Have any of you tried to implement e-learning or Computer-Aided Teaching (Web based or companywide intranet based or standalone CBTs etc) for Quality Topics like SPC, MSA, FMEA, DOE, Calibration, GD&T & so on?

I know there are a whole lot of web based training modules available. What I want to find out is how many of you actively use / have used these techniques in your organizations? Were these initiative successful? If not, why not? What should be the attributes of a good e-learning program / CBT for Quality Technology?

Thanx.
-Atul.

In a limited way I have...

I frequently use Powerpoint with a large screen. The actual teaching is done in a classroom, but where we used to dish out a pile of paper I just tell people that the notes I used can be found on our intranet.

This seems to work pretty well. ( At least a lot better than the old piles of paper that always seem to clog up offices or waste bins).

It's easy to set up a link to a powerpoint file or convert it to HTML.

Proper E-learning...? I've seen a rather lame attempt here so far: A very "flashy" application designed to teach us about the company. Well, it was flashy, but they forgot to put some good content in it... Result? Boooooring...

/Claes

I took the liberty of expanding the options a bit. In part because there was no way for me to view the poll results until I voted and there was no option for me! :thedeal:
If anyone wants to change their vote, let me know - I can change the numbers.

Thanx Marc, I should have thought of it before!

No problem. I've posted enough polls now to have been beaten up numerous times for 'poor design'. Once you post a few you'll see 'failure modes' in your design early. My first polls were impulse polls (Hey - This is a neat feature - Let's try it out!) and I did a very poor job at designing them. But then again, this is all in unscientific fun, right? :thedeal:
I DO like the poll feature of this software. I think it's pretty neat.

I don't believe in informal or formal training. I believe that a person learns what is needed for his or her proffesion, reading, practice, experience, practice.

When I took a lead internal auditor class I was asking questions that could not be answered. Which goes to the hypothesis that you don't ask a question unless you know the answer.

I've seen a few people come out of the education system that had great degree work but diddddddn't know how to fill out an SPC chart and interpret it let alone make a decision on it.

Am I against education? No No No, but a grade school education is worth a four year degree these days!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, still pessimistic!!!

> I don't believe in informal or formal training.

As far as I can tell you're just saying all you believe in is On The Job training and 'life experience', Al. You may not like the word training, but it's the same thing.

> I've seen a few people come out of the education system
> that had great degree work but diddddddn't know how to
> fill out an SPC chart and interpret it let alone make a
> decision on it.

In the same vein, I've seen people who didn't have the benefit of a higher education system who couldn't fill out an SPC chart or knew anything else about SPC. What's your point?

> a grade school education is worth a four year degree these
> days

Surely you jest...

I do believe some sort of a formal and standard training / education has to be provided for every type of job in order to prepare the basics which can later be applied 'on the job'.

It is difficult to judge anything from just 14 votes (as of now), but I was expecting a much better acceptance of Computer-Aided-Learing.

Any reasons why it is not done?

I have to qualify my response that we use all three :OJT, classroom, and e-learning....

We primarily use OJT. We use videotapes for many other training needs. I have held classroom training for QMS topics. And fairly recently I put a "training" section into our network qms that has powerpoint presentations, FAQ's, Tips for how to prepare and respond for audits, etc. When we go to a web-based QMS then we will add learning modules and tests.

I know this is not exactly what you're looking for when you talk about E-learning and the things that are taught, so thought I should clarify....

Lucinda, thanx for the reply.

It appears that e-learning is understood mainly as Web-based learning, whereas what I actually intended was to find out about general use of computers - right from PPT slide shows, interactive multimedia, simulators upto intranet/network based & web-based training modules and Knowledge Management Systems etc etc. - in teaching Quality related topics. I believe the trainees would include operators, engineers and managers.

-Atul.

Atul Khandekar said:

It is difficult to judge anything from just 14 votes (as of now), but I was expecting a much better acceptance of Computer-Aided-Learing.

Any reasons why it is not done?

I have a hunch....

First of all, you can quite easily find good teachers, programmers, webdesigners and people with good knowledge about the subject at hand. However, it may be hard to put a group with these qualities together, even harder to turn them into a team, and next to impossible to find all these qualities in one person.

Secondly, all our schooling was aimed at paper based and/or verbal teaching, and e-learning simply cannot be done in quite the same way. I think this factor is grossly underestimated.

This will probably change in the future, but it's early days yet. The young pups finding their way out of school now will have an idea how to do this, but on the other hand they lack experience and are also too young to be taken seriously by the people in charge.

Oh, I nearly forgot: E-learning proper means that *you* will have to schedule it yourself. You have to clear your agenda for whatever time it takes, even if it's just five minutes. Planning is something many people are notoriously poor at. If you have to drag your bottom to a classroom: Different story, right?

/Claes

As a consultant, from time to time I am asked what type of training is best, or should an organization lean towards e-learning, or conventional, or what. My response is always the same. It depends on what is being taught, by whom and to whom. I have some welding experience and find it hard to believe e-learning can develop a good welder. On the other hand, with some of the new computerized robotic welders e-learning might be the most effective. With some of the DL (distance learning) systems available, it might be logical to use this method for say, internal auditor training. My son (14) would feel far more comfortable in a computer-based scenario than I. I am most comfortable teaching in a conventional mode.

In most cases, I strongly suggest all learning be backed up by Al’s “practice, experience, practice” (supervised of course). Learning didn’t occur if the learner can’t perform.

First Conventinal Classroom training than training thro Mail and finally thro E-mail or thro E-learning all of this again steps to learn more and more without any disturbance to curriculam and daily routine. It is very well accepted in my organisation.

Thanks Atul for giving useful tips on E-learning.

Any new thoughts on this, folks?

If you haven't Voted, please take a minute and Vote!

Any new thoughts on this, folks? Yes, as a matter of fact I have changed my approach a bit since last time:

I frequently use Powerpoint with a large screen. The actual teaching is done in a classroom, but where we used to dish out a pile of paper I just tell people that the notes I used can be found on our intranet.
I still use the large screen, but I ditched the Power Point bit when I found that it wasn't really necessary anymore. The info is already at hand on the intranet.

I increased my use of forms a lot. That way I can give people a task to solve at a time convenient for them and recieve the reply via mail. It's a lot easier than trying to drag people to a classroom, but then again, the old problem with personal planning is still a factor:

Oh, I nearly forgot: E-learning proper means that *you* will have to schedule it yourself. You have to clear your agenda for whatever time it takes, even if it's just five minutes. Planning is something many people are notoriously poor at. If you have to drag your bottom to a classroom: Different story, right?
/Claes

As I've said in some other post, training for us is highly structured and consists of several formats.


Compubter-based - Industry-based cd's provide information on generic information such as the mini-mill set-up, steel recycling, melt shop/rolling mill processes, and QA/QC functions. There isn't much that is job-specific at this level.
On-the-job - Shadowing, performing tasks under direct supervision of a supervisor or qualified (and competent) individual.
One-Point Lessons - PowerPoint presentations that highlight one aspect of a job/task. It details both the Right and Wrong way to accomplish the aspect.
Training modules - PowerPoint presentations that incorporate slide of information, pictures and movies. This level of training gets down to the task-specific information not covered by the cd's first mentioned in this list.
Classroom - Lectures, PowerPoint presentations, face-to-face meetings, documentation review and under direct supervision of the supervisor or person responsible for the area being discussed (e.g., I do the Quality Orientation).


The degree of training is determined by several variables, such as:


Is the person a new or transferred employee?
If transferred, is it within own department or to a similar job?
Reason for transfer (e.g., modified work) - may not require full training if complete job will not be performed


An individual is given a deadline for completion of training and it is up to the direct supervisor (in conjunction with our HR Coordintor) to ensure that the training is completed on time. It is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure all steps are taken in our effort to have a safe, environmentally-friendly, and quality-focused workplace if training is not complete.

Any new thoughts on this, folks?

If you haven't Voted, please take a minute and Vote!
Although I'm somewhat surprised at the relatively low percentage of those using E-learning in the poll, my sense from other information sources is that this number is rising with the increasing availability, variety, and quality of low-cost E-learning options. I think that products like WebEx ( www.webex.com ) and LiveMeeting ( www.livemeeting.com ) will also have a positive effect on variety and quality of e-learning options.

I work for an environmental consulting firm, and I was actively involved in developing computer-based environmental and ISO 14001 training products. When we first started doing this, computers weren't as widely used as they are now, and the idea of e-learning or computer-based training was not as familiar as it seems to be today.

I also have experience as a user of e-learning (provided by other organizations), and have found it to be an excellent training option. I really likethe flexibility, and the quality of e-learning seems to be continually improving. I see it as a potentially very effective part of an overall training program that may also include other forms of training.

We use a mix, because different modes are more appropriate for different things. For this calibration lab, we use these:

Classroom: principles and philosophy of electronic calibration (normally an off-site week-long course by an outside organization); ISO 9000 and QMS introduction.
OJT: learning calibration practices on specific equipment with the guidance of a fully qualified calibration technician.
Computer-based: CD-based additional training in metrology, plus there are a number of corporate-level recurrent thraining requirements that are virtually all CBT's.
Other: each technician must accomplish and document at least an hour per week of self-directed professional study. they are also encouraged (but not required) to consider obtaining ASQ's new calibtation technician certification (CCT).

(Note that anyone coming into the lab must already be a fully qualified electronic technician and have an FCC radio operator license. This means that, among other things, they already know how to use most of the equipment they will be calibrating.)