MindLeaders: Fueling the Learning Revolution

Generation Y's impact on training at UPS

Fortune Magazine has published a fascinating article about UPS revamping its training program to better suit Generation Y. (Via Tom Werner at Brandon Hall. They also have a video introduction here.) Here is one of the best concrete examples so far of how the new arrivals in the workforce are having an impact - in UPS's case, first on skyrocketing dropouts and injury rates, then on the pilot program of a complete re-engineering of their training program to deal with these issues.

I worked with a guy in college who also worked at a UPS shipping facility, and he showed me the book full of zip codes that he had to memorize for the job. He was tested on it constantly. Turns out such rote book study doesn't fly so well these days. As we've been seeing for a while now, the NextGen is demanding to see and do it for themselves, and they want to instantly know their results. My favorite line of the article:

Because the young people they're trying to train aren't just Generation Y, they're Generation Why?

That's got to be one of the best one-line descriptions of NextGen that I've seen yet.

But here's the thing that struck me as I read about the new training program that UPS had put together for their workers, one that includes lots of examples along with their quizzes, instant feedback in hard data and video recordings, full-scale simulations and practice runs: that sounds like excellent training for everyone, regardless of generation.

The training innovations that Generation Y are demanding are good innovations that are resulting in better training. Maybe the real difference with Generation Y isn't about their training needs, but because they're demanding it rather than accepting the training that's given to them.

Writing learning objectives for the right audience

I read today a long, well-researched, well-thought-out post from from Sims Learning Connections about Writing Learning Objectives. It reminded me of a conversation I had at Learning 2007 with a small group of workplace trainers. We were discussing a completely different topic, but it turned out that 2 or 3 of them had surveyed their audiences about their training and had hit the same surprising theme: one of the things that learners panned most universally were learning objectives. They said that the learning objectives did them as students no good at all; they seemed to be there for the sake of the teacher, not the learner.

So are learning objectives worth our time and effort?

I think the article by Will at Work on the New Taxonomy for Learning Objectives is headed in the right direction. We're making a mistake when we try to write singular objectives for our training. Our objectives as trainers and instructional designers are different than our objectives as CLOs or front-line managers and are different than our objectives as learners. We should never present an objective written for one listener to another - they won't care.

• Trainers and instructional designers need objectives to tell them what the training must cover.
• Managers and executives need objectives to tell them what business purpose and strategy the training is going to help fulfill.
• Learners need objectives to tell them why this applies to their jobs and what they should be looking to take away from the training session.
• And those of us who are building the training programs have to keep all three of these sewn together like battle plans.

What would you like to see in the learning objectives of the next training program you're involved in?

New Office, AJAX, A+, communication, and project management courses available

It's course release day here at MindLeaders! We've released new courses in the following topics:

• Access 2007 Advanced
• AJAX
• Communicating with Power
• CompTIA A+ Essentials 220-601
• European Computer Driving Licence Version 4.5
• PowerPoint 2007
• Project Management from a People Perspective
• SharePoint 2007

We're continuing with lots more information on Office 2007, Vista, web technologies and marketing, and a whole lot of technical and certification titles to come. Our development schedule is always available at http://www.mindleaders.com/products/schedule.asp.

What topics are you most interested in seeing MindLeaders produce in the coming months? Please drop us a comment with your thoughts.

How to really evaluate Second Life

ComputerWorld's latest issue contains another review of Second Life from a person making his first visit to the "virtual world." He gives one of the best overviews of his experience that I've seen and makes some good suggestions for companies who want to put a presence on Second Life. He concludes that most of the companies with a Second Life presence so far are pretty tentative and experimental, and the article includes pictures of his avatar all alone in rooms, streets, and buildings.

As trainers, I think this is missing part of the point of Second Life. The thing I find the most fascinating about SL isn't the virtual world itself; it's the technology that's behind it. Worlds that allow you to move around as an avatar in it is almost two decades old; I remember one called WorldsAway that I worked on at CompuServe. The difference in Second Life is that the world so closely mirrors "real life" and - here's the big one - the world is open for modifications, and you don't have to have a programming degree to build something for yourself in it.

Think of the whole Second Life phenomenon as simulations going to the next level. And some companies, like Forterra, are concentrating heavily on the amazing training possibilities this offers. Is it ready for prime-time, public use yet? Maybe not. But it's a glimpse at the future, and it's coming fast.

If you'd like to read a longer article about the training possibilities of virtual worlds, check out this excellent article in eLearn magazine: Another Life: Virtual Worlds as Tools for Learning.