CHAPTER 16

Delivering as if Learning Depended Upon It!

Hadiya Nuriddin

Delivery or implementation considerations may happen near the end of instructional design process models; however, the way learners will engage with a performance solution influences the entire design process. Design intends to support performance through authentic experiences, but how that support functions differs depending on how we plan to deliver it. Different delivery categories are often called modalities.

How learners experience a solution is often referred to as a mode, which we define as how something occurs or is experienced, expressed, or done. It’s often debated which learning modality is the best, fastest, or cheapest way to implement solutions. And truthfully, it’s nearly impossible to compare them with one another, especially without a specific context. There is also the matter of selecting criteria for each measurement. For example, choosing a solution based solely on price now may result in higher costs down the line if shortcuts were taken.

The confusion comes from comparing the modalities with one another rather than assessing the qualities of each and determining whether it’s a good fit for delivering the identified performance solution to the target audience. Consequently, choosing the most appropriate delivery strategy requires a clear understanding of how each type supports performance. The goal is not to choose the best modality; rather it’s to choose the right modality for the right job.

Choosing the Right Modality for the Right Job

As much as we’d prefer to base our primary decision on how an implementation supports learning, the realities of the flow of business can, and should, influence our choices. Suppose we believe that the best way to teach managers how to give feedback to their team is to have them practice this skill in a face-to-face course. But if these managers are consultants who travel most of the time and can rarely attend a live course, a face-to-face delivery is not the best choice.

Decisions about which modality to use are often made based on four primary drivers:

•  The modalities to which your learners have access

•  The performance you are supporting

•  The characteristics and work environments of your learners

•  The modality that best supports the target performance

The Modalities to Which Your Learners Have Access

As Abraham Maslow wrote, based on a proverb, “I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.” Our primary goal should be to support shifts in performance; however, our options for delivering this goal are determined by the development and delivery means available within our organization.

Making modality choices based on access alone perhaps inevitably results in forcing a square peg into a round hole. We maneuver the class design to accommodate the delivery platform instead of selecting a modality that fits our preferred class design. Another possible consequence is creating logistical challenges that overshadow the design and delivery, like blending different modes, which could lead to confusion.

The Performance You Are Supporting

What you expect learners to be able do after engaging with the learning solution is a key driver in your delivery strategy. Creating an authentic experience, where the learner feels free to explore for better or worse in a safe, low-stakes environment, is essential.

Not all performances can be authentically reproduced in every modality. For example, while you can create customer interactions in asynchronous e-learning programs, the unpredictability of responses and gestures may be more realistically reproduced in a live role-play exercise with a classmate. If the risk of injury is high, e-learning may be the best alternative for encouraging learners to replicate the desired performance.

The Characteristics and Work Environments of Your Learners

Who your learners are influences the design and implementation strategy of any performance solutions you deliver. It’s ideal to avoid encouraging learners to engage in activities that require a shift in performance while simultaneously asking them to learn a new method to access those activities. This contributes to extraneous cognitive load and may discourage your learners from using the solution and perhaps from engaging in the desired performance on the job.

Where, how, and when learners use a performance solution—such as an online course or a job aid—also influences its design. And this depends on the work lives of each participant. Here are some questions to consider:

•  What technology can employees access on the job?

•  What is their typical work schedule? When would they have time to engage with a performance solution?

•  Where and how are employees completing most work tasks? (For example, are they on a sales floor with customers all day?)

•  What policies specify what employees can use while working? (For example, employees may not have access to electronic devices on the job because of their work’s physical location, the nature of their work, or corporate policy.)

The Modality That Best Supports the Target Performance

This final consideration is the focus of the rest of the chapter. Choosing a modality based on how it supports a performance is your primary goal. Using this lens to focus your modality decision requires taking all that we know about all the available modalities and understanding how they support learning and the desired performance.

Frankly, stakeholders often choose the delivery modality before they even request support from learning and development teams. Perhaps they may see it as a business decision because a primary driver is reducing or eliminating the expenses of financing same-time, same-place instructor-led training. In addition, a distributed workforce or high turnover may make traditional modes of training impractical. While these are just the realities of the businesses we support, learning and development teams should focus instead on which modality best supports learning and the desired performance.

We must make these decisions with the business in mind, but the learners’ needs should be our priority—after all, the employees are the business. If employees fail to deliver the desired performance, the goals of the business strategy the solution is supporting will not be realized.

Terminology, Definitions, and Categories

It’s challenging to define the modalities that are most prevalent in this space. In addition, different learning and development professionals often use different terms to describe the same modality. Have you had a discussion with a colleague about defining e-learning that turned out to be more frustrating than you anticipated? Some define it as a strictly asynchronous experience delivered using any digital device. That definition purposely excludes virtual learning (another debated term), but if virtual learning depends on a digital device and people are learning, doesn’t that qualify as e-learning? The word training is also seen by some as an outdated and inaccurate way to describe an entire industry of performance solutions. However, because this chapter cannot resolve these universal debates, we’ll use the most common definitions (and the word training) to explore each modality.

It’s just as challenging to categorize these modalities as it is to define them. Because our definitions for modalities often overlap, so do the categories to which they belong. We are exploring the modalities by category, so we’ll use the following delimiters and accept that overlaps may occur:

•  Instructor-led training (ILT) is a synchronous (or same-time) learning experience facilitated by an instructor in the same location as the participants.

•  Instructor-led online training is a synchronous or asynchronous learning experience led by an instructor. The participants and instructor may not all be in the same location.

•  Asynchronous online training occurs when the trainer and the learner do not participate simultaneously. Training is done at different times and at different locations.

•  Performance support modalities or materials are printed or digitized content designed to provide information when and where it is needed to support on-the-job performance.

•  Personalized support modalities are one-on-one or small group targeted engagements. These standardized materials are also personalized to meet employee needs.

Let’s explore these modalities further.

Instructor-Led Training

Instructor-led training modalities are synchronous learning experiences facilitated by an instructor who is in the same location as the participants. The typical implementation of ILT is a classroom-based experience in which the instructor is guided by course design and supports the participants in using course materials, like workbooks or handouts. In addition, the instructor often uses a facilitator guide and visual aids to explain the content and walk participants through activities that support the course’s performance objectives.

Depending on the content and context, effective ILT can be designed and implemented quickly. The format is familiar to most learners and facilitators, so preparing people for the experience may take less time. However, implementation can also be a costly, logistical, and resource-heavy challenge. The quality of an ILT program may be compromised by inconsistent content delivery and learning experiences, especially when delivered by different instructors.

Here are three ways ILT modalities support learning:

•  The instructor can adjust the learning experience based on immediate feedback from participants. Facilitators know that every group they teach has a unique collection of knowledge, experience, and skills. While a course is typically designed before it’s delivered, instructors may alter its content, focus, or speed based on learner needs. Adjustments are more easily applied when facilitators can see learner body language or, as in software training, visually see how learners are progressing.

•  The instructor can provide hands-on experience for participants. While learners can engage in hands-on activities in an instructor-led online training course, they may feel more supported if the instructor is physically in the room with them. Participants often judge the quality of a learning experience based on how quickly they receive personalized feedback because it provides insight into their performance and guidance for future behavior (Ambrose et al. 2010). ILT may provide learners access to that feedback during practice, which is when it is most beneficial.

•  Facilitators can provide opportunities for participants to quickly gain further insight into existing content or share and collect new ideas from other participants. Learners benefit from exposure to various perspectives and feelings of connection if their classmates are also going through the same experience. While you can incorporate learner-learner interaction into other modalities, it is challenging to duplicate the experiences and interactions among participants in an ILT program. For example, participants in an on-the-job training program will learn from one another, but because they hold similar positions within the same department, they may miss out on the variety of perspectives they’d get from a mixed-audience ILT course. Also, the stakes are much higher during on-the-job training—training that their manager could be leading.

Here are some ways to implement ILT:

•  Lectures are typically implemented as content-centric educational talks. This is a viable way to deliver content; however, it often leads to learning experiences stuffed with a lot of information and very little interaction. As a result, lectures are rarely authentic learning experiences for learners.

•  Workshops are hands-on experiences designed to engage participants in targeted practice. Unlike lectures, workshops tend to be more learner centric. The primary goal of a learner-centric experience is to use the content to support what the learners need. The design encourages learners to draw on their own experiences and engage with the content while focusing on their individual needs. Experienced facilitators know that while learner-centric courses may vary from delivery to delivery, and are consequently more challenging to deliver, learners walk away with a more meaningful experience and new skills that they can use immediately. It’s rewarding for everyone because learners will be more engaged and facilitators will put the focus on their participants, which is where it belongs.

•  Labs, like workshops, tend to be hands-on, but they typically use a more self-directed approach. They feature less lecture and more practice and experimentation. While the assignments may be preselected, participants usually can use the time to go at their own pace and ask questions based on their immediate needs.

Instructor-Led Online Training

Instructor-led, online training is a synchronous or asynchronous learning experience led by an instructor who may or may not be in the same location as the learners. There are two primary differences when facilitating classes virtually: With some exceptions, no one sees one another in real time and everyone must communicate and engage with the content using technology.

The synchronous version of this modality is often called virtual training or virtual instructor-led training (vILT). Cindy Huggett defines virtual training as “a highly interactive, synchronous online, instructor-led training class, with defined learning objectives, that has geographically dispersed participants, each one individually connected using a web classroom platform” (Huggett 2017). In addition, vILT is typically conducted using software that allows everyone to simultaneously access the content and communicate in real time through voice and text. As of this writing, online tools such as Zoom, Adobe Connect, and WebEx are among the most popular.

In the asynchronous version of instructor-led online training, course administrators (or facilitators) post content in a central location, like a web portal, which participants access and read within a given window of time. Participants are also assigned work to complete, which a facilitator then reviews and grades. The facilitator is available throughout the length of the course to provide context to the content and answer questions. Some facilitators deliver content using prerecorded video or include occasional synchronous sessions in which they share new content, elaborate on existing content, or simply answer questions.

Instructor-led online training is often seen as an easy replacement when the “real thing” (that is, live classroom training) isn’t possible or practical. But there are qualities about instructor-led online learning that make it a viable solution on its own.

Here are five ways instructor-led online training modalities support learning:

•  Participants engage in learning where the work happens. Learning in a familiar space with easy access to all documents and tools you regularly use is valuable. In addition, learning where you are planted may help with learning transfer. The drawback is that this also comes with all the regular distractions.

•  Learning where you do the work integrates performance improvement into the flow of work. This goes beyond the location of the training activities. Putting training in the flow of work supports the idea that learning isn’t a separate activity that you access only in a training room on the fourth floor—it’s part of your job.

•  Participants have options regarding social engagement during the learning experience. Learning in a room with others is not desirable for everyone. Some people prefer to communicate through the online classroom tools instead of face-to-face. Also, when working in groups, there are fewer distractions in a breakout room than in a room full of multiple groups all talking at once.

•  Participants can benefit from spaced learning opportunities. Asynchronous online learning experiences allow participants to engage in content and activities on their own time, over time. As Neelen and Kirschner (2020) write, “The effectiveness of spaced learning comes down to this: tackling learning in various short sessions works better than learning that same thing in one long session.”

•  Spaced learning benefits everyone. In addition to spacing, this strategy may also accommodate the individual needs of large, dispersed groups of people who prefer to experience and absorb content at different speeds. Most synchronous classroom tools allow for recording the experience so participants can review essential parts or the entire course once it’s gone live.

Instructor-led online training can be implemented in a variety of ways:

•  Full curriculums can be implemented via synchronous instructor-led online training. Most virtual training programs are no more than 60 to 90 minutes in length (Huggett 2017). Consequently, the design and the scheduling have to accommodate ways to include necessary content within that target timeframe.

•  vILT is often blended with other asynchronous approaches. Learners may spend most of the time engaging at their pace and occasionally gather for an online session to learn new content or expound on existing content. Synchronous online ILT could also be part of a blend focused on question-and-answer instead of learning new content. It provides a way for participants to get immediate answers to their questions and feedback on their ideas and progress.

•  To make synchronous learning experiences as concise as possible, designers offload content onto webpages, portals, or documents that participants can view on their own time. As part of course facilitation, instructors tell participants about the additional content and where to access it. With this approach it’s important that participants know whether engaging with the content is optional or if it’s a fully integrated (or required) part of the learning experience.

•  While a typical implementation of asynchronous online ILT includes webpages on a portal tracked through a learning management system, asynchronous content can be delivered via any mechanism that participants can access. For example, content can be delivered by email, the intranet, or even social media.

•  Both synchronous and asynchronous online training require technical support. Make sure you have a support model in place that includes instructions, documentation, and diagrams detailing how, when, and where instructors and learners can get support.

•  Full courses using the asynchronous online ILT modality are more common in academic environments. If used in corporate environments, this modality may work better if the courses are multiday experiences where learners are kept engaged enough to work independently. However, most corporate courses range from one hour to two days.

•  The common belief that asynchronous online ILT is somehow “easier” is a myth. The workload actually has the potential to be significantly higher for both facilitators and participants. The impression of increased work is due in part to the inclusion of ongoing learner-engagement activities. For example, facilitators and participants are required to engage on discussion boards in addition to their assigned homework.

Asynchronous Online Training

The asynchronous online training category consists of interactive learning experiences delivered digitally. Although there are many different implementations of this type of training, our focus in this chapter is on e-learning and mobile learning.

The definition of e-learning is frequently debated. Ruth Clark (2011) defines it as “instruction delivered on a digital device such as a computer or mobile device that is intended to support learning.” I am adding to that definition that it is an asynchronous, interactive experience designed to support performance.

Defining mobile learning is a little more clear-cut—it’s agreed that mobile learning is accessed via a mobile device. Chad Udell (2015) defines mobile learning as “the ability to move from place to place while using mobile devices to receive from and contribute to a variety of digital information sources.” However, mobile learning should be specifically designed and optimized for access via a screen of mobile or tablet dimensions. For example, many interactions are impractical on a mobile device, and images intended to be viewed on a 15-inch laptop screen may not be legible on a six-inch smartphone. Avoid forcing learners to interact with e-learning on a mobile phone.

In addition to the convenience of anytime, anywhere access to content, asynchronous online training allows designers to create immersive experiences that may not be possible in the classroom. The tools developers use to create asynchronous online training allow them to get closer to creating authentic learning experiences, which ultimately support learning.

Here are a few more things to think about:

•  Learners get access to consistent messaging throughout the organization. One of the challenges of live instructor-led training is that the organization is dependent on instructors delivering a consistent message to everyone. Unfortunately, instructors often fall short of that goal for a variety of reasons. Asynchronous online training, on the other hand, can deliver the same message to everyone. While this is more of a benefit to the organization, it helps increase learning transfer when employees can rely on others who have received the same message for support.

•  Learners can access the content at their own pace. The most apparent way asynchronous online training supports learning is through spaced learning. But learners can also reaccess and reread content when needed.

•  Learners can engage with highly interactive modules that encourage skills practice in a safe environment. Designers and developers can create interactive exercises that mimic, at least metaphorically, the performance expected of them back on the job. Authenticity is key.

As for implementation, e-learning is not instructor-led training on a computer, and mobile learning is not e-learning on a mobile device. Of course there are similarities among the decisions that need to be made, but the design, development, and implementation processes are not the same.

A typical implementation of e-learning is to use software to design and develop the modules. The course is then loaded onto an online system accessible to everyone who needs to access it (like a web portal); if participant engagement needs to be tracked the course would likely be placed on the organization’s learning management system. These modules are ideally highly interactive to support the participant as they learn about and practice new skills. Courses range from short, targeted modules to long, multilevel experiences that take days to complete.

Two other implementations of e-learning are gamification and microlearning:

•  Gamification is a popular e-learning design strategy that incorporates game elements into a learning experience. This could include creating levels of mastery or the awarding of points. Clark Quinn (2021) writes that “serious games are, perhaps, the ultimate learning experience. Putting people into the role of making contextualized decisions is an ideal practice for learning. We can approximate that fairly closely without having to build, or develop to, a full game engine.”

•  Microlearning is a strategy that provides the right amount of content and practice a learner needs to achieve a learning objective. Micro doesn’t necessarily speak to the length of the course; rather, it speaks to how much the learner will be able to do after interacting with the module. For example, a 30-minute course with five learning objectives is not microlearning, but a 30-minute course with one objective could qualify as microlearning. Regardless of the length, a microlearning module must cover one complete task. It is not the same as “chunking,” where you break one task into smaller chunks and then require the learner to engage with every chunk to learn how to complete that task. A microlearning course should be able to stand alone as a single task. For example, if you’re creating a course on delivering feedback, you could build a microlearning module on how to deliver negative feedback. An experienced manager wouldn’t have to go through an entire course on feedback just get to the part they need. Instead, they could take a 10-minute course on strategies for framing a poor performance.

•  Mobile learning, or m-learning, is unique. When creating m-learning content, instructional designers should design an experience that’s optimized for the mobile screen and refrain from simply building an e-learning module for a small screen. This goes beyond look and feel—it’s the full learner experience, including how they will complete activities, engage with multimedia elements, and communicate with facilitators or other learners. An essential consideration is how, when, and where learners will access and interact with the course. Understanding that will influence the design, the implementation, and any communication strategies you have in play.

Many organizations have adopted a design strategy that allows them to “have it both ways” so that they do not need to create a course for e-learning delivery and another version for mobile delivery. That approach is often referred to as “mobile first.” This means that most e-learning content can be accessed by mobile devices when the modules are built using a tool that interfaces with both small and large screens.

Performance Support

Performance support is any resource that supports a desired performance at the learner’s moment of need. That moment of need is when the learner needs to demonstrate that performance. Bob Mosher writes that one goal of performance support is to move the solutions we provide “as far into the natural workflow of the organization as possible, so that we avoid, when we can, pulling people from their work for large periods of time to learn” (Gottfredson and Mosher 2011).

Performance support could take the form of literally anything that supports performance, particularly if it’s easily accessible within the flow of work. In fact, some performance support even belongs more in the operations space than the learning and development department. Examples of performance support include:

•  Printed or digitized documentation, such as job aids, reference guides, websites, and videos

•  Process refinement or revamping processes and systems to accommodate the needed performance

•  Social support for developing processes where teams or groups have dependencies in their responsibilities for groups and teams

Asynchronous varieties of training can also fall within this category, including e-learning and mobile learning, because while those modalities are formally referred to as training, they are often shorter and more targeted in a way that longer courses are not.

Performance support should be a vital consideration in any design strategy. Not including performance support would be akin to assuming that the learner would not need any additional support back on the job aside from what’s provided in the learning experience. This is rarely the case. Yes, learners will have other means of support, but those mechanisms may not tie back to the objectives of the learning experience. Here are some benefits of performance support to keep in mind:

•  Learners may experience greater learning transfer. Job aids and other documentation are typically guides, instructions, and memory aids readily available to help people accomplish tasks.

•  Learners will have access to information regarding rarely used skills. When deciding which tasks may require additional performance support, it’s often a choice between a task they often do or one that rarely happens and is consequently difficult to remember. There’s no definitive answer to this question, but performance support certainly serves as a memory aid for difficult to remember tasks, whether the difficulty is due to time or complexity.

•  Learners can access updated information without having to be retrained. You can update the performance support material and alert learners to the changes rather than having to retrain everyone.

Because performance support is defined so broadly, it’s difficult to know where to begin. Resist the urge to create performance support based on the course’s content and what you think could be helpful. The path to performance support requires designers to put themselves in the learners’ shoes when they are back on the job and better understand how they engage with their work. For example, while the instructor may walk through a diagram of handoffs in the classroom, that doesn’t mean that the same diagram will help them figure out whom to give reports to back on the job. Perhaps, instead, an FAQ document would work better.

Here are some strategies for implementing performance support:

•  Gain a clear understanding of how and where people work back on the job and consider how you can incorporate the support into the flow of work. For example, if your learners work on a retail floor, they may not be able to pull out their mobile phones to find a job aid on how to upsell. However, reading from a sheet of paper in front of the customer may not work well either. Perhaps adhering small cards to the counter in a place that’s out of the customer’s line of sight is the answer.

•  Ideally, performance support will not be buried in your learning management system under countless passwords. Post messages, tools, and documentation on the intranet or some other open place where they are easily accessible.

•  Be creative about getting performance support to your learners. Websites are ignored. Documents are lost. Emails are deleted. You’ll need to think of new and innovative ways to ensure that learners get what they need. Asking them and conducting a few tests using your best ideas will help. Unless you have experience doing the same job as your learners (in the same environment and using the same technology), do not assume you have a clear picture on which to base your decisions.

Personalized Support

Structured personalized support is the most broadly defined modality. The term personalized learning is more typically used in K–12 environments. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, Volume III: Building a Common Knowledge Base defines personalized support as “instruction that focuses on tailoring methods to target the particular learning needs of each student.” We are broadening that definition by changing the “learning” to “support” and moving beyond gaining knowledge to including solutions that support actual performance based on the needs of learners when they need it.

Personalized support could include an experience that is:

•  Tailored specifically to one individual learner’s skill or knowledge level

•  Designed to support individual learners and, while not necessarily catered to their personal needs, tailored to support self-directed learning

The options for personalized learning range from independent study, to one-on-one on-the-job training, to fully structured multiyear mentorship programs. Each type has benefits and challenges, but they are all designed with the intent of meeting the needs of individual learners. Here’s a closer look at each:

•  One-on-one training. The typical model for one-on-one training is a knowledgeable manager or peer teaching a person, such as a new employee, through job-related tasks specific to that person’s role. While the tasks may be standardized, the training is personalized because the approach may differ depending on the learner’s needs. The speed could be varied and tasks may be removed, added, or taught at different levels depending on the learner’s experience. It’s often information that will be used soon after (or while) the training takes place. This is often considered on-the-job training because it takes place in the work environment. It could also occur in a simulated environment or some other designated place, like a conference room. The trainer may be present during the entire training, or the learner may engage in self-study for part of the experience.

•  Self-study. Learners are given content to explore on their own. The content could come as documentation, e-learning programs, videos, or some other asynchronous modality. Learners could also experience training using virtual reality technology where they can engage in on-the-job activities in an immersive, simulated environment. While the same content may be given to every learner, self-study is personalized because learners can go at their own pace and may have options regarding when, how, and where they engage in the learning experience. They do not need to wait for other learners to catch up or request that they slow down. Learners can also revisit content as needed.

•  Coaching and mentorship programs. Personalized support programs can address immediate needs through solutions like on-the-job training and job aids, but they can also be used to support long-term goals and overall professional development. Coaching is a personalized support option for people who want to develop in specific areas. It’s defined as a process in which a person provides a learner with constructive advice and feedback to help improve performance. Coaches could be professionals who’ve studied the craft and have coaching certifications or managers and peers with subject matter expertise and knowledge of coaching methods. Another option is mentoring, which is the practice of a more experienced individual sharing expertise with a mentee over a set period. Mentorships can be formal programs where mentoring relationships are assigned and the time is structured. They can also be informal, shaped and driven by the person’s need or desire to get advice or perspectives on different aspects of their current or future career. Coaching and mentorships tend to be the most personalized types of support because the one-on-one nature depends on learners being transparent about their needs and leaders responding in kind.

Organizations, teams, or individuals choose the personalized support modality for a variety of reasons. Group modalities such as ILT may be logistically impossible due to the learners’ locations or the number of people who may need to simultaneously develop the same skills. E-learning may not be an option due to a lack of the expertise required to build the courses or the technology needed to support them. Personalized support is also often more economical than ILT or e-learning, although that may be seen only in short-term savings. In other words, having an asynchronous, consistently delivered, online solution that managers can point new hires to may cost less in the long run than taking a manager’s time to walk through the onboarding basics for every new employee.

Here are some strategies for implementing personalized support:

•  Develop a formal coaching or mentoring program. While it’s true that many mentoring and coaching relations form organically, developing a formal program will help you facilitate connections, track the investment of time and expense, and continue to improve the program over time.

•  Blend with other modalities. Personalized support is often blended with other modalities. For example, before and after training, give learners access to online resources, provide access to coaching, or assign a case study based on their current work role. The key is to avoid merely suggesting they complete these tasks, but to embed them as required elements. Refer to these elements as modules or units instead of pre-work or follow-up work so it’s clear that they are part of the course.

•  Use technology to implement personalized support. Technology is also influencing how personalized support is implemented. For example, in addition to the virtual reality technology mentioned earlier, augmented reality (AR) also exists. In her TD at Work, “Seeing the Possibilities With Augmented Reality,” Debbie Richards (2019) describes AR as the use of “codes to overlay virtual elements—such as instructions or video that show users steps, processes, or directions—on real-world objects.” She says that AR technology is accessible through devices already available to learners, like smartphones and tablets using the device’s camera. The word augmented differentiates it from virtual reality in that AR technology overlays (or augments) the existing environment with information, rather than creating an entirely new environment with which the learner can interact. Other examples include chatbots, virtual personal assistant technology (like Alexa or Siri), and online collaboration tools like Slack and Teams. Learners can use these tools to get answers to their specific questions immediately.

Final Thoughts

This chapter provided a broad overview of some of the delivery options you can use to support learners. You’re now better prepared to address the last of the four factors that contribute to choosing a delivery modality: The modality that will best support the target performance.

About the Author

Hadiya Nuriddin has more than two decades of experience in learning strategy, instructional design, e-learning development, and facilitation. She worked in corporate learning before founding her firm, Duets Learning. She frequently speaks at industry events and teaches courses for ATD. Hadiya holds an MEd in curriculum studies, an MA in writing, and the CPTD designation. She is the author of StoryTraining: Selecting and Shaping Stories That Connect.

References

Ambrose, S.A., M.W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, M.C. Lovett, and M.K. Norman. 2010. How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Biech, E. 2008. ASTD Handbook for Workplace Learning Professionals. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Clark, R.C., and R. Mayer. 2011. E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Gottfredson, C., and B. Mosher. 2011. Innovative Performance Support: Strategies and Practices for Learning in the Workflow. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Huggett, C. 2017. Virtual Training Tools and Templates: An Action Guide to Live Online Learning. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

Knowles, M.S., E.F. Holton, and R.A. Swanson. 2015. The Adult Learner. New York: Taylor and Francis.

Metcalfe, J., N. Kornell, and B. Finn. 2009. “Delayed Versus Immediate Feedback in Children’s and Adults’ Vocabulary Learning.” Memory & Cognition 37(8): 1077–1087.

Neelen, M., and P.A. Kirschner. 2020. Evidence-Informed Learning Design. New York: Kogan Page.

Quinn, C. 2021. Learning Science for Instructional Designers: From Cognition to Application. Alexandria, VA: Association for Talent Development.

Reigeluth, C.M., and A.A. Carr-Chellman, eds. 2009. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, Volume III: Building a Common Knowledge Base. New York: Taylor and Francis.

Richards, D. 2019. “Seeing the Possibilities With Augmented Reality.” TD at Work. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

Udell, C. 2015. Mastering Mobile Learning. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Recommended Resources

Anderson, H.H., I. Nelson, and K. Ronex. 2021. Virtual Facilitation: Create More Engagement and Impact. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Biech, E. 2016. The Art and Science of Training. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

Bloomberg, L.D. 2021. Designing and Delivering Effective Online Instruction: How to Engage Adult Learners. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Huggett, C. 2018. Virtual Training Basics, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

LaBorie, K. 2020. Producing Virtual Training, Meetings, and Webinars: Master the Technology to Engage Participants. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

Nuriddin, H. 2018. StoryTraining: Selecting and Shaping Stories That Connect. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.

Willmore, J. 2018. Job Aids Basics, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.