Session P10 Evaluating Online Learning: Frameworks and Perspectives (Workshop: Sunday Sept 22nd, Online Learning 2002)

1
Session P10 Evaluating Online Learning
Frameworks and Perspectives(Workshop Sunday
Sept 22nd, Online Learning 2002)

• Dr. Curtis J. Bonk
• President, CourseShare.com
• Associate Professor, Indiana University
• http//php.indiana.edu/cjbonk,
• cjbonk_at_indiana.edu
• Dr. Vanessa Paz Dennen
• Assistant Professor, San Diego State University
• vdennen_at_mail.sdsu.edu
• http//edweb.sdsu.edu/people/vdennen

2
Workshop Overview

• Part I The State of Online Learning
• Part II. Evaluation Purposes, Approaches, and
  Frameworks
• Part III. Applying Kirkpatricks 4 Levels
• Part IV. ROI and Online Learning
• Part V. Collecting Evaluation Data Online
  Evaluation Tools

3
Sevilla Wells (July, 2001), e-learning

• We could be very productive by ignoring
  assessment altogether and assume competence if
  the learner simply gets through the course.

4
Why Evaluate?

• Cost-savings
• Becoming less important reason to evaluate as
  more people recognize that the initial expense is
  balanced by long-term financial benefits
• Performance improvement
• A clear place to see impact of online learning
• Competency advancement

5
16 Evaluation Methods

• 1. Formative Evaluation
• 2. Summative Evaluation
• 3. CIPP Model Evaluation
• 4. Objectives-Oriented Evaluation
• 5. Marshall Shriver's 5 Levels of Evaluation
• 6. Bonks 8 Part Evaluation Plan
• ( the Ridiculous Model)
• 7. Kirkpatricks 4 Levels
• 8. Return on Investment (ROI)

• 9. K-Level 6 budget and stability of e-learning
  team.
• 10. K-Level 7 whether e-learning champion(s) are
  promoted
• 11. Cost/Benefit Analysis (CBA)
• 12. Time to Competency
• 13. Time to Market
• 14. Return on Expectation
• 15. AEIOU Accountability, Effectiveness, Impact,
  Organizational Context, U Unintended
  Consequences
• 16. Consumer-Oriented Evaluation

6
Part I. The State of Online Learning
7
Survey of 201 Trainers, Instructors, Managers,
Instructional Designers, CEOs, CLOs, etc.
8
Survey Limitations

• Sample poole-PostDirect
• The Web is changing rapidly
• Lengthy survey, low response rate
• No password or keycode
• Many backgroundshard to generalize
• Does not address all issues (e.g., ROI
  calculations, how trained supported, specific
  assessments)

9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Why Interested in E-Learning?

• Mainly cost savings
• Reduced travel time
• Greater flexibility in delivery
• Timeliness of training
• Better allocation of resources, speed of
  delivery, convenience, course customization,
  lifelong learning options, personal growth,
  greater distrib of materials

13
(No Transcript)
14
A Few Assessment Comments
15
Level 1 Comments. Reactions

• We assess our courses based on participation
  levels and online surveys after course
  completion. All of our courses are
  asynchronous.
• I conduct a post course survey of course
  material, delivery methods and mode, and
  instructor effectiveness. I look for suggestions
  and modify each course based on the results of
  the survey.
• We use the Halo Survey process of asking them
  when the course is concluding.

16
Level 2 Comments Learning

• We use online testing and simulation frequently
  for testing student knowledge.
• Do multiple choice exams after each section of
  the course.
• We use online exams and use level 2 evaluation
  forms.

17
Level 3 Comment Job Performance

• I feel strongly there is a need to measure the
  success of any training in terms of the
  implementation of the new behaviors on the job.
  Having said that, I find there is very limited by
  our clients in spending the dollars required

18
More Assessment CommentsMultiple Level Evaluation

• Using Level One Evaluations for each session
  followed by a summary evaluation. Thirty days
  post-training, conversations occur with learners
  managers to assess Level 2 (actually Level 3).
• We do Level 1 measurements to gauge student
  reactions to online training using an online
  evaluation form. We do Level 2 measurements to
  determine whether or not learning has occurred
• Currently, we are using online teaching and
  following up with manager assessments that the
  instructional material is being put to use on the
  job.

19
Who is Evaluating Online Learning?

• 59 of respondents said they did not have a
  formal evaluation program
• At Reaction level 79
• At Learning level 61
• At Behavior/Job Performance level 47
• At Results or Return on Investment 30

20
(No Transcript)
21
Assessment Lacking or Too Early

• We are just beginning to use Web-based
  technology for education of both associates and
  customers, and do not have the metric to measure
  our success. However, we are putting together a
  focus group to determine what to measure (and)
  how.
• We have no online evaluation for students at
  this time.
• We lack useful tools in this area.

22
Limitations with Current System

• I feel strongly there is a need to measure the
  success of any training in terms of the
  implementation of the new behaviors on the job.
  Having said that, I find there is very limited by
  our clients in spending the dollars required
• We are looking for better ways to track learner
  progress, learner satisfaction, and retention of
  material.
• Have had fairly poor ratings on reliability,
  customer support, and interactivity

23
PauseHow and What Do You Evaluate?
24
Readiness Checklist

• 1.      ___ Is your organization undergoing
  significant change, in part related to
  e-learning?
• 2.      ___ Is there pressure from senior
  management to measure the results of e-learning?
• 3.      ___ Has your company experienced one or
  more training/learning disasters in the past?
• 4.      ___ Is the image of the training/learning
  function lower than you want?

25
Part II Evaluation Purposes, Approaches and
Frameworks
26
What is Evaluation???

• Simply put, an evaluation is concerned with
  judging the worth of a program and is essentially
  conducted to aid in the making of decisions by
  stakeholders. (e.g., does it work as
  effectively as the standard instructional
  approach).
• (Champagne Wisher, in press)

27
What is assessment?

• Assessment refers toefforts to obtain info about
  how and what students are learning in order to
  improveteaching efforts and/or to demo to others
  the degree to which students have accomplished
  the learning goals for a course. (Millar, 2001,
  p. 11).
• It is a way of using info obtained through
  various types of measurement to determine a
  learners performance or skill on some task or
  situation (Rosenkrans, 2000).

28
Who are you evaluating for?

• The level of evaluation will depend on
  articulation of the stakeholders. Stakeholders
  of evaluation in corporate settings may range
  from???

29
Evaluation Purposes

• Determine learner progress
• What did they learn?
• Document learning impact
• How well do learners use what they learned?
• How much do learners use what they learn?

30
Evaluation Purposes

• Efficiency
• Was online learning more effective than another
  medium?
• Was online learning more cost-effective than
  another medium/what was the return on investment
  (ROI)?
• Improvement
• How do we do this better?

31
Evaluation Purposes

• An evaluation plan can evaluate the delivery of
  e-learning, identify ways to improve the online
  delivery of it, and justify the investment in the
  online training package, program, or initiative.
  (Champagne Wisher, in press)

32
Evaluation Plans

• Does your company have a training evaluation plan?

33
Steps to Developing an OL Evaluation Program

• Select a purpose and framework
• Develop benchmarks
• Develop online survey instruments
• For learner reactions
• For learner post-training performance
• For manager post-training reactions
• Develop data analysis and management plan

34
1. Formative Evaluation

• Formative evaluations focus on improving the
  online learning experience.
• A formative focus will try to find out what
  worked or did not work.
• Formative evaluation is particularly useful for
  examining instructional design and instructor
  performance.

35
Formative Questions

• -How can we improve our OL program?
• -How can we make our OL program more efficient?
• -More effective?
• -More accessible?

36
2. Summative Evaluation

• Summative evaluations focus on the overall
  success of the OL experience (should it be
  continued?).
• A summative focus will look at whether or not
  objectives are met, the training is
  cost-effective, etc.

37
Course Completion

• Jeanne Meister, Corporate University Xchange,
  found a 70 percent drop out rate compared to
  classroom rates of 15.
• Perhaps need new metrics. Need to see if they
  can test out.
• Almost any measure would be better than course
  completion, which is not a predictor of
  anything. Tom Kelly, Cisco, March 2002,
  e-Learning.

38
What Can OL Evaluation Measure?

• Categories of Evaluation Info (Woodley and
  Kirkwood, 1986)
• Measures of activity
• Measures of efficiency
• Measures of outcomes
• Measures of program aims
• Measures of policy
• Measures of organizations

39
Typical Evaluation Frameworks for OL

• Commonly used frameworks include
• CIPP Model
• Objectives-oriented
• Marshall Shrivers 5 levels
• Kirkpatricks 4 levels
• Plus a 5th level
• AEIOU
• Consumer-oriented

40
3. CIPP Model Evaluation

• CIPP is a management-oriented model
• C context
• I input
• P process
• P product
• Examines the OL within its larger system/context

41
CIPP OL Context

• Context Addresses the environment in which OL
  takes place.
• How does the real environment compare to the
  ideal?
• Uncovers systemic problems that may dampen OL
  success.
• Technology breakdowns
• Inadequate computer systems

42
CIPP OL Input

• Input Examines what resources are put into OL.
• Is the content right?
• Have we used the right combination of media?
• Uncovers instructional design issues.

43
CIPP OL Process

• Process Examines how well the implementation
  works.
• Did the course run smoothly?
• Were there technology problems?
• Was the facilitation and participation as
  planned?
• Uncovers implementation issues.

44
CIPP OL Product

• Product Addresses outcomes of the learning.
• Did the learners learn? How do you know?
• Does the online training have an effect on
  workflow or productivity?
• Uncovers systemic problems.

45
4. Objectives-Oriented Evaluation

• Examines OL training objectives as compared to
  training results
• Helps determine if objectives are being met
• Helps determine if objectives, as formally
  stated, are appropriate
• Objectives can be used as a comparative benchmark
  between online and other training methods

46
Evaluating Objectives OL

• An objectives-oriented approach can examine two
  levels of objectives
• Instructional objectives for learners (did the
  learners learn?)
• Systemic objectives for training (did the
  training solve the problem?)

47
Objectives OL

• Requires
• A clear sense of what the objectives are (always
  a good idea anyway)
• The ability to measure whether or not objectives
  are met
• Some objectives may be implicit and hard to state
• Some objectives are not easy to measure

48
5. Marshall Shriver's Five Levels of Evaluation

• Performance-based evaluation framework
• Each level examines a different areas of
  performance
• Requires demonstration of learning

49
Marshall Shriver's 5 Levels

• Level I Self (instructor)
• Level II Course Materials
• Level II Course Curriculum
• Level IV Course Modules
• Level V Learning Transfer

50
6. Bonks Evaluation Plan
51
What to Evaluate?

1. Learnerattitudes, learning, use, performance.
2. Instructorpopularity, course enrollments.
3. Traininginternal and external components.
4. Task--relevance, interactivity, collaborative.
5. Tool--usable, learner-centered, friendly,
   supportive.
6. Courseinteractivity, participation, completion.
7. Programgrowth, long-range plans.
8. Organizationcost-benefit, policies, vision.

52
RIDIC5-ULO3US Model of Technology Use

• 4. Tasks (RIDIC)
• Relevance
• Individualization
• Depth of Discussion
• Interactivity
• Collaboration-Control-Choice-Constructivistic-Comm
  unity

53
RIDIC5-ULO3US Model of Technology Use

• 5. Tech Tools (ULOUS)
• Utility/Usable
• Learner-Centeredness
• Opportunities with Outsiders Online
• Ultra Friendly
• Supportive

54
7. Kirkpatricks 4 Levels

• A common training framework.
• Examines training on 4 levels.
• Not all 4 levels have to be included in a given
  evaluation.

55
The 4 Levels

• Reaction
• Learning
• Behavior
• Results

56
8. Return on Investment (ROI) A 5th Level

• Return on Investment is a 5th level
• It is related to results, but is more clearly
  stated as a financial calculation
• How to calculate ROI is the big issue here

57
Is ROI the answer?

• Elise Olding of CLK Strategies suggests that we
  shift from looking at ROI to looking at time to
  competency.
• ROI may be easier to calculate since concrete
  dollars are involved, but time to competency may
  be more meaningful in terms of actual impact.

58
Example Call Center Training

• Traditional call center training can take 3
  months to complete
• Call center employees typically quit within one
  year
• When OL was implemented, the time to train (time
  to competency) was reduced
• Benchmarks for success time per call number of
  transfers

59
Example Circuit City

• Circuit City provided online product/sales
  training
• What is more useful to know
• The overall ROI or break-even point?
• How much employees liked the training?
• How many employees completed the training?
• That employees who completed 80 of the training
  saw an average increase of 10 in sales?

60
Matching Evaluation Levels with Objectives Pretest

• Instructions For each statement below, indicate
  the level of evaluation at which the objective is
  aimed.
• 1.      ___ Show a 15 percent decrease in errors
  made on tax returns by staff accountants
  participating in the e-learning certificate
  program.
• 2.      ___ Increase use of conflict resolution
  skills, when warranted, by 80 percent of
  employees who had completed the first eight
  modules of the online training. (see handout for
  more)

61
9. A 6th Level?Clark Aldrich (2002)

• Adding Level 6 which relates to the budget and
  stability of the e-learning team.
• Just how respected and successful is the
  e-learning team.
• Have they won approval from senior management for
  their initiatives.
• Aldrich, C. (2002). Measuring success In a
  post-Maslow/Kirkpatrick world, which metrics
  matter? Online Learning, 6(2), 30 32.

62
10. And Even a 7th Level?Clark Aldrich (2002)

• At Level 7 whether the e-learning sponsor(s) or
  champion(s) are promoted in the organization.
• While both of these additional levels address the
  people involved in the e-learning initiative or
  plan, such recognitions will likely hinge on the
  results of evaluation of the other five levels.

63
11. ROI AlternativeCost/Benefit Analysis (CBA)

• ROI may be ill-advised since not all impacts hit
  bottom line, and those that do take time.
• Shifts the attention from more long-term results
  and quantifying impacts with numeric values, such
  as
• increased revenue streams,
• increased employee retention, or
• reduction in calls to a support center.
• Reddy, A. (2002, January). E-learning ROI
  calculations Is a cost/benefit analysis a better
  approach? e-learning. 3(1), 30-32.

64
Cost/Benefit Analysis (CBA)

• To both qualitative and quantitative measures
• job satisfaction ratings,
• new uses of technology,
• reduction in processing errors,
• quicker reactions to customer requests,
• reduction in customer call rerouting,
• increased customer satisfaction,
• enhanced employee perceptions of training,
• global post-test availability.
• Reddy, A. (2002, January). E-learning ROI
  calculations Is a cost/benefit analysis a better
  approach? e-learning. 3(1), 30-32.

65
Cost/Benefit Analysis (CBA)

• In effect, CBA asks how does the sum of the
  benefits compare to the sum of the costs.
• Yet, it often leads to or supports ROI and other
  more quantitatively-oriented calculations.
• Reddy, A. (2002, January). E-learning ROI
  calculations Is a cost/benefit analysis a better
  approach? e-learning. 3(1), 30-32.

66
Other ROI Alternatives

• 12. Time to competency (need benchmarks)
• online databases of frequently asked questions
  can help employees in call centers learn skills
  more quickly and without requiring temporary
  leaves from their position for such training
• 13. Time to market
• might be measured by how e-learning speeds up the
  training of sales and technical support
  personnel, thereby expediting the delivery of a
  software product to the market
• Raths, D. (2001, May). Measure of success.
  Online Learning, 5(5), 20-22, 24.

67
Still Other ROI Alternatives

• 14. Return on Expectation
• Asks employees a series of questions related to
  how training met expectations of their job
  performance.
• When questioning is complete, they place a
  figure on that.
• Correlate or compare such reaction data with
  business results or supplement Level 1 data to
  include more pertinent info about the
  applicability of learning to employee present job
  situation.
• Raths, D. (2001, May). Measure of success.
  Online Learning, 5(5), 20-22, 24.

68
15. AEIOU

• Provides a framework for looking at different
  aspects of an online learning program
• Fortune Keith, 1992 Sweeney, 1995 Sorensen,
  1996

69
A Accountability

• Did the training do what it set out to do?
• Data can be collected through
• Administrative records
• Counts of training programs ( of attendees, of
  offerings)
• Interviews or surveys of training staff

70
E Effectiveness

• Is everyone satisfied?
• Learners
• Instructors
• Managers
• Were the learning objectives met?

71
I Impact

• Did the training make a difference?
• Like Kirkpatricks level 4 (Results)

72
O Organizational Context

• Did the organizations structures and policies
  support or hinder the training?
• Does the training meet the organizations needs?
• OC evaluation can help find when there is a
  mismatch between the training design and the
  organization
• Important when using third-party training or
  content

73
U Unintended Consequences

• Unintended consequences are often overlooked in
  training evaluation
• May give you an opportunity to brag about
  something wonderful that happened
• Typically discovered via qualitative data
  (anecdotes, interviews, open-ended survey
  responses)

74
16. Consumer-Oriented Evaluation

• Uses a consumer point-of-view
• Can be a part of vendor selection process
• Can be a learner-satisfaction issue
• Relies on benchmarks for comparison of different
  products or different learning media

See the vendors!
75
Part III

• Applying Kirkpatricks 4 Levels to Online
  Learning Evaluation Evaluation Design

76
Why Use the 4 Levels?

• They are familiar and understood
• Highly referenced in the training literature
• Can be used with 2 delivery media for comparative
  results

77
Conducting 4-Level Evaluation

• You need not use every level
• Choose the level that is most appropriate to your
  need and budget
• Higher levels will be more costly and difficult
  to evaluate
• Higher levels will yield more

78
Kirkpatrick Level 1 Reaction

• Typically involves Smile sheets or
  end-of-training evaluation forms.
• Easy to collect, but not always very useful.
• Reaction-level data on online courses has been
  found to correlate with ability to apply learning
  to the job.
• Survey ideally should be Web-based, keeping the
  medium the same as the course.

79
Kirkpatrick Level I Reaction

• Types of questions
• Enjoyable?
• Easy to use?
• How was the instructor?
• How was the technology?
• Was it fast or slow enough?

80
Kirkpatrick Level 2 Learning

• Typically involves testing learners immediately
  following the training
• Not difficult to do, but online testing has its
  own challenges
• Did the learner take the test on his/her own?

81
Kirkpatrick Level 2 Learning

• Higher-order thinking skills (problem solving,
  analysis, synthesis)
• Basic skills (articulate ideas in writing)
• Company perspectives and values (teamwork,
  commitment to quality, etc.)
• Personal development

82
Kirkpatrick Level 2 Learning

• Might include
• Essay tests.
• Problem solving exercises.
• Interviews.
• Written or verbal tests to assess cognitive
  skills.
• Shepard, C. (1999b, July). Evaluating online
  learning. TACTIX from Fastrak Consulting.
  Retrieved February 10, 2002, from
  http//fastrak-consulting.co.uk/tactix/Features/ev
  aluate/eval01.htm.

83
Kirkpatrick Level 3 Behavior

• More difficult to evaluate than Levels 1 2
• Looks at whether learners can apply what they
  learned (does the training change their
  behavior?)
• Requires post-training follow-up to determine
• Less common than levels 1 2 in practice

84
Kirkpatrick Level 3 Behavior

• Might include
• Direct observation by supervisors or coaches
  (Wisher, Curnow, Drenth, 2001).
• Questionnaires completed by peers, supervisors,
  and subordinates related to work performance.
• On the job behaviors, automatically logged
  performances, or self-report data.
• Shepard, C. (1999b, July). Evaluating online
  learning. TACTIX from Fastrak Consulting.
  Retrieved February 10, 2002, from
  http//fastrak-consulting.co.uk/tactix/Features/ev
  aluate/eval01.htm.

85
Kirkpatrick Level 4 Results

• Often compared to return on investment (ROI)
• In e-learning, it is believed that the increased
  cost of course development ultimately is offset
  by the lesser cost of training implementation
• A new way of training may require a new way of
  measuring impact

86
Kirkpatrick Level 4 Results

• Might Include
• Labor savings (e.g., reduced duplication of
  effort or faster access to needed information).
• Production increases (faster turnover of
  inventory, forms processed, accounts opened,
  etc.).
• Direct cost savings (e.g., reduced cost per
  project, lowered overhead costs, reduction of bad
  debts, etc.).
• Quality improvements (e.g., fewer accidents, less
  defects, etc.).
• Horton, W. (2001). Evaluating e-learning.
  Alexandria, VA American Society for Training
  Development.

Of course, this assumes you have all the
documents!
87
Kirkpatrick Evaluation Design

• Kirkpatricks 4 Levels may be achieved via
  various evaluation designs
• Different designs help answer different questions

88
Pre/Post Control Groups

• One group receives OL training and one does not
• As variation try 3 groups
• No training (control)
• Traditional training
• OL training
• Recommended because it may help neutralize
  contextual factors
• Relies on random assignment as much as possible

89
Multiple Baselines

• Can be used for a program that is rolling out
• Each group serves as a control group for the
  previous group
• Look for improvement in subsequent groups
• Eliminates need for tight control of control group

90
Time Series

• Looks at benchmarks before and after training
• Practical and cost-effective
• Not considered as rigorous as other designs
  because it doesnt control for contextual factors

91
Single Group Pre/Post

• Easy and inexpensive
• Criticized for lack of rigor (absence of control)
• Needs to be pushed into Kirkpatrick levels 3 and
  4 to see if there has been impact

92
Case Study

• A rigorous design in academic practice, but often
  after-the-fact in corporate settings
• Useful when no preliminary or baseline data have
  been collected

93
Matching Evaluation Levels with Objectives
Posttest

• Instructions For each statement below, indicate
  the level of evaluation at which the objective is
  aimed.
• 1. Union Pacific Railroad reported an increase in
  bottom-line performance--on-time delivery of
  goods--of over 35, which equated to millions of
  dollars in increased revenues and savings.
• 2. They also reported that learners showed a 40
  increase in learning retention and improved
  attitudes about management and jobs.
• (see handout for more)

94
Part IV

• ROI and Online Learning

95
The Importance of ROI

• OL requires a great amount of and other
  resources up front
• It gives the promise of financial rewards later
  on
• ROI is of great interest because of the
  investment and the wait period before the return

96
Calculating ROI

• Look at
• Hard cost savings
• Hard revenue impact
• Soft competitive benefits
• Soft benefits to individuals
• See Calculating the Return on Your eLearning
  Investment (2000) by Docent, Inc.

97
Possible ROI Objectives

• Better Efficiencies
• Greater Profitability
• Increased Sales
• Fewer Injuries on the Job
• Less Time off Work
• Faster Time to Competency

98
Factors Impacting ROI

• of employees
• Travel costs
• Opportunity costs (e.g., what does it cost to
  pull off of job)
• Online course development costs
• Infrastructure costs

99
Hard Cost Savings

• Travel
• Facilities
• Printed material costs (printing, distribution,
  storage)
• Reduction of costs of business through increased
  efficiency
• Instructor fees (sometimes)

100
The Cost of E-learning

• Brandon-hall.com estimates that an LMS system for
  8,000 learners costs 550,000
• This price doesnt include the cost of buying or
  developing content
• Bottom line getting started in e-learning isnt
  cheap

101
Hard Revenue Impact

• Consider
• Opportunity cost of improperly or untrained
  personnel
• Shorter time to productivity through shorter
  training times with OL
• Increased time on job (no travel time)
• Ease of delivering same training to partners and
  customers (for fee?)

102
Soft Competitive Benefits

• Just-in-time capabilities
• Consistency in delivery
• Certification of knowledge transfer
• Ability to track users and gather data easily
• Increase morale from simultaneous roll-out at
  different sites

103
Individual Values

• Less wasted time
• Support available as needed
• Motivation from being treated as an individual

104
Talking about ROI

• As a percentage
• ROI(Payback-Investment)/Investment100
• As a ratio
• ROIReturn/Investment
• As time to break even
• Break even time(Investment/Return)Time Period

105
Net Present Value

• Need to discount the return to present dollars a
  100,000 project that yields 30,000/year for 5
  years, would have a new present value of 29,364
  at 8 interest (Horton, 2001, ASTD)

106
Benefit-Cost Ratio

• Project cost of 100,000 that yields 150,000 of
  benefits would have a benefit-cost ratio of 1.5
  (Horton, 2001, ASTD)

107
Time to Payback

• If cost is 100,000 and ROI is 10,000/month,
  then the time to payback is 10 months (Horton,
  2001, ASTD)

108
Learners to Payback

• Training costs 100,000 to develop and
  100/person to offer. Assuming each person
  trained benefits the organization 300 (or 200
  net) development costs are repaid by training
  500 people (Horton, 2001, ASTD)

109
Classroom Training vs. ROI(William Horton)

1. Per-course costs (course development costs)
2. Per-class costs (instructor/facilitator, travel,
   and facilities)
3. Per-learner costs (travel, salary,
   instructor/facilitator salary)

110
What is ROI Good For?

• Prioritizing Investment
• Ensuring Adequate Financial Support for Online
  Learning Project
• Comparing Vendors

111
The Changing Face of ROI

• Return-on-investment isnt what it used to be
  The R is no longer the famous bottom line and the
  I is more likely a subscription fee than a
  one-time payment (Cross, 2001)

112
More Calculations

• Total Admin Costs of Former Program - Total
  Admin Costs of OL ProgramProjected Net Savings
• Total Cost of Training/ of StudentsCost Per
  Student (CPS)
• Total Benefits 100/Total Program CostROI

113
Pause How are costs calculated in online
programs?
114
ROI Calculators

1. Mediapro (www.mediapro.com/roi)
2. Mentergy (www.mentergy.com/roi)
3. BNH Expert Software www.bnhexpertsoft.com (free
   trial version available)

115
(No Transcript)
116
ROI Calculators
117
Success Story 1 (Sitze, March 2002, Online
Learning)EDS and GlobalEnglish

• Charge Reduce money on English training
• Goal 80 online in 3 months
• Result 12 use in 12 months
• Prior Costs 1,500-5,000/student
• New Cost 150-300/user
• Notes Email to participants was helpful in
  expanding use rolling out other additional
  languages.

118
Success Story 2 (Overby, Feb 2002, CIO)Dow
Chemical and Offensive Email

• Charge Train 40,000 employees across 70
  countries 6 hours of training on workplace
  respect and responsibility.
• Specific Results 40,000 passed
• Savings Saved 2.7 million (162,000 on record
  keeping, 300,000 on classrooms and trainers,
  1,000,000 on handouts, 1,200,000 in salary
  savings due to less training time).

119
Success Story 3 (Overby, Feb 2002, CIO)Dow
Chemical and Safety/Health

• Charge Train 27,000 employees on environmental
  health and safety work processes.
• Results Saved 6 million safety incidents have
  declined while the number of Dow employees have
  grown.

120
Success Story 4 (Overby, Feb 2002, CIO)Dow
Chemical and e-learning system

• Charge 1.3 million e-learning system
• Savings 30 million in savings (850,000 in
  manual record-keeping, 3.1 in training delivery
  costs, 5.2 in reduced classroom materials,
  20.8 in salaries since Web required 40-60 less
  training time).

121
Success Story 5 (Ziegler, e-learning, April
2002)British Telecom sales training

• Costs Train 17,000 sales professionals to sell
  Internet services using Internet simulation.
• Result Customer service rep training reduced
  from 15 days to 1 day Sales training reduced
  from 40 days to 9 days.
• Savings Millions of dollars saved sales
  conversion went up 102 percent customer
  satisfaction up 16 points.

122
And Blended Learning Results???
123
Blended Learning Advantages

1. Course access at ones convenience and flexible
   completion
2. Reduction in physical class time
3. Promotes independent learning
4. Multiple ways to accomplish course objectives
5. Increased opportunities for human interaction,
   communication, contact among students
6. Less time commuting and parking
7. Introverts participate more

124
Blended Learning Disadvantages

1. Procrastination, procrastination, procrastination
2. Students have trouble managing time
3. Problems with technology at the beginning (try
   too much)
4. Can be overwhelming or too novel
5. Poor integration or planning
6. Resistance to change
7. Good ideas but lack of time, money, support

125
Success Story 6. Infusing E-Learning (Elliott
Masie, March 2002, e-learning Magazine)

• A manufacturing company transformed a week-long
  safety program into a three-part offering
• 1. One day in classroom
• 2. Multiple online simulations and lessons.
• 3. One final day of discussions and exams.
• Must accomplish online work before phase 3
• this raised success rate, transfer of skills,
  and lowered hours away from the job.

126
Success Story 7. Ratheon, Build Own LMS (John
Hartnett, Online Learning, Summer 2002)

• SAP Training Choice Vendor (390,000) or Build
  Internally (136,000) or Cost of Instructor-led
  Training (388,000).
• Note Saved 252,000
• Five Training Components in 18 Weeks (within 6
  weeks, 4,000 courses were taken by 1,400
  students)
• Role-based simulations
• Audio walk-throughs
• Online quick reference system
• Live training support (special learning labs)
• Online enrollment and tracking

127
Success Story 8IBMSpecial E-Learning Issue,
April 2001

• 33,000 IBM managers have taken online courseware.
• 5 times as much content at one-third the cost.
• IBM reported 200 million in savings in one year.
• Voided 80 million dollars in travel and housing
  expenses during 1999 be deploying online
  learning.

128
IBM Training of 6,600 New First-Line Managers
(Basic Blue)

• Phase I 26 Weeks of Self-paced Online Learning
• Cohorts of 24 managers
• Lotus LearningSpace Forum
• 2 hours/week 5 units/week
• 18 mandatory and elective management topics
• Need minimum score on mandatory topics
• 14 real-life interactive simulations
• LearningSpace tutor guides behavior
• Karen Mantyla (2001), ASTD.

129
IBM Training of 6,600 New First-Line Managers
(Basic Blue)

• Phase II In-class 5 day learning lab
• Experiential higher order learning
• Bring real-life activities from job
• Focus on self-knowledge and to understand their
  roles as leaders and members of IBM
• Harvard Business cases, leadership competency
  surveys, managerial style questionnaires, brain
  dominance inventories
• Coached by a learner-colleague (teaming impt!)
• Less than 1 hour of the 5 days is lecture

130
IBM Training of 6,600 New First-Line Managers
(Basic Blue)

• Phase III 25 Weeks of Online Learning
• Similar to Phase I but more complex and focuses
  on application
• Creates individual development plan and
  organizational action plan
• Managers reviews and signs off on these plans

131
IBM Training Results (Kirkpatrick Model)

• Level 1
• High satisfaction and enthusiasm for blended
• Coaching and climate rated highest
• Level 2
• 96 displayed mastery in all 15 subject areas 5
  times as much content covered in this program
  compared to 5 days of live training
• 150 Web page requests/learner

132
IBM Training Results (Kirkpatrick Model)

• Level 3
• Significant behavior change (in particular in
  coaching, styles, competencies, and climate)
• Graduate had high self-efficacy and believed that
  they could make a difference
• Level 4
• Linkage bt leadership customer satisfaction
• Leadership led to teamwork and satisfaction
• Managers reported improvement on job
• Improved morale and productivity reported

133
IBM Training Results (Kirkpatrick Model)

• Level 5
• Asked graduates to estimate the impact on their
  departments in dollars
• 415,000 or ROI of 47 to 1.
• Perceived real and lasting leadership increases

134
Blended Learning Advantages for IBM

1. Greater consistency of language, knowledge, and
   corporate culture across the globe
2. Blended approach to training now replicated in
   other units
3. Market its e-learning design
4. Cross functional understanding teamwork
5. No risk trials and simplicity helps

135
Success Story 9. Three Phases of AC3-DL

1. Asynchronous Phase 240 hours of instruction or 1
   year to complete must score 70 or better on
   each gate exam
2. Synchronous Phase 60 hours of asynchronous and
   120 hours of synchronous
3. Residential Phase 120 hours of training in 2
   weeks at Fort Knox

136
AC3-DL Course Tools

• Asynchronous
• Learning Management System
• E-mail
• Synchronous Virtual Tactical Operations Center
  (VTOC) (7 rooms 15 people/extension)
• Avatar
• Audio conference by extension/room (voice over
  IP)
• Text Chat Windowsglobal and private
• Special tools for collaboration

137
(No Transcript)
138
(No Transcript)
139
Success 10 Microsoft Excel Training(Jeff
Barbian, Blended Works, Summer 2002, Online
Learning)

• Group One 5 scenario-based exercises that
  offered live use of Excel on real-world tasks,
  online mentors, FAQs, relevant Web sites, NETg
  Excel Fundamentals Learning Objects.
• Group Two Same as Group One but without
  scenarios, but info in 5 scenarios were embedded
  in the learning objects.
• Group Three No training control.

140
Success 10 Microsoft Excel Training(Thompson
Learning Company Study Jeff Barbian, Blended
Works, Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• Group One (the blended group) 30 percent
  increase in accuracy over Group Two (the
  e-learning group) and were 41 percent faster
• Group Two performed 159 more accurately than
  Group Three
• Groups 1 and 2 relied on the online mentors for
  support
• (Note with these results, Lockhead Martin became
  a blended learning convert.

141
Success 11 NCR Blended Approaches(Thompson
Learning Company Study Jeff Barbian, Blended
Works, Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• Design of E-Learning (Various methods Web
  articles Synchronous points for team exercises)
• Field Guide Binders (Web site guidance, live
  feedback on case studies, live kick off that
  promotes collaboration, hands-on role play)
• Over 71 percent of learners were responding to
  customers more effectively (Kirkpatrick Level 3)

142
Success 12 Convergys Blended(Jeff Barbian,
Blended Works, Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• Leadership Dev, Succession Planning, performance
  management, etc.
• LMS from Knowledge Planet, 3 e-learning
  libraries, virtual classroom tools to 50
  locations in North America Europe
• New managers received Readings, job aids,
  meeting checklists, 5 off-the-shelf courses from
  SkillSoft, virtual classes via LearnLinc (new
  recruits talk to experienced managers), and a 4
  day instructor-led seminar at HQ.

143
Success 13 Sallie Mae/USA Group (Blended
student loan provider program)(Jeff Barbian,
Blended Works, Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• LEAD (Leadership and Education Development)
  Groom internal staff to fill supervisory-level
  positions
• 4 hours/week in class with internal and external
  instructors learn trust, role of managers, etc.
• First must complete 3 online management courses
  from SkillSoft and 6 online project management
  courses (includes panel presentation by IT
  Project Team to illustrate how projects are
  handled in the companys culture)
• Findings increased temawork, camaraderie, shared
  understanding of concepts, respect for individual
  differences, social interaction, and
  reinforcement for class concepts.

144
Success 14 Proctor and Gamble(Jeff Barbian,
Blended Works, Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• 1999 100,000 employees 20,000 trained/year
• LMS from Saba, live training from Centra
• CD-based training using Authorware,
  CourseBuilder, Dreamweaver
• 2002 1,200 learning items 34 Web, 54 CD
• Global English saved 2.5 million per year
• Off-the-shelf courses in time management and
  managing for success

145
Proctor and Gamble(Jeff Barbian, Blended Works,
Summer 2002, Online Learning)

• Given our learning objectives and needs, should
  we select Web-based live training, versus
  classroom, versus video-based, versus CBT, or
  some blended solution?It depends, on the
  resources you have, how far geographically you
  have to reach, or whether you can get your arm
  around them and pull them into a classroom. Art
  DiMartile, Senior IT Manager, Proctor and Gamble

146
The Worldwide Expansion of E-Learning!!!

• Success 15 Circuit City is training 50,000
  employees from 600 stores using customized
  courses that are short, fun, flexible,
  interactive and instantly applicable on the job.
• Success 16 The Armys virtual university
  offered online college courses to more than
  12,000 students located anywhere in the world in
  2001 in the first year of a 42 million
  e-learning program.
• Dr. Sylvia Charp, Editor-in-Chief, T.H.E.
  Journal, March 2002.

147
Success 17 Community Health Network of Indiana
www.ehealthindiana.com (July 15, 2002, American
Hospital Association)

• Named one of most wired hospitals and most
  improved hospital system nationwide in the use of
  technology in health care
• Virtual nurse recruitment Web site (live chats
  with recruiters)
• Video streams of nursing leaders
• Virtual tours of individual nursing units
• Online application and interactive job-posting
  databases
• Web portal for physicians
• First in nation to offer live Web cast of in
  vitro fertilization procedure
• Real time clinical data repository

148
(No Transcript)
149
Success 18 Cisco and DigitalThink Course
(employees)

• Sales training self-assessment
• Ask via survey to estimate how much time training
  saved them on the job
• Ask whether it improved performance
• Select a percentage for each
• ROI of 900 for every 1 spent on training,
  Cisco sees a gain of 900 in productivity

150
Success 18 Cisco and DigitalThink Course (Cisco
vendors)

• Most saw significant growth in productivity
• 74 reported improvement in ability to sell or
  service clients
• Customer satisfaction jumped 50

151
And What about Higher Ed???
152
Success 19 Higher Education Student survey
results after a hybrid course

• Student feedback N282
• 69 felt they could control the pace of their own
  learning
• 77 felt they could organize their time better
• 16 felt the time spent online would have been
  better spent in class
• 61 felt there should be more courses like this
• www.uwsa.edu.ttt/articles/garnham.htm

153
At the End of the Day...

• Are all training results quantifiable?
• NO! Putting a price tag on some costs and
  benefits can be very difficult
• NO! Some data may not have much meaning at face
  value
• What if more courses are offered and annual
  student training hours drop simultaneously? Is
  this bad?

154
Evaluation Cases (homework)

1. General Electric Case
2. Financial Services Company
3. Circuit Board Manufacturing Plant Safety
4. Computer Company Sales Force
5. National HMO Call Center

155
Part V

• Collecting Evaluation Data Online Evaluation
  Tools

156
Collecting Evaluation Data

• Learner Reaction
• Learner Achievement
• Learner Job Performance
• Manager Reaction
• Productivity Benchmarks

157
Forms of Evaluation

• Interviews and Focus Groups
• Self-Analysis
• Supervisor Ratings
• Surveys and Questionnaires
• ROI
• Document Analysis
• Data Mining (Changes in pre and post-training
  e.g., sales, productivity)

158
How Collect Data?

• Direct Observation in Work Setting
• By supervisor, co-workers, subordinates, clients
• Collect Data By Surveys, Interviews, Focus Groups
• Supervisors, Co-workers, Subordinates, Clients
• Self-Report by learners or teams
• Email and Chat

159
Learner Data

• Online surveys are the most effective way to
  collect online learner reactions
• Learner performance data can be collected via
  online tests
• Pre and post-tests can be used to measure
  learning gains
• Learner post-course performance data can be used
  for Level 3 evaluation
• May look at on-the-job performance
• May require data collection from managers

160
Multiple Assessment Example Naval Training
Follow-Up Evaluation

• A naval training unit uses an online
  survey/database system to track performance of
  recently trained physiologists
• Learners self-report performance
• Managers report on learner performance
• Unit heads report on overall productivity

161
Learning System Data

• Many statistics are available, but which are
  useful?
• Number of course accesses
• Log-in times/days
• Time spent accessing course components
• Frequency of access for particular components
• Quizzes completed and quiz scores
• Learner contributions to discussion (if
  applicable)

162
Computer Log DataChen, G. D., Liu, C. C., Liu,
B. J. (2000). Discovering decision knowledge from
Web log portfolio for managing classroom
processes by applying decision tree and data cute
tech. Journal of Educ Computing Research, 23(3),
305-332.

• In a corp training situation, computer log data
  can correlate online course completions with
• actual job performance improvements such as
• fewer violations of safety regulations,
• reduced product defects,
• increased sales, and
• timely call responses.

163
Learner System Data

• IF learners are being evaluated based on number
  and length of accesses, it is only fair that they
  be told
• Much time can be wasted analyzing statistics that
  dont tell much about the actual impact of the
  training
• Bottom line Easy data to collect, but not always
  useful for evaluation purposes
• Still useful for management purposes

164
Benchmark Data

• Companies need to develop benchmarks for
  measuring performance improvement
• Managers typically know the job areas that need
  performance improvement
• Both pre-training and post-training data need to
  be collected and compared

165
Online Survey Tools for Assessment
166
Web-Based Survey Advantages

• Faster collection of data
• Standardized collection format
• Computer controlled branching and skip sections
• Easy to answer clicking
• Wider distribution of respondents

167
Sample Survey Tools

• Zoomerang (http//www.zoomerang.com)
• IOTA Solutions (http//www.iotasolutions.com)
• QuestionMark (http//www.questionmark.com/home.htm
  l)
• SurveyShare (http//SurveyShare.com from
  Courseshare.com)
• Survey Solutions from Perseus (http//www.perseusd
  evelopment.com/fromsurv.htm)
• Infopoll (http//www.infopoll.com)

168
(No Transcript)
169
(No Transcript)
170
(No Transcript)
171
Online Testing Tools(see http//www.indiana.edu/
best/)
172
(No Transcript)
173
Test Selection Criteria (Hezel, 1999 Perry
Colon, 2001)

• Easy to Configure Items and Test
• Handle Symbols, Timed Tests
• Scheduling of Feedback (immediate?)
• Flexible Scoring and Reporting
• (first, last, average, by individual or group)
• Easy to Pick Items for Randomizing
• Randomize Answers Within a Question
• Weighting of Answer Options
• Web Resource http//www.indiana.edu/best/

174
Tips on Authentification

• Check e-mail access against list
• Use password access
• Provide keycode, PIN, or ID
• (Futuristic Other Palm Print, fingerprint, voice
  recognition, iris scanning, facial scanning,
  handwriting recognition, picture ID)

175
Ziegler, April 2002, e-Learning

• the key is not to measure every possible angle,
  but rather to focus on metrics that are pragmatic
  and relevant to both human and business
  performance at the same time.

176
E-Learning Evaluation Measures

• So which of the 16 methods would you use???
• Something ridiculous???

177
Some Final Advice
Or Maybe Some Questions???