The Pain and Peril of Live Group Instruction
December 9, 2009

I had the misfortune of attending a live Web-based class today on a new content management system being used by my organization. I’m sure you can correctly guess exactly how it went. One learner in the class brought things to a grinding halt as she fumbled with multiple windows and documents on her end, trying to click links being shown on the instructor’s shared screen rather than switching to her own browser window and clicking them there, etc. The instructor struggled mightily (but blindly) to assist, but to no avail. After a half hour of this, she finally got frustrated enough to drop out of the session entirely (thankfully – which sounds cruel, but you’ve thought it too), allowing us to proceed.
Of course I use the word “proceed” loosely, as another learner quickly announced that he had become lost in the group exercise 10 minutes ago. Again, brakes were applied, the gear shift was thrown into reverse, and we all got to sit and stare at our fingernails (or Facebook) as the instructor spent the next 15 minutes trying to get this lost soul caught up with the rest of the group. The instructor’s frustration was obvious, the exasperation of the other learners was silent but assumed, and another learning experience was flushed into the abyss.
We’ve all sat through sessions just like this, whether in a virtual classroom or a real one. Does anyone seriously believe that this is the way to learn? And if not, why do we keep trying it?
The problem with live instruction is the pace is inherently limited to the slowest learner in the group. It always has been this way, it always will be this way. There can be only one pace in the classroom, and that pace is typically slow. Live classroom instruction is akin to trying to run a marathon while tied at the waist to a group of other runners, at least one of which is suffering from a bad ankle sprain. Does this make any sense? Of course not. So why do we apply that very approach to education?
Imagine if you could compress your entire K-12 educational experience by eliminating all the downtime spent catering to the slowest student or the time spent controlling the unruly ones. If you could have moved at your own pace, how long would it have taken you to learn everything you did learn under that conventional system? 5 years? Less? (The argument becomes irrational when you consider the intellectual maturation required during the K-12 process – much of which only time and physical growth can provide – but you get the drift.)
Imagine if that slowest student could be spared the everlasting humiliation (and permanently scarred self-esteem) from being personally tended to while the rest of the group stares in disapproval and mockery.
Imagine how much smarter we would be as a society if we weren’t lumped together into a Lowest Common Denominator learning system.
Imagine.
Wouldn’t a better approach for my class today have been to provide us with some pre-recorded instruction (a screencast, for example), some exercise materials to complete at our own pace, an email address (or instant messaging address or phone number) for the instructor to pose questions as needed, and then follow it all up with a live group Q&A session to discuss what was learned? Or better yet, skip the live Q&A session (and the technological snafus that will inevitably accompany it) entirely and allow the group to discuss the course content in an online discussion forum or other virtual collaboration or social media environment?
Wouldn’t that approach be vastly more effective (and pleasant) for everyone involved?
Yes!
I firmly believe that such a blended approach is the way to go.
Sadly, my children – who are currently in elementary school – will be shackled by the antiquated and broken live instruction model for many years to come.
However, we as corporate training developers can start changing this within our organizations now!
The next time someone suggests a live Webinar to replace a classroom-based course, suggest a blended model that utilizes various technologies instead – eliminating the problematic “live” factor wherever possible. Your learners will thank you. Your instructors will thank you. And imagine how much more scalable such an approach would be. Your manager will praise you for the cost savings. Everyone wins!
It’s time we finally admit failure and move on. Seriously.
Sidenote: On the plus side, I wrote this entire (admittedly lengthly – sorry) blog post during the fumble-filled dead time of this ill-fated live training session. No kidding. The irresistible urge to multitask during sessions like these should be completely understandable by anyone who has ever attended one.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Posted in 



content rss
December 9th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Great, Chris!!! three posts in a week, and the three brilliant!!!
I can’t agree more with you about the troubles of live group instruction: my university, a distance university, is still teaching to their staff in a live way and suffer the same problems. I think the problem is at the top of the institutions, managers that are far away of the new technologies.
Pedro.
December 9th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Hey Pedro, sorry for the flood of posts – some days I just feel more inspired than others (or have more time). When it rains at eQuixotic, it pours.
December 17th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Excellent post! I’ve started creating screencasts, and putting more “interactive” stuff online while reducing the time I talk in front of people. Now that technology makes it so easy to let students work in their own space, at their own time and pace, it only makes sense to do things this way. And if all the time now spent repeating the same presentation over and over went to improving a recorded one that’s widely available, think of how much better it could get.
But for the school system, admitting that all students don’t actually learn at the same pace will be a hard sell; (sort of democratic heresy). Maybe someday though. We can always hope……
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Stupendous post. I can’t count the number of these types of sessions I’ve participated in. I encourage my peers to use alternatives any time possible. I get asked to “facilitate” these sessions on a regular basis but somehow manage to find an alternative that works every time. We have long been using CBTs in our organization but are just starting to introduce blended options. Thanks for a wonderful post with great ideas.