When employees of the US Internal Revenue Service need to find out what taxpayers are doing, they look online. How would you train them to dig deep into the web without violating privacy laws?
David Anderson has linked to the script of an online course that the IRS uses to train its employees. It was released during a Freedom of Information Act case and posted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). As David points out, the script uses the common tell-then-test approach.
What could they have done differently?
Here’s the script, thanks to the EFF. You’ll see that it’s clearly written and organized, which is great.
Like most elearning, it presents a lot of information and then quickly tests our understanding of that info. It also uses some interesting examples from real life.
The course is a perfectly capable information presentation. But since my tax dollars helped pay for it, I can’t help wishing they had done it differently. So let’s give the IRS some friendly suggestions.
What would happen if we changed the objectives?
The IRS course has these objectives:
- Identify internet research do’s and don’ts
- Identify how to locate relevant taxpayer information with internet searches
- Identify additional internet research tools
If you’ve spent more than 5 seconds with Action Mapping or the Elearning Blueprint, you’ll easily predict what I’m about to say. The objectives need describe action, not knowledge. Do we really want employees to passively “identify” what they should do, or do we want them to actually do it?
When we start out with “identify” objectives, our activities tend to become “identify” activities — typically, multiple-choice questions that ask learners to recognize something they just read. They test learners’ short-term memory, not their ability to use the new information on the job.
Imagine how the course might have turned out if all stakeholders had agreed to an objective like “Find accurate online information about a taxpayer without violating privacy laws.” The activities that would naturally flow from that objective would be realistic simulations of what the employees need to do each day on the job.
How could scenarios help?
The course hints at some interesting examples — a taxpayer reposted a web site he was supposed to have shut down, officers of a corporation were dodging responsibility for taxes, and a restaurant owner tried to hide online businesses. However, these are presented as isolated examples, usually after a presentation of more abstract information.
What if the IRS had elevated those examples to decision-making scenarios, and used them to replace the “knowledge check” mini-quizzes?
For example, instead of asking, “What is the best way to save multiple pages of a web site?” the designers could present a scenario in which an IRS employee has found a taxpayer’s illegal web site and wants to save it before the taxpayer can pull it offline. What should the employee do?
Ideally, the IRS would have a fake website to practice on, and the learner would actually go to that site and save its pages. But even a decision-making scenario in which the learner chooses actions for a fictional employee would be more effective than a basic knowledge check because it would more closely simulate what the learner does on the job.
What info should go in the course, and where?
The course includes lots of how-to information that would benefit from screen shots and explicit steps (“On the advanced search screen, enter the taxpayer’s name…”). There’s so much how-to info that learners might want to look it up again — which means that the procedures are probably better off in a job aid than the course.
I’d suggest offloading a lot of the how-to information to a few easily found pages on the intranet, and using the course to teach employees how to use those job aids.
Then, once they’ve put together the job aids, the designers could make the course seem more like a stream of interesting activities.
Instead of this:
They could do this:
Each activity could be a decision-making scenario based on a realistic case. The learners would use the job aids to complete the activities, which simulates what they’ll be doing on the job. Because this approach is more realistic and “applied,” it’s more likely to change real-world behavior.
What do you think?
Tell the IRS what to do! How do you think they should change their course to make it more memorable and more likely to affect behavior on the job?
You are right on the money! I have always found scenario-based activities are an extremely effective method of knowledge transfer and application.
All too often, eLearning is data dump – quiz – data dump – quiz… Snooze! It is a little extra effort to develop – but feedback from learners who have completed these style modules suggests that it absolutely worth it. Fabulous post as always…
Cathy, not only are you a great resource of clearly presented information, you also seems to always have an interesting way of inviting participation. I am always inspired when I come to your blog. Thank you for taking the time to show not tell.
Oh, and I don’t think there is much to add – you’ve covered it all!
Thanks for finding this example of the IRS’s eLearning course. One of the first things I learned early in my training career and I still use everytime I’m approached with a new training request is to force the client to answer the questions “What do you want them to DO differently as a result of this training intervention.” As you state the fact that Learning Objectives should be action versus knowledge.
@ Michael Francis – me too! But I’m afraid there’s not enough of us who approach training and learning this way…
Hi,
I’m having some troubles creating a basic course on reading financial statements. Its lacking the element of fun. The audience level is people from non financial background.
Hoping you could share your insights on this