It is generally recognised that people learn in different ways, some learn 'hands on' or 'on the job' while others learn best in the classroom, reading from books, by researching the internet or using e-learning.
So I ask, why is it that employers insist on moving everything to e-learning? Is it because they perceive it as cheap and therefore cost effective, or, is it because they are too lazy to use training personnel or training establishments? They obviously don't want "the best" form of employee education otherwise they would use all guises of training in its many forms.
Now some would argue that e-learning offers 'standardisation' ensuring that everyone gets exactly the same tutorial and assessment, but e-learning media cannot detect or perceive how a person is performing. It cannot detect when one member of the team has logged on and undertaken the test for any number of other students (who all get a pass mark they haven't earned).
As a confirmed cynic I think there is a much simpler answer, which is, the employer seeks only to put a 'tick in the box' that enables them to gain some meaningless certification such as Investors in People or one of the many provided by the HSE or FCA (or similar). The employer wants that certification achieved as cheaply as possible and for automated reporting that 'proves' how many students took each course and what they scored in the final assessment.
At the end of the day all they achieve is a devaluation of the certification of the subject matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment