The Difference Is In the Analysis – IMO
When is a Learning Path more of a Performance Competence Development Path, than not?
When it’s focus in planning, analysis and design – and development/purchase – and then its implementation: deployment and/or making it accessible, is squarely focused on the Performance Competence requirements of the Performance Context of the learners/Performers – which may have little or great variance.
Make sure you are clear about the Requirements and the Current State Adequacy – and any current gaps. Before creating your path.
Overview: My 7 Step Process
Adopt or Adapt as Required.
This effort takes 3 days – if you have the data required from your analysis efforts – with 6-12 Master Performers – and other SMEs as required. I’ve done 75+ of these design meetings using this process, since my first in 1982.
Once you have your Path you could – but it certainly isn’t necessary – attempt to figure out your version of 70:20:10. In case you get hit with that. But watch out. It could be the reverse. Manage everyone’s expectations appropriately before starting.
And about Learning Styles preferences – you can probably say that you’ve got them all covered.
And if pressed – you can claim that you have even guided the Informal Learning – that potential content that is to be left to U-OJT: Unstructured on-the-job training/learning – by naming it and placing it a suggested sequence.
Win – Win – Win!!!
Welcome to ReUse City
Especially if is this is not your first PACT CAD rodeo – so to speak.
You can borrow/steal from prior efforts and use as is, or after modification at the Event level, the module/Lesson level and at the Instructional Activity level – of INFOs and DEMOs and APPOs.
You can even start at the Path level and adopt and adapt from there.
In your first effort – you are laying the ground work for future ReUse of Instructional and Informational CONTENT – as is (AI), after modification (AM) – and of course, potentially: not at all, when not appropriate (NA).
When Do You Go To This … This EXTREME?
When the ROI is obvious or has been calculated to meet the current hurdle rate at YOUR Enterprise.
Not unless. IMO.
And … you can build/buy – and deploy and/or make accessible – Learning Content – performance-based Instruction and Information for what I call PUSH Target Audiences and share that with PULL Audiences.
Push – Pull.
Very Critical Job Positions – and – Less Critical Job Positions.
In case you simply cannot afford to treat all as the same – to start.
Article in Training Magazine back in 1984…
CAD – Training Mag – 1984 – 6 page PDF – the first publication about Curriculum Architecture Design via a Group Process – published in Training Magazine in September 1984. Original manuscript (30 pages) – How to Build a Training Structure That Won’t Keep Burning Down.
And my 2011 book…
Click on image above for more info about this book … one of 6 in my 2011 Six-Pack.
Note: The contents for this book are updates of what was in my 1999 book: lean-ISD – if you’d like to start there in the middle. Click here for more info.
# # #