Much of this site is dedicated to elearning techniques, strategies, tools and theory – but from time to time we do write about instructor-led training.
In fact, my entrance to the elearning world came about through an instructor-led training consulting project.
Without getting into the specifics, we had to create training workshops around a new help desk software that the client was adopting, and then deliver the training across 15 locations in the United States.
While the course did have some blended components (before “blended learning” even became a buzzword), I would say that it was 90% delivered in-person.
Preparation is the Same
The interesting thing about live training is that the beginning portion is the same as elearning, and that’s creating a solid storyboard.
Before you create slides for the course(s) that are going to be taught, a thorough framework needs to be created and approved. This is a huge time saver down the road.
The great thing here is that the same solid instructional design principles applied to elearning are applied with instructor led training course design.
So if you have had your head buried in elearning development programs, you will still do just fine during this portion if live training design.
The audience has to be defined, role mapping must take place (that is, determining which courses fit with which “role” in an organization), duration defined, objectives laid out, so on and so forth. Many of the same components of an elearning program.
I have seen people breeze through this portion in course development, and it’s a real shame. Sure, it’s nice show momentum, but without proper planning, more time is wasted when the actual build comes about.
Instructor-led training isn’t elearning though, and there are certainly some differences. In the next installment, we’ll examine some components of live training, and what to avoid.