will ACTUALLY do”. Which ends up being all about motivation and less and less about learning. We all know, both intuitively and in practice for ourselves, that when the motivation is strong enough, the mechanics are almost trivial. Not necessarily trivial for the learner to master, but they become simply details, and more importantly — the behavior becomes much more robust. In other words, we want people to be willing and able to do the thing even in the face of incomplete, sketchy, missing chunks of knowledge and understanding.

    Guess this is my rambling way of saying that there is still a massive gap between ABLE and WILLING, so I would add “willing” in your “what the learner will be able to do” description. It is not what I have *enabled* that matters (though that may be a key prerequisite), it is what *actually happens* later. I know this is your intent, which is why you made “care about it” as one of your two key assumptions/implications. It’s just that I do not feel that “care about it” really IS implied by a focus on “able to do”, whereas if our objective becomes WILL ACTUALLY DO, then it makes your assumptions more likely.

  2. Clark says

    9 October 2012 at 4:15 AM

    Kathy, absolutely, agree that while we have to focus on ‘do’ from the point of view of our objectives, we need to find contexts in which it’s obvious why ‘do’ is important, and secondly (and just as importantly) that learners care about when we’re exposing them (via examples) and having them practice. Of course, if we don’t get the ‘do’ right first, the rest isn’t going to help (and I see too much of that).

  3. Mark Joyce says

    9 October 2012 at 8:15 AM

    “what will the learner be able to do with this after the class”
    Your question is a variation on the eternal “When will I ever use this?” question.

    One key to addressing this question is to embed “after class” performance
    right into the initial learning.

    I find framing learner performance outcomes this way helpful:
    “Given what, you will do what, how well?”
    This is much more of an “on demand” statement than a hypothetical “will be able to”.

    When the conditions (Given what) include not just physical tools and materials
    but an authentic context and schema that requires the performance to reflect
    adaptation to and application within an authentic world-of-work situation,
    the motivational value of “why to do” as well as “when to do” become more apparent.

    It’s important that learner’s learning engagements with the new content and
    assessment of the new performances (both formative and summative)
    be couched in authentic contexts. This holds for both directed & self-directed learning.

    When the performance outcomes and their supporting content(s) are driven by standards
    for licensure or compliance, related situational contexts are usually more apparent.

    An unexpected benefit of the framework often shows up in the “how well” element.
    Context raises our awareness of the demands of not just accuracy, but also fluency.
    How efficiently can you make the best decision, get a process, project or procedure underway,
    or piece of equipment operating?

    As for what can be done to increase the likelihood that the new learning will be transferred,
    I recommend The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning: How to Turn Training and Development into Business Results by Wick, Pollack & Jefferson. This book and the company’s resources address matters of transfer within the context of workplace factors.

  4. Clark says

    9 October 2012 at 11:19 AM

    Mark, for all that I’m a cognitivist (constructivist, embedded cognitionist, …), I don’t have a problem with Mager-style behavioral objectives (“do this, to this level, in this context”), which strikes me as what you’re talking about. So, as I commented re: Kathy, I’m just starting with meaningful objectives, but obviously there’re more relevancies we can bring to bear to make it even more powerful. Thanks for the feedback!

  5. Dave Ferguson says

    12 October 2012 at 1:04 PM

    Clark, you say you’re a cognitivist. I often tell people I’m a Reform Behaviorist. I certainly think it’s valuable for people to WANT to do whatever it is — I’m just pretty skeptical about my own ability to get them to want.

    Kathy Sierra’s a great model for caring whether they want to. That attitude helps inform the choices that the designer / developer makes, as the approach you are describing is trying to do.

    I’m not preaching, but if I were, I’d be preaching to the choir to say that there’s a strong tendency for us designers and developers to want the learners (whatever we call them) to care the same way we do about the same things we do. This, I’m convinced, is what enables the cult of overexplanation, the fetishization of will-be-able-tos, and any number of well-intended instructional rituals.

    Some of those rituals are attempts to concretize ideas that can have value: get people to write down their personal goals for whatever, for example, with the idea that that helps them connect what they’re going to learn with what they want or need to accomplish.

    If I care enough about gaining that ability, I wonder how much I really need to write down goals. And if at the moment I don’t care, I’m not sure that writing is going to do all that much for me.

    (I don’t have any answer to this; your post and the comments are just a good late-afternoon boost for me.)

  6. tahiya says

    16 October 2012 at 9:42 AM

    There is a final level of assessment that no one seems to be very cognizant of, but that I find really helps move from “know how ought to do” to “want to do.” Invention. If assessment includes an opportunity for the learner to invent something the instructional designer didn’t think to ask for, then they learner becomes the real owner of the learning he or she took pains to acquire. Prompt the learner to show you some application of the material that wasn’t suggested in the learning experience.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Clark Quinn

The Company

Search

Feedblitz (email) signup

Never miss a post
Your email address:*
Please wait...
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

Pages

  • About Learnlets and Quinnovation

The Serious eLearning Manifesto

Manifesto badge

Categories

  • design
  • games
  • meta-learning
  • mindmap
  • mobile
  • social
  • strategy
  • technology
  • Uncategorized
  • virtual worlds

Blogroll

  • Charles Jennings
  • Christy Tucker
  • Connie Malamed
  • Dave's Whiteboard
  • Donald Clark's Plan B
  • Donald Taylor
  • Harold Jarche
  • Julie Dirksen
  • Kevin Thorn
  • Mark Britz
  • Mirjam Neelen & Paul Kirschner
  • Stephen Downes' Half an Hour

License

Previous Posts

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006

Amazon Affiliate

Required to announce that, as an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Mostly book links. Full disclosure.