<figure class="alignleft size-full"></figure>

This is the last installment in our seven-episode series on learning science’s role in a learning business, and we’ve covered a variety of interesting topics. But we want learning science to be more than interesting. We want you to apply it so you can elevate the success and impact of your learning business, as well as the success and impact of the learners you serve.

In this episode, we revisit comments from the interviewees in the series about the one tenet or aspect of learning science they wished was better understood by those designing and delivering learning for adult lifelong learners. We connect their perspectives and uncover the common theme: actionability. And, to help your learning business take the important step of applying learning science, we offer a framework we developed—the MIDDLE ME learning product lifecycle—to get you started.

To tune in, listen below. To make sure you catch all future episodes, be sure to subscribe via RSS, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher Radio, iHeartRadio, PodBean, or any podcatcher service you may use (e.g., Overcast). And, if you like the podcast, be sure to give it a tweet.

Listen to the Show

Access the Transcript

Download a PDF transcript of this episode’s audio.

Read the Show Notes

Perspectives on Key Tenets of Learning Science

[00:27 ] – We spoke with Megan Sumeracki for the episode that focused on behavioral and cognitive psychology. She explained that we’re actually really bad at putting ourselves in the future context related to what we’re learning and assessing how well we’d do in that context.

We’re bad judges of our own learning. That is a significant finding. It shows that we can’t just ask learners if they’re getting it and if they’ll be able to do it when the time comes. We need to get them to try to do and see. That’s when we’ll know—and they’ll know—whether or not they’ve really learned it.

Celisa Steele

[04:04 ] – We asked learning designer and technologist Myra Roldan what aspect of learning science she wishes those designing and delivering adult lifelong learning better understood. Her comments connect with Megan’s. Myra explained that a lot of instruction focuses on theory and understanding concept, but instruction tends to fall flat on the hands-on, application piece.

What both Megan and Myra homed in on is cause and effect—or at least a logical consequence. If learners aren’t good judges of knowing if they’ve learned something, you need to give them opportunities for for trying things out. Those hands-on opportunities allow them to not only learn but to also get some feedback about their learning.

By doing something, learners often produce something that an instructor can evaluate and provide feedback on too. There’s a lot of work to be done in helping instructors and subject matter experts learn how to scaffold hands-on, application opportunities well.

Not just any doing will have good results—learners need doing and application that are spot-on, relevant, and align with how they will use whatever they are learning in the future.

That can sound obvious and easy, but we know from our own experience that when you’re trying to design something impactful in a limited amount of time, it can be hard to determine appropriate opportunities for doing and application. It requires work over time, and learning businesses should help their subject matter experts in understanding the importance of practice and scaffolding application opportunities.

[07:14 ] – The aspect of learning science Ruth Colvin Clark wishes learning designers better understood is the fundamentals of the mental processes and a better appreciation of the limits and strength of working memory.

This is one I’ve been guilty of, time and time again, and always have to pay attention to. So many subject matter experts, so many presenters, teachers, facilitators are guilty of this. Just stuffing too much into a learning experience, not taking the time to cut down to what’s truly essential and what’s truly reasonable for a learner to process…. Less content really can be a beautiful thing.

Jeff Cobb

[09:35 ] – The limitations of working memory that Ruth brought up are also an argument for microlearning, which Brenda McLaughlin, CEO at SelfStudy, raised in regards to designing effective learning experiences. She thinks we need more normalcy and systems around creating smaller interactions with education so that we’re not always thinking in terms of mapping to a course but of mapping to a competency or skill.

Brenda’s comments remind us of Cathy Moore’s take that we really need a mindset shift to get away from content-heavy learning options and offerings that can then favor more doing because there’s less emphasis on content. Microlearning embraces the less-is-more approach, and Brenda points out that, to realize its full potential, it isn’t just chunking longer content; it’s truly a different approach.

[12:04 ] – We asked evaluation experts Rob Brinkerhoff and Daniela Schroeter to pick one aspect of effective evaluation they wished was more broadly understood by those charged with looking at the impact of learning programs.

Daniela emphasized that there has to be a focus on performance—what the learning is about, what you want to get out of it, and if it’s actually being used.

Rob stressed that that an evaluation must be actionable. You need to know what the return on investment of the evaluation is, and it has to be actionable because, if you can’t do anything with it, there’s no point. We struggle with this ourselves, and it’s not easy territory, but the Success Case Method is one approach that can be used.

Listen to Mark Nilles speak at the Leading Learning Symposium about how he’s made use of the method to evaluate training programs.

Sponsor: SelfStudy

[15:17 ] – If you’re looking for a technology partner to help you optimize the learning experiences you offer, check out our sponsor for this series.