Competencies for Today's Workforce - Critical Thinking

In a recent survey conducted by the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD) a significant skills gap was identified in addition to a lack of the following critical soft skills: communication, creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking.  Respondents also reported that leadership or executive-level skills were the number one skills gap in their organization (Pace, 2012).

Pace (2012) identified the following competencies that employees look for in their young workforce. These competencies are provided as they were reported 20 years ago, today, along with predictions for the future workforce (see table below). 

Top 5 competencies employees look for in youths entering workforce
20 Yrs. AGO	TODAY	FUTURE
Technical Mastery	Self-motivation and Discipline	Adaptability
Self-motivation and Discipline	Effective Communication	Effective Communication
Confidence	Learning Agility	Learning Agility
Effective Communication	Self-Awareness	Multicultural Awareness
Resourcefulness	Adaptability	Self-motivation and Discipline
		Collaboration

There are two discrepancies from the previous information. The first is that even though respondents identified the following skills gap lacking in their workplace (communication, creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking), they also reported that leadership training was the number one skill gap in their organization. Additionally, the top five competencies for the entering workforce do not include those missing skills that were already identified, with the exception of communication and collaboration, although collaboration was only listed in the future category. This leaves out creativity and critical thinking skills.

With nearly $12 billion dollars dedicated to leadership training in the US alone (Peters, Stephens, & Baum, 2012), there is a disproportion of training leadership related skills compared to training the required critical skills needed to complete everyday tasks. Pace (2012) highlighted that collaboration between higher education and businesses was essential to developing these skills and to assist in closing these gaps. However, examples provided were for leadership skills collaboration programs. I agree with Pace, there must be collaboration between higher education and businesses (private & public) so that the workforce employed today will have appropriate competencies and skills. Unfortunately, concentrating on leadership training will not resolve the skills gap.

Concentrating on the competencies identified above would be the best place to begin closing the skills gap between what today’s businesses are requiring and what new employees are offering. Essential in closing this skills gap is to concentrate on providing today’s students with critical thinking skills. If students are not able to think on their feet and solve complex problems how can you expect them to lead these efforts from others (through leadership training?). If businesses concentrated on demanding and hiring employees that were able to demonstrate true critical thinking skills, then, their workforce would be able to be trained to be future leaders. Higher education should be able to train their students to practice critical thinking skills through workshops and groups assignments in classrooms (group projects add the collaboration to the mix, with collaboration being one of the competencies). Teaching critical thinking skills can be practiced and taught through the following three criteria:

• Reflective scepticism.
• Identifying and challenging assumptions.
• Imagining and exploring alternatives (Martin, 1995, p. 5).

Additionally, teaching students to become self-directed learners could be easily accomplished through the following four stages presented by Grow (1991), the student’s stage is listed first followed by the teacher’s role listed second:

• Dependent - Authority Coach
• Interested - Motivator, Guide
• Involved - Facilitator
• Self-Directed - Consultant, Delegator

By addressing the competencies, rather than trying to train leaders, businesses and higher education will be able to address the skills gap more effectively. Resulting, ultimately, in a better qualified workforce for the future.

References:

Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41, 125-149. doi: 10.1177/0001848191041003001

Martin, G. W. (1995). An approach to the facilitation and assessment of critical thinking in nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 16, 3-9.

Pace, A. (December, 2012). Preparing Today’s Youths for Tomorrow’s Workplace. Training + Development, 42-46.

Peters, L., Stephens, G. K., & Baum, J. (December, 2012). When developing leaders, don’t blame training! Training + Development, 59-62.

Training Evaluation Misses the Critical Thinking Dimension

For typical training courses the following four or five evaluation steps are the norm:

Level 1: Reaction and Perceived Values

Measures reaction to, and satisfaction with, the medium, content, and value of the project or program.

Level 2: Learning and Confidence

Measures what participants understand or learned from the project or program (information, knowledge, skills, and contacts).

Level 3: Application and Implementation

Measures what participants understand or learned from the project or program (information, knowledge, skills, and contacts).

Level 4: Impact and Consequences

Measures progress after the program implemented (the use of information, knowledge, skills, and contacts).

Level 5: ROI

Monetary Benefits.

(Phillips, & Phillips, 2007)

Evaluation is further divided into formative and summative evaluation, with formative evaluation relating to evaluating the training program and summative evaluation relating to the long-term effects of the training program (see Evaluation). Level 2, Learning and Confidence, is more of a formative evaluation measure and identifies whether trainees learned the material presented in the training. Level 3, application and consequences, is categorized as summative evaluation in which it looks at whether the trainees on-the-job behavior represents their learning from the training program.  

For these two specific levels of evaluation Phillips and Phillips (2007) highlighted information, knowledge, skills, and contacts. Providing employees (trainees) with the information that they need to conduct their job functions is critical. Additionally, providing employees with the knowledge to utilize this information in a productive manner is key to success. Having the skills to perform one's job is self-explanatory, but, as experience has shown us, people often lack the proper skills required to perform their main job function. Having the right contacts as well as knowing who has the information when needed is equally important. 

Using the following variables to evaluate training programs (information, knowledge, skills, and contacts) have proven to be effective for years. However, expanding on these variables to improve the evaluation process follows the continuous improvement process. As an effort to expand on the accuracy of training I would pose adding critical thinking to the mix.

Training employees to think critically helps to eliminate issues such as functional fixedness and mental sets. Ollinger, Jones, and Knoblich (2008) termed mental set as: " the repeated application of a successful method makes blind any alternative approach, because of the mechanization of the particular solution method" (p. 270). Alternatively, Duncker (1945) identified functional fixedness as: "the tendency to fixate on the typical use of an object or one of its parts" (as cited in McCaffrey, 2012, p. 216).

Adding the dimension of critical thinking to training endeavors will help transform learners (trainees, employees) to effective learners. Brindley, Walti, and Blaschke (2009) identified effective learners as those who are capable of coping with "complexity, contradictions, and large quantities of information, who seek out various sources of knowledge" (p. 3). By seeking out new sources of knowledge employees will better avoid the aforementioned traps of mental sets and functional fixedness. 

Including critical thinking skills as part of the training program, as well as incorporating evaluation of employees critical thinking skills on-the-job, could prove to produce better training results and on-the-job performance results. Additionally, including critical thinking in both the instructional and evaluation phases of the training program could improve both the formative and summative evaluations of the overall program. 

References:

Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke (2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in an online environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), 1-18. 

McCaffrey, T. (2012). Innovation relies on the obscure: A key to overcoming the classic problem of functional fixedness. Psychological Science, 23(3), 215-218. dpi: 10.1177/0956797611429580

Ollinger, Jones, & Knoblich (2008). Investigating the effect of mental set in insight problem solving. Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 269-282. dpi: 10.1027/1618-3169.55.4.269

Phillips, & Phillips (2007). Show me the money: The use of ROI in performance improvement, part 1. Performance Improvement 46(9), 8-22. dpi: 10.1002/pfi.160

Training & Learning Theories: Pedagogy, Angragogy, Heutagogy

Basic theories of learning include Pedagogy (child and adolescent learning theories), Andragogy (adult learning theories including self-directed learning), and now Heutagogy (self-determined learning theories).

Andragogy includes learners who are actively involved in identifying their needs and how to meet those needs in which the educator takes the role of a tutor or a mentor (Blaschke, 2012).  The goals for andragogy include: "helping learners develop the capacity for self-direction, supporting transformation learning" (Blaschke, 2012, Andragogy).

The Andragogical model is based on six general assumptions:

1. The need to know.
2. The learner's self-concept.
3. The role of the learners' experiences.
4. Rediness to learn.
5. Orientation to learning.
6. Motivation (Knowles, Holton III, & Swanson, 2005, pp. 64-68).

Heutagogy is the study of self-determined learning in which the focus is person-centered (Davis, 2001) as opposed to teacher-centered or teacher-student centered. Heutagogy was coined in 2000 by Hase and Kenyon, acknowledging that "learners do immensely valuable work for themselves by filling in the gaps of their formal education through discovery and reflection" (Parslow, 2010, p. 121).  A heutagogical environment would focus on both the development of the learner as well as the development of the learners capability to learn and capacity to learn (Blaschke, 2012).

The educator in a heutagogical environment facilitates the learning process through guidance and by providing appropriate resources, much in the same manner as with andragogy. However, in heutagogy the educator relinquishes control/ownership of the learning path and process (Blaschke, 2012).  Here the learner determines their path and sets their own learning goals.

Heutagogy is influenced by Argyris' theory of double-loop learning. Schein (2010) described it best in his discussion on implicit assumptions: "To learn something new… requires us to resurrect, reexamine, and possibly change some of the more stable portions of our cognitive structure" (p. 28).

Compared to andragogy, self-directed learning requires the acquisition of both competencies and capabilities. Blaschke (2012) identified competencies as one's ability to acquire knowledge and skills, compared to capabilities that are the learner's self-efficacy on their ability to recall and use their new knowledge or skills. 

Heutagogy was termed and utilized to describe today's online learning environment where learning activities have moved away from the traditional classroom setting to a more asynchronous environment for both the instructor and the students. An equal and similar environment, that of training and development in the workplace, heutagogy principles could be found to be beneficial.  For example, focusing attention on both competencies and capabilities for training and development efforts could prove to be most successful. Additionally, Blaschke (2012) provided course design elements to support a hetagogical approach to training:

• Learner-defined learning contracts
• Flexible curriculum
• Learner-directed questions
• Flexible and negotiated assessment

As part of the reflection process (the 'reexamine' portion identified by Schein) Blaschke (2012) identified the following design elements to support reflective practice:

• Learning Journals
• Action Research
• Formative and Summative Assessment
• Collaborative Learning Environments

As informal and non-formal learning initiatives increase in the workplace with the aid of mobile technologies, these training functions could benefit from utilizing the general principles provided by heutagogy learning theories. 

References:

Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of hetagogical practice and self-determined learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1076/2087

Davis, L., & Stewart, H. (2001). The river of learning in the workplace. In Research to Reality: Putting VET Research to Work. Retrieved from ERIC.

Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. New York, NY: Elsevier.

Parslow, G. R. (2010). Multimedia in biochemistry and molecular biology education. Commentary: Heutagogy, the practice of self-learning. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 38(2), 121. doi: 10.1002/bmb.20394 

Learning from Training: Learning Theories

Learning is perceived to be both a cognitive construct and a social construct.  Some may argue that learning is predominantly cognitive while others would argue that learning is primarily social.  In either case, regardless of which epistemology you prescribe to, learning from training works best when both cognitive and social activities are incorporated.

Learning as a cognitive construct:

Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007) identified the cognitive perspective of learning from the camps of Piaget, Kuhn, and Dewey.  This perspective views learning as: "meaning… by the individual and is dependent on the individual's previous and current knowledge structure. Learning is thus an internal cognitive activity" (p. 291). This stream of learning theories view past experiences, existing knowledge, and interactions with the environment as critical to new learning.

Learning as a social construct:

Merriam et al. (2007) identified the social perspective of learning from the campus of Vygotsky and Driver. This perspective views culture and social interaction as being critical to learning.  "This approach involves learning the culturally shared ways of understanding and talking about the world and reality (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).  From this perspective culture, artifacts, and social interaction with others is critical to new learning.

The learning spectrum:

Merriam et al. (2007) describe these two learning theories as a type of spectrum, with cognitive theories on one end of the spectrum and social theories on the opposite end of the spectrum.  Realistically, the location one is on this learning spectrum is situational. In some situations the learning could be more cognitive, while in other situations this learning could be mostly social.  

Training and Learning:

Viewing the composite of learning from the middle of the learning spectrum one would view learning as both cognitive and social.  Situationally, this would be the optimal position to maximize learning from training.  Specific learning activities have been identified that would take advantage of both the cognitive and social theories of learning.  Listed below are a few activities / theories that could be used during training to optimize learning.

• Activity Theory (AT): Activity theory 'conceptualizes learning as involving a subject (the learner), and object (the task or activity) and mediating artifacts…. Activity theory… combines the individual and the social (including culture and history) in understanding an activity such as learning' (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).

• Action-Based Learning: Action-Based Learning is "a dynamic, real-time method of training that brings a group of individuals together to identify the cause of real problems and arrive at possible solutions…. requiring those solutions to be put into action and the results fed back to the group" (Kirkpatrick, & Kirkpatrick, 2010, p. 116).

• Evaluative Research: Evaluative research can be used in a training environment as a means to combine both a groups knowledge and experience through social interactions.  Evaluative research "involves statements about cause-and-effect relationships" (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2010, p. 12). One example of an evaluative research model is a needs assessment where "a set of procedures for identifying and prioritizing needs related to societal, organizational, and human performance" (McKillip, as cited in Gall et al., 2010, p. 515) is conducted.  Another type of evaluative research would be responsive evaluation, responsive evaluation "focuses on identifying and describing stakeholders' issues… and concerns" (Gall et al. 2010, p. 516).

• Action Research: Action Research is research conducted in the workplace, where the problem exists.  Gall et al. (2010) identified seven steps to an action research project:
• Selection of a Focus for the Study (or training)
• Data Collection
• Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
• Taking Action
• Reflection
• Continuation or Modification of Practices
• Preparing a Report of the Findings (or group presentation)
• *parenthesis include items added, not in original referenced material*

Summary:

Effective training could maximize learning by focusing activities along the middle of the learning spectrum. Various activities are available from the education and research literature that could be used in training situations that provide learning opportunities for participants.  The above activities are only a few of those available that could be used in a training exercise.  Those listed are identified to maximize learning as viewed from the middle of the learning spectrum.

References:

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. (2010). Applying Educational Research (6th ed.). Boston, MS: Pearson.

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2010). Training on Trial: How Workplace Learning Must Reinvent Itself to Remain Relevant. New York, NY: American Management Association (AMACOM).

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Evaluation

Evaluation is often at the end of systematic performance models.  The Instructional Systems Design (ISD) model, sometimes referred to the ADDIE model, includes the following stages: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation.  Other disciplines practice models similar to the ADDIE model.  Six Sigma practices the DMAIC model: define, measure, analyze, improve, and control. In the DMAIC model measure would be comparable to evaluation.  Human Resource Development (HRD) practices analyze, propose, create, Implement, and assess.  In the HRD model, assess refers to assessment which is the same as evaluation in the ADDIE model. 

These systematic performance models are often viewed as linear, stet-by-step, models.  By viewing these models this way they become ineffective at improving performance for the long-term.  Each model is presented to be cyclical and interactive.  This means that each model is designed as a continuous improvement cycle with dynamic interactions between each stage.  In the case of evaluation, this stage affects each of the other four stages in the process.  Evaluation begins during the initial analysis phase and continues through each stage, then re-cycles again, as improvements to the new improved cycle are incorporated.  Wang and Wilcox (2006) support this view indicating: “the larger view of evaluation may not be treated as a separate phase during the process…. It is indeed an ongoing effort throughout all phases of the ADDIE process and culminating at the last phase” (p. 528).

Shrock and Geis identified evaluation as a “process of collecting information and feeding it back to those who need the information so that the system can succeed” (as cited in Stolovitch & Keeps, 1999, p. 185).  Evaluation should be designed to provide feedback during each stage in the process so that improvements can be made to the process.

Evaluation comes in two forms: formative evaluation and summative evaluation.

Scriven (1991) identified formative evaluation to be used “to provide information on improving program design and development” (as cited in Wang & Wilcox, 2009, p. 529).  Wang and Wilcox identified that the purpose of formative evaluation was “to identify weakness in instructional material, methods, or learning objectives” (p. 529). Formative evaluation can be used to evaluate the instructional methods during a training program. 

Following the training program summative evaluation will be used to determine the long-term effectiveness of the program and its instructional methods, including learning transfer.  Brown and Gerhardt (2002) described summative evaluation as those “efforts that assess the effectiveness of completed interventions in order to provide suggestions about their use” (p. 952).  A training program can be evaluated by its impact on the organization and its long-term effectiveness through summative evaluation.

A successful evaluation is one that utilizes both formative evaluation and summative evaluation.  Evaluation needs to be viewed as an iterative process that affects each of the stages in the training process that it is measuring.  Each systematic performance improvement endeavor needs to be addressed as a continuous improvement cycle with a strong emphasis on evaluation.  Evaluation is the key component that makes the systematic performance improvement process a continuous effort, allowing improvements to be made to the process during each stage.

REFERENCES

Brown, K. G. & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002).  Formative evaluation: An integrative practice model and case study.  Personnel Psychology, Vol. 55, pp. 951-983.

Stolovitch, H. D. & Keeps, E. J. (1999).  Handbook of human performance technology: Improving individual and organizational performance worldwide (2^nd ed.).  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.

Wang, G. G. & Wilcox, D. (2006).  Training evaluation: Knowing more than is practiced.  Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 528-539.

Training as an Intervention

Training is a critical component in the field of Human Performance Technology (HPT). Pershing (2006) defined HPT as “the study and ethical practice of improving productivity in organizations by designing and developing effective interventions that are results-oriented, comprehensive, and systemic” (p. 6). Unfortunately, training is often looked at as the end-all solution to correcting/fixing performance problems. This fallacy of ‘training can fix it’ has lead to a large number of training interventions, along with their expenditures, that have fallen short of promised expectations.

Training programs are often selected as a matter of convenience rather than as a planned systematic intervention with a specified goal or outcome.  At times it feels as though training programs are selected primarily, as Landis and Bhagat (1996) stated, "because they are well advertised, not because they are well designed" (as cited in Weber, S., 2008, p. 51).  Often times, trainers and those in charge of training, resort to already established training programs.  Rossett (2009) highlighted this problem by sounding the following alarm: “It is time for human resources and training professionals to turn from their habitually favored interventions, like training, to solutions that match the customer and situation” (p. 19).  Additionally, training is often considered to be a quick-fix to a misunderstood performance problem. Rothwell, Stavros, and Sullivan (2010) identified the problem where quick-fix solutions are inappropriate in resolving the source of the problem as “employee training is often inappropriately perceived to be” (OD defined).

HPT takes a counter-intuitive approach when dealing with training. Training is often considered the last step in the problem resolution intervention. Thus, training should only be applied in those instances where no other cheaper and less timely intervention will work. Robinson and Robison (1995) highlight: “solutions to performance problems should be based upon a thorough analysis of causes of the problem” (p. 4). The point here is not that training is ineffective, but that training needs to address the right performance objective for it to be effective.

Training needs analyses, or performance analyses, should be conducted before any training intervention is designed.  These analyses are conducted to determine what is termed the performance gap.  This gap is the difference between what should be to what is.  Rummler and Brache (1995) view process maps that compare processes in their current state (the ‘as-is’ state) compared to how these should be (the ‘should-be’ state). The differences between the should-be and the as-is represents the performance or process gap - this is where the resolution needs to be directed.    Robinson and Robinson (1995) use a performance relationship map to determine the needs for four key performance drivers: business needs, performance needs, training needs, and work environment needs. Their performance relationship map distinguishes between the type of performance that should be demonstrated with those that is being demonstrated. The difference is the performance gap that needs to be attended to. 

When the identified performance gap identifies a deficiency in employees knowledge and skills in which new knowledge could resolve the gap then training could be a final resolving intervention.  Robinson and Robinson (1995) identified training needs as those “areas where performers lack skill or knowledge to perform satisfactorily” (p. 26). If the performance gap identifies a deficiency in either of the other three drivers (business needs, performance needs, work environment needs) then training is probably not the best intervention to resolve the performance gap.  

Selecting training as an intervention when the performance deficiency relates to employees knowledge and skills will most certainly guide you on the path to resolving the performance gap.  Selecting training as an intervention when the source of the problem is not related to knowledge or skills, or when the problem has not been identified through need analysis, will most likely lead to waisted expenditures and waisted effort from those involved.  Additionally, improperly selecting training could potentially decrease performance while lowering the motivation of the employees in the long-term. 

References:

Pershing, J. A. (2006). Human performance technology fundamentals. In Pershing, J. A. (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology: Principles, practices, potential. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Robinson, D. G., & Robinson, J. C. (1995). Performance consulting: Moving beyond training. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Rothwell, W. J., Stavros, J. M., & Sullivan, A. (2009). Organization development and change. In Rothwell, W. J., Stavros, J.M., & Sullivan, A. (Eds.). Practicing organization development: A guide for leading change (3^rd ed.) (Chapter 1). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Rossett, A. (2009). First things fast: A handbook of performance analysis (2^nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Rummler, G. A., Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving performance: How to manage the white space on the organization chart (2^nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Weber, S. (2008).  Intercultural learning in business and human resource education. In Nijhof, W. J., & Nieuwenhuis, L. F.M. (Eds.), The learning potential of the workplace (pp. 47 - 69). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Using Technology in Education / Training

Technology used in education (formal school education) and for training (business training, non-formal education) takes many forms: simulations, communication, interactive, virtual, games, etc…  The use of technology in education and training have been reported to be both effective and non-effective.  Listed below are two examples of recent research relating to using technology in education along with a brief summary of their findings.  Following, I have identified a list of four items to consider prior to using technology in an education or training setting. 

Vanderwater et al. (2006) pointed out that "technology use has no intrinsic value per se, but instead has value only with respect to the activities it displaces" (as cited in Bavelier et al., 2010, p. 694).  For example, if a student is already working on math problems at home, by introducing technology to help with their math abilities probably will not show too much gain.  It is when a student does not work on math problems that introducing technology could aid the student to begin working on math problems - thus benefitting that student.

Vogel et al. (2006) conducted a meta-analysis which compared traditional teaching methods with games and interactive simulations. They viewed which teaching method had the highest cognitive gains for the learner.  What they found was: "those using interactive simulations or games report higher cognitive gains and better attitudes toward learning compared to those using traditional teaching methods" (Vogel et al., 2006, p. 237).  Some limitations were identified however.  For example, the interactive simulations had to be experiential for the learner, it could not be controlled by the teacher or the program, in order to be effective.  Although this study provided interesting results, highlighting benefits from games and interactive simulations, comparative analyses could not be conducted with traditional teaching methods due to a lack of data from the literature.

When determine which teaching methods and materials to choose for a training program, when the need for a training program has been identified, a few things should be considered.  

1. If technology is to be used as part of the training, the expected outcome from the technology should be determined a priori.  What is the outcome that you expect from the learners through the use of this technology?  Is this outcome possible without the use of the technology?  Do the learners understand what is expected of them prior to using this technology?  This item relates to the point identified above that technology only has value based on the activities it displaces, in this case the outcome expected from using technology in a training environment.
2. When technology is being used for training purposes, are the learners free to experiment, or are they being guided and told what to do at each step?  In order for technology to provide effective training the learners need to have the ability to freely experiment with the content, to be able to interact through the technology, and be able to make mistakes without consequences.  This item relates to the previously mentioned research identifying that interactive simulations or games can provide higher cognitive gains.
3. An additional item to consider is the type of learners that this training will be addressing.  If the learners are mostly self-directed learners than the technology may not be necessary.  Self-directed learners are motivated and they will absorb the material and research beyond the content presented in the training material, with or without new technology.  However, if the learners are not self-directed learners the technology may provide a means for effective learning transfer.  
4. Lastly, a caution to consider is that the technology being used for training cannot be too demanding of the learners.  If the technology is hard to use or learn to use (a steep learning curve) then the learning will be lost.

References

Bavelier, D., Green, S. C., & Dye, M. W. G. (2010). Children, wired: For better and for worse. Neuron, 67, 692-701. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.035

Vogel, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006). Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computer Research, 34(3), 229-243.

Podcasts in Education and Training

Podcasts provide a rich source of information in a platform that is flexible for all types of users.  They can be downloaded and listened to at the leaner's convenience.  Podcasts are also capable of being distributed through a variety of mediums.  Podcasts can take the form of the traditional audio cast as well as the newer video cast.  The content of the material included in a Podcast can vary in which each end user can find most anything he/she is interested in.  Podcasts also vary in content, providing entertainment as well as educational material.  

Some of the educational / training Podcast's, that I have found useful, are provided below:

The American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) provides Podcasts on their webpage: ASTDPodcasts

Great e-learning tips can be found at The Rapid E-Learning Blog: Practical, real-world tips for e-learning success.  Podcasts are provided from this The Rapid E-Learning blog page at: Download Podcasts from The Rapid E-Learning Blog

Another great site for Podcasts, and other e-learning materials (audio books & videos) can be found at the Learn Out Loud website.

Xyleme Voices: A Podcast Library on the Evolution of Training provides a rich source of information with a Podcast provided for each blog post.

Advantages to using Podcasts in education have been documented in recent research projects.  Evans (2008) identified podcasting as a form of m-learning.  Research from Malan (2007) described research studies where lectures were recorded allowing students to download the lectures as they wished.  These lectures were found to be used more as a review tool rather than as an excuse to miss class.  Additionally, they found that by downloading the lectures more free time was allotted during class time to discuss specific issues and for problem solving (Milan, 2007, as cited in Evans).  Other studies promoted well designed materials (in m-learning formats such as a podcasts): "by increasing the amount of control learners have over their learning process, can be more efficient and effective than traditional alternatives" (Evans, 2008, Introduction).  Thus, Podcasts and other m-learning tools can be advantageous to the learner when used as a tool for learning.

Alternatively, just as writing helps one learn more about a subject, so to can developing a podcast.  Developing a podcast requires a student to research a topic, outline their talk around that topic, and persuade the audience that their information is authentic.  One drawback to creating a podcast for the learner, especially if it is their first time, is the learning curve associated with learning to create a podcast.  Spraque and Pixley (2008) indicated: "podcasts have a steep learning curve.  The most difficult part is learning how to use an editing software program" (p. 232).  Once this learning curve has passed, learning the subject matter will improve.  Creating a Podcast can also be advantageous to the learner once they overcome the learning curve associated with developing a Podcast.

Training and Development have incorporated the use of Podcasts in a variety of capacities while training.  Some of these uses include: providing a Podcast to give additional information to the learners after the training project is complete, providing additional training material for learners to review prior to certification testing, and incorporating Podcasts into lessons as an additional source of information.  

Podcasts are easy to use and provide numerous benefits to Education and to the Training and Development industry.  As the use of Podcasts increase I believe we will see additional benefits for the end user, the learner.

References:

Evans, C. (2008). The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education. Computers & Education, 50(2), 491-498. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.016

Spraque, D., & Pixley, C. (2008). Podcasts in Education: Let their voices be heard. Computers in the schools, 25(3), 226-234. doi: 10.1080/07380560802368132