Or … Why Bother?
Organizing is one thing. Alignment is another.
In my view Alignment comes second and Organizing comes third.
Well, then what comes first?
That – in a moment.
So much Content is out there – you’ve probably read or heard that “all the content already exists.”
Maybe. Maybe it does.
But is it organized well, taking the unknowing learner up the learning curve path both effectively and efficiently – focused on the real Performance Requirements – eliminating unnecessary content on the straight path for the newbies but keeping it for the experts who might need to explore the side roads/paths of that content?
Or is it just in piles for the newbie and expert to dig through and navigate – on their own?
Is all that existing Content overlapped and gapped … and does it inadvertently use conflicting or confusing language – where the same words are used to mean differing things … or different words are used to mean the same thing – where the newbies can’t figure it out quickly enough … and maybe the experts have finally, finally figured it out?
Organizing includes separating overlapping but conflicting (in language and imagery) content, filling important (but not all gaps), and organizing it best for climbing the Performance Curve – incrementally.
Organizing also means keeping it evergreen – fresh – up-to-date – or … why bother in the first place?
But that’s not all – and the reason I don’t buy that “all the Content already exists” – is …
WHERE ARE THE APPOS?
The APPOs – the Application Exercises – for authentic Practice (or why bother?) – are few and far between IMO … and IMExperience.
One might find the INFOs and DEMOs out there – in cyberspace – audio clips – video clips – text and graphics galore … but …
But the APPOs – as simple as “real work WITH reinforcing feedback or corrective feedback” – are usually missing in most Instruction – Learning – Training – call it what you may or need to – but THAT is what is most often MIA.
MIA – Missing in Action.
MIA in Formal Learning too often – and in Informal Learning most often.
Address that – Organize that – the APPOs.
And organize the complete sets of Content via Paths, Events/ Lessons and Instructional Activities – or whatever architectural framework and language you use – for the benefit of the learners.
That’s why Alignment of Content comes before Organize Content. Gotta know the audience.
Old content, new content. Overviews and enabler and Performance How To Content.
Here is my organization segmentation scheme for L&D…
That’s what I mean by Organizing Content.
Alignment of Content
Alignment of Content – back to the task, tasks, job, jobs, departments and functions – is critical.
Alignment is also about sharing Content – insuring that those who work in shared Processes – share the same Content – in “combination with” and “not in conflict” with their unique Content needs.
Alignment – in my view – should mirror the work process performance “segments” – I call them AoPs – Areas of Performance.
Here is my model/ the L-C-S framework …
Taking all of that up – to the Enterprise level – might organize and then align Content using something that the next graphic suggests.
Again, Organizing is one thing. Alignment is another. In my view Alignment comes second and Organizing comes third.
Well, then what comes first?
Deriving Content … from the Process requirements.
Deriving Content comes before Alignment of Content. Gotta know the audience’s work process performance requirements.
Deriving the Enabling Awareness, Knowledge and Skills
If you need to look at and organize and align the Content Requirements of the work – the task, tasks, job, jobs and departments and functions of a modern Enterprise – public, private and government – you would need to deriving the needs from some model of the captured Work Process Performance.
Of a Job or a Team or a Process or a set of Processes.
At least that’s my belief.
I start with the Target Audience or Audiences – and then their AoPs … to frame further Analysis …
Then we create a Performance Model for each AoP … with a team of Master Performers, or Star Performers, Exemplars, etc., etc..
We capture their voice … not because they know it perfectly – but because who else would you ask?
Then we systematically derive the enabling K/Ss … with the same team of Master Performers.
We derive the enabling K/S using up to 17 categories …
You can then use that data to feed your alignment and organizing of Content processes … hopefully with the same team of Master Performers … to get it and keep it authentic.
For once you know the audience and their voice of their work process performance requirements … you can meet their needs for content based on the variability – or not – of their background knowledge, education and experience. Perhaps based on their background – a simple Job Aid of steps without explanation would suffice – versus intense skills practice in a laboratory setting.
Alignment is a reflection of the Deriving targets.
Check out the Resource Tab at http://www.eppic.biz for over 400 free resources on this approach – part of my PACT Processes for Training/ Learning/ Knowledge Management.
# # #