tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post3810048164066051184..comments2024-02-13T03:00:19.778-07:00Comments on Corporate eLearning Strategies and Development: Training vs Learning - Which do You Create?bschlenkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13519463877110474192noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-39131594157167525192012-03-30T02:26:38.277-07:002012-03-30T02:26:38.277-07:00Interesting piece of information! Learning express...Interesting piece of information! Learning expresses a person growing. Whereas 'training' merely describes, and commonly represents, transfer of knowledge or skill for organizational gain, which generally has bugger-all to do with the trainee.Workplace Safety Videoshttp://www.trainingvideostore.com.au/training-videos-category.php?id=17&name=workplace-safety-videosnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-11569830914130761352012-01-23T11:13:12.983-07:002012-01-23T11:13:12.983-07:00There is always been a clear distinction (at least...There is always been a clear distinction (at least in my mind) between learning and training. <br /><br />To me, learning is a process internal to an individual that can happen in many ways through sensory interaction with his/her environment. As a kid, we learn by trial and error or by imitating others. We learned to talk by repeating the words we heard. We also all learned the meaning of 'hot' by burning ourselves for the first time. We learned all this stuff without actually training for it, it just happened.<br /><br />Training, to me, is simply learning towards an objective. Training puts together prior skills and knowledge, introduces new ones and organizes them all to achieve a desired result (objective). Driving lessons are training since they call upon knowledge of traffic laws, car engineering, physics, etc. and put them all together so that we can move a car safely from one point to another.<br /><br />Learning provides knowledge, training provides experience.Guy Boulethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08024906671026902073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-19970912685542656612012-01-22T13:41:53.570-07:002012-01-22T13:41:53.570-07:00Just a thought, still steaming as it comes forth f...Just a thought, still steaming as it comes forth from my brain, and so not mature yet: what about a term like "learning support professional"? The idea here is that we can't force learning, but we can support the conditions that encourage it, and we can support those who wish to learn. I first thought "learning supporter," but that came uncomfortably close to "athletic supporter"--another phrase that can be taken two ways.Donn Kinghttp://donnellking.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-12054352360292074862012-01-18T12:56:47.759-07:002012-01-18T12:56:47.759-07:00Hi Brent:
I was part of that little Yammer discuss...Hi Brent:<br />I was part of that little Yammer discussion as well. Interesting how a little detour like that can bring old discussions to the surface. I don't think we switched to "Learning" to earn greater respect. If anything we lost a little. Most line managers and exec's are more comfortable with the term "Training" (and continue to call it that). I think we switched partly as a result of (inappropriately) co-opting Senges term (as Guy mentions above) and partly because of our own discomfort with the formal approach the term implies. At this point it is almost politically incorrect to use the term in professional circles. Using it will certainly cast you in a certain stereotypical bucket. That's a shame really, because it a perfectly appropriate word for a certain type of activity to help people develop skill. In recent years we have evolved many other approaches but haven't landed on a catch all term for them. The problem with "Learning" as i mentioned in the yammer discussion is that it was an attempt by our profession to soften the hard edges of training and imply our new found "learner-centred" approaches. Unfortunately we didn't really change anything and now "Learning" is the new "Training" with all the baggage that carries. <br /><br />BTW, i don't like that Wikipedia definition. "Training" is an activity. It may or may not lead to the "acquisition of knoweldge skills and competencies". <br /><br />I vote for "Performance Development" if we are still looking for a catch all for our work as a profession. <br /> <br />TomTom Gramhttp://performancexdesign.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-88260610887253509832012-01-18T00:22:11.031-07:002012-01-18T00:22:11.031-07:00I would say, Training is meant for learning, unles...I would say, Training is meant for learning, unless you wont learn you wont be called as a learner when you get learned you will called as a expert.<br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.samplequestionnaire.com/training-feedback-questionnaire.html" rel="nofollow">Training Feedback questionnaire</a>Ruby Clairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01710522322446393469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-19978080500447632132012-01-17T13:10:06.003-07:002012-01-17T13:10:06.003-07:00Well, sure, Kelly, but the truth of it is that tha...Well, sure, Kelly, but the truth of it is that that's exactly what we're doing. The subject of a training experience may be willing or unwilling, equipped or unequipped to make sense of it. The context we provide for them may be well-or-ill suited, but it is the learner, in the end, who either does or does not incorporate the experience we expose them to into a state of being which can be described as "having learned something." <br /><br />Our role isn't all that much unlike that of my hubby, the family doc, who leaves each morning joking that he is off to "inflict health" on his patients. He provides a diagnosis, a recommended treatment, but in the end, whether the patient heals is largely out of his hands!<br /><br />Some humilty/realism around such things strengthens our discipline, IMO.Valerie Bockhttp://www.q2learning.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-33948903646152097882012-01-17T12:59:59.082-07:002012-01-17T12:59:59.082-07:00I've always liked some version of "learni...I've always liked some version of "learning" better than training because training sounds like you're inflicting a an experience on an unwilling participant. Perhaps that's just semantics (or just me!) but learning I think focuses on the more meaningful purpose of the profession: enabling and empowering others.Kelly Meekerhttp://www.opensesame.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-77961407563351601102012-01-17T11:02:48.715-07:002012-01-17T11:02:48.715-07:00Hi Brent,
I received my basic training and design ...Hi Brent,<br />I received my basic training and design skills from the U.S. Army and then later got a degree in Human Resource Management. Both of them had a very specific meaning for training - learning that is provided in order to improve performance on the present job. Thus training is learning, but only if it leads to the desired performance.<br /><br />That does not mean other forms of learning are good or bad, but it does give one some perspective on how to allocate resources.<br /><br />For example, the Army spends a great deal of resources to not only ensure their soldiers can perform (training), but also to grow (development) them into future leaders.<br /><br />HRD specified what training is because it was one of the earliest crafts to realize that informal learning was also important and should be supported since Malcolm Knowles was one of the early pioneers of both studying informal learning and bringing many of the concepts to HRD.Donald Clarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01980740206430947090noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15724579.post-40437943110507052962012-01-17T10:29:22.689-07:002012-01-17T10:29:22.689-07:00Agreed. but put the "name game blame" on...Agreed. but put the "name game blame" on those who misunderstood Senge's Learning Organization (in The Fifth Discipline) and "appropriated" that language in the early-mid 1990s. Training has always worked or not depending on the context (personal, educational or enterprise), understanding of the terminal goals of awareness, knowledge or skills and their application to performance (now or later) - and the name change to Learning did "nothing" to change any of that. While a focus on the learner is critically important and always was to "not enough in the business" - a foci that starts with performance objectives (or understanding objectives as evidenced by an ability to perform) is even more critical - especially in an Enterprise Learning Context. IMO. And I believe that we should leave the "e" off. That's just one of many deployment methods - most appropriate sometimes - and not at other times - and most typically best in some broader blend, extended over time.Guy W. Wallacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01462952681694155575noreply@blogger.com