One of the critical functions of a HR department in the organizations is Training and Development (T&D). From organizational point of view employee’s training is one of the crucial needs through which the overall performance would be improved but the word, E-Learning, is not only related to the organizations.
Using computer network technologies (internet, intranet, etc.) instead of physical classroom-based methods (face-to-face training) with the primary goal of delivering information, knowledge, instructions or any other contents to the individuals, users, students or any other type of audiences which are required to be informed/trained is ‘e-Learning’. When the audiences are employees ‘e-learning revolution’ (Galagan, 2000) finds way to enter the organizations to be held and maintained by HR professionals as a new method of T&D function. The transformation from ‘Training’ to ‘Learning’ refers to the continuous nature of this method which is not based on a single event, but a persistent nurture in the course of work. Computer-based learning, online learning, distributed learning and web-based training are the other terms indicating e-Learning.
Wild et al. (2002) introduce e-learning as a tool for knowledge management across the organizations (use of IT to create and distribute knowledge through online delivery) and believe the companies today are more concerned about keeping not trained workers instead of missing trained workers who leave the company. That really emphasizes on the ability of the organization to deliver the right information/knowledge to the right employees at the right time to prevent operating in a competitive market passively.
SYNCHRONOUS vs. ASYNCHRONOUS E-LEARNING
Asynchronous e-learning (one-way connection) refer to the pre-recorded/pre-written learning materials which are available to the employees at any time during a day (which could be accessed from any location as well) like documents, web pages, video files, etc. whereas the synchronous e-learning (two-way connection) indicates a ‘live’ event which requires all the employees to be in front of their computers or any other devices at a specific time during a day to get the streams in a real time. Asynchronous methods are more common in organizations with a different level of sophistication which could be as simple as PowerPoint slides or using the online learning simulation programs (Welsh et al., 2003).
Obviously this categorization can be generalized to the traditional learning systems as well. The lectures or seminars are synchronous learning methods whereas the books are asynchronous learning tools.
BLENDED LEARNING
Generally two generations of e-learning have been defined: the first move was based on presenting the contents over the internet without any interaction outside the box (single mode) which has been realized as an imperfect way to provide sufficient choices, engagement, social contact and so on. If an organization holds only the online meetings and conferences (synchronous e-learning) or uploads only pre-recorded learning materials over its intranet or internet (Asynchronous e-learning) it is a good example of single mode learning. So in the second wave, ‘blended learning’ has been introduced through which the combination of various delivery media (synchronous and asynchronous) would be used (Singh, 2003).
When a teacher only gives you lecture without any references it is absolutely on a single mode learning system whereas introducing the references could bring benefits for both sides; you learn better and the teacher is able to go on. So blended learning is not only about combining different e-media together but also the physical ones as well, For example a combination of face-to-face and web-based formats.
DRIVERS
In a study by Welsh et al. (2003) six reasons have been realized which drive organizations to use e-learning systems; (1) Provide consistent and worldwide training – When the companies have a lot of agencies around the world or even different branches across a country that would be somehow impossible to hold a course in physical mode. Also if they decide to do it in each branch separately the level of consistency between what is desired to be delivered and what is delivered by different instructors would decrease. (2) Reduce delivery cycle time – Through e-learning the companies are able to deliver training to many people quickly since the courses are not constrained by instructors or classrooms capacity. (3) Increase learner convenience – Accessibility to the learning materials at any time in asynchronous learning or possibility to be present in online courses from anywhere in synchronous learning brings convenience for the learners. (4) Reduce information overload – Availability of the information presented to the employees at any time – even when there is an online course by providing them with the recorded files (i.e. blended learning, combination of synchronous and asynchronous) – actually delivers the information in a longer periods of time which improves retention of information. (5) Improve tracking – The employees can be tracked for every activity done. (6) and Lower expenses – Travel and classroom costs would be disappeared. Especially for large companies this method is a good deal.
In another study, Fry (2001) refers to the rapid obsolescence of knowledge as a major strategic driver for companies to embrace e-learning. In this fast-developing century in which there is a shift from product-based economy to the Knowledge-based economy (K-economy) and sometimes a breakthrough would be outdated in less than a year, discovering, absorbing and sharing the information among human capital inside the company is the only way to survive otherwise the trend of unawareness or inattention toward the changes acts as a tumor which takes the breath of the company over time.
CHALLENGES
The most important challenges on implementing and utilizing an e-learning system can be discussed as follows: (1) High up-front cost – Considerable investment is required in both Information Technology (IT) and staff. (2) Lack of interaction among trainees – However it is possible to provide the possibility for e-interaction among trainees through sophisticated learning systems but it is not the case in all the companies and also it may not be as real as an employee-to-employee discourse which often happens during a physical classroom lecture. (3) Misperception about training – Since reading is not training this approach may create this mindset that electronically-encoded information is training (Welsh et al., 2003).
Security and trust are the other issues still on debate. How we are able to know who did the course? Who passed the quizzes/evaluation tests? Or even, does the employee sit in front of his/her computer all the time (for online courses) and not sleep? These questions make troubles for evaluation purposes. On the other hand we cannot expect employees to learn materials without considering usability of the system. A poorly design interface and rigid interaction schemes makes them lost, confused or frustrated (Ardito et al., 2003).
Noted as limitations of e-learning, based on lessons learnt by Chew (2012) some topics do not have potentials to be taught electronically like counseling and negotiation or firefighting (however the theoretical part can be provided on internet but the most important part of the course needs to be done physically). Also motivation and self-discipline for trainees are noted as requirements to perceive effectiveness in e-learning system. According to his experiences, since the learning part of the e-learning is a human activity not robotic one, it could not be implemented without considering human emotions.
IMPLEMENTATION
Keeping all these in mind, as Welsh et al (2003) truly noted an effective e-learning system requires significant effort and planning. Consequently three important areas should be considered during implementation: Training design, IT infrastructure and change management.
One of the well-known and comprehensive frameworks for e-learning is Khan’s octagonal framework with eight dimensions that are needed to be addressed carefully to have a successful e-learning system: Institutional (concerned with administrative and academic affairs), Pedagogical (e.g. goals, objectives and contents), Technological (technology infrastructure), Interface Design (how the system looks like in terms of appearance and usability), Evaluation (assessment of learners and the learning environment), Management (maintenance), Resource Support (e.g. online support), and Ethical issues (Khan, 2000).
Ismail (2001) stresses on e-learning strategy and calls it as the missing ingredients from most e-learning programs. Having a cohesive strategy that creates a link with the company’s business needs before doing any implementation is prescribed. “The real value of e-Learning lies not in its ability to train just anyone, anytime, anywhere, but in our ability to deploy this attribute to train the right people to gain the right skills or knowledge at the right time” (Govindasamy, 2001).
The importance of strategy to have a successful implementation which results effective e-learning systems may be more clarified by this example. Whereas Accenture indicated the lack of peer-to-peer networking makes e-learning less attractive to its learners (Welsh et al., 2003), Netteland et al. (2007) uncovered the Telenor’s (Norwegian Telecommunication company) reliance on a “peer-to-peer” strategy for communication among its employees instead of a common information space strategy brought weaknesses on their e-learning implementation.
Considering all the concerns about e-learning systems with its huge investment required a comprehensive evaluation mechanism should be set to assess the realization of the desired outcomes.
REFERENCES
Ardito C., Costabile M. F., Marsico M. D., Lanzilotti R., Levialdi S., Roselli T., and Rossano V. (2006), “An approach to usability evaluation of e-learning applications”, Universal Access in the Information Society 4(3): 270-283.
Chew L. K. (2012), “A Practical Corporate E-learning Effectiveness Model”, The Eighth International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society, Thailand: 23-24 February.
Elizabeth T. Welsh E. T., Wanberg C. R., Brown K. G., and Simmering M. J. (2003), “E-learning: emerging uses, empirical results and future directions”, International Journal of Training and Development 7(4): 245–258.
Fry K. (2001), “E-learning markets and providers: some issues and prospects”, Education + Training 43(4/5): 233-239.
Ismail J. (2001), “The design of an e-learning system beyond the hype”, Internet and Higher Education 4(3/4): 329–336.
Galagan P. A. (2000), “The e-learning revolution”, Training & Development 54(12): 24-30.
Govindasamy T. (2001), “Successful implementation of e-Learning Pedagogical considerations”, Internet and Higher Education 4(3/4): 287–299.
Khan B. H. (2000), “A framework for Web-based learning”, TechTrends 44(3): 51.
Netteland G., Wasson B., and Mørch A. I. (2007), “E-learning in a large organization: A study of the critical role of information sharing”, Journal of Workplace Learning 19(6): 392-411.
Singh H. (2003), “Building Effective Blended Learning Programs”, Educational Technology 43(6): 51-54.
Wild R. H., Griggs K. A., and Downing T. (2002), “A framework for e-learning as a tool for knowledge management”, Industrial Management & Data Systems 102(7): 371-380.
Chase the Pace of My Mind 