Which is better, e-learning or blended learning?

Which is better, e-learning or blended learning?

Both constructs are constituted at too high a level of granularity to really make a difference for human learning. To say this more simply, it's not whether it's e-learning or blended learning that matters. It's the learning methods that are used in designing these learning interventions that matter.

An e-learning program can be well-designed or poorly designed, depending on what learning methods are utilized in its design. It’s the same with a blended-learning approach. A learning intervention that utilizes meaningful repetitions will produce better learning outcomes than one that doesn't. A learning intervention that provides realistic retrieval practice will be more effective than one that doesn't. The key is to know how learning works, and design accordingly.

Imagine being asked the question, "What type of vehicle is going to get better gas mileage, trucks or sports-utility vehicles?" Such a question suggests a poor understanding of the causes of gas mileage. A person with a basic understanding of gas-mileage factors wouldn't even ask such a question.

The implications for this are as follows:

1. If someone tells you they have a great learning intervention because it's a blended-learning program, you are entitled to be skeptical. If they are trying to sell you this learning intervention, you are entitled to chuckle quietly---although we recommend nodding slowly and gently with sad empathetic eyes.

2. If you have to purchase or design a learning intervention---and you've been thinking that all you need to do is determine which media or which technology to use, please find someone who understands human learning to help you focus on learning methods and outcomes.

Comments

[Howard Jones]

Will

Thanks for this, and sorry for being so tardy in reading the article.

Although in the e-learning industry in the UK, as a training designer, I’ve never felt that e-learning was the answer to all our learning problems even though the hype would suggest that it might be. And then someone came up with the extended hype of blended learning: it’s all blended learning, even e-learning is blended.

My pedigree is in face-to-face training and ‘airborne coaching’ of aircrew and, from experience, I know that the same lesson can be delivered by different interventions with vastly different results. At all levels, it is understanding how learning works that makes the difference, as you point out. I’ve always said the 90% of training is psychology.

One of the questions I’ve occasionally asked clients who come to us to buy e-learning is, “Why have you chosen e-learning?” Amongst all of the answers I receive I never hear, “Because it is the right solution for this learning need.” And I think there are very few clients, if any, who are turned away from any e-learning company because the e-learning company thought e-learning was the wrong solution.

There is almost part of me that wishes clients would only come to us as a last resort; at least then you would feel that they’d considered other options.

Another problem is the people who are buying the e-, or any other, learning; how much do they know about how learning works? Many have risen to positions in the ‘training department’ based on their experience of the work they are in, not based on any ability to educate.

I’ve probably been unfair to many people in this comment; only highlighting the worst aspects of e-learning. At the end of the day though, we in the industry are probably the worst offenders; I see many articles purporting e-learning and blended solutions, but this is one of the first I’ve seen addressing how learning works and applying that to learning design. If we do go down this road we tend to end up with an article about various models of learning theory. Should people buying learning already be aware of this?.

Now if only there was mandatory induction training for prospective purchasers of learning.

Regards

HowieJ