Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2021 - 22

that learners on the fringes give high
marks to facilitators, but the information
being covered sometimes misses the
mark. The content is either too much
of a stretch, or the learner already
understands and uses the information
being offered.
While one-size-fits-all training is easiest
to offer, meeting individual employees
where they are ensures training
satisfaction, efficacy and application
of new knowledge. One solution to
consider is to structure professional
training to assess current knowledge
first, then place employees into training
along a continuum or at a specific level.

A Case Study on
Pre-assessments to Direct
Individualized Learning
This case study was developed to
determine if the benefits of learning
effectiveness would be greater if
the participants were intentionally
segmented, and each person was
directed to a training opportunity aligned
to their current abilities.
To test this solution, pre-assessment
self-evaluations were conducted in
two different training areas -Microsoft
Excel and management. These preassessment tests were developed
to enable learners to self-evaluate
competency levels.
Learners
accessed
these
preassessments through an eLearning
platform. Then, two methods were used
to help learners identify appropriate
eLearning starting points.

Microsoft Excel
Pre-assessment Explained
The Microsoft Excel pre-training
evaluation was built using video clips of
a facilitator discussing varying shortcuts,
functions and operations.
Learners were first given a brief
description of content for each of the
three levels and then asked to guess

| 22

their possible starting point (X100 -
beginner, X200 - intermediate or X300
- advanced). Within each level, they
were then offered six 15-second video
clips of training content appropriate to
that level. Following each clip, learners
were asked to rate their familiarity with
the material in the video on a scale from
1 to 5 (with 1 being not at all familiar and
5 being very familiar).
Results were calculated, and learners
were
given
a
recommendation
either confirming their original level
choice or suggesting another level.
Learners were then offered a single
comprehensive
course
at
their
assigned level or were able to access
more granular microlearning materials
one at a time using the X100, X200 or
X300 course codes.

self-assessments if they were available
in other professional development
areas. Further evidence that quizzes
used in learning environments appeal to
learners is that several participants took
the self-assessment but accessed no
further training.
Prior to adding the Excel pre-assessment
into the eLearning platform, users
had access to the same Excel training
materials, and usage patterns were not
greatly affected by the addition of the
self-assessment. Satisfaction levels and
predicted application of skills learned were
largely unchanged by self-assessments,
indicating that - while learners saw merit
in taking the assessment - it didn't greatly
affect how they searched for or used the
eLearning platform.

Management
Pre-assessment Explained

Using self-assessments
with supporting training
recommendations enables
learners to pinpoint
their own strengths
and weaknesses.

Participants in the pre-assessment study
were all heavy Excel users who reported
using the program daily. A survey
conducted after learners took the preassessment and completed some
training placed them at 60% beginner,
20% intermediate and 20% advanced.
Participants using the Excel learning
assets said they would apply 88% of
the information covered in the training.
The majority (60%) said they preferred
the microlearning Excel options to the
longer course.
All participants said they were either
somewhat likely or extremely likely to use

To develop the management preassessment, research was conducted
to identify 10 competency areas needed
in leadership. Scenario-based questions
were then developed to help assess
existing expertise, such as: " When
delegating, I am likely to ..., " or " When
dealing with an employee who seems
resistant to change, I should ... . " This style
of question was selected to decrease
responses based on what the learner
might assume is the right answer.
The final self-assessment consisted
of 56 questions (five to seven for
each competency area) and were
accessed one at a time, with results in
one competency not being affected
by results in another competency.
Participants in this study self-identified
as low- to mid-level managers with more
than one year of experience.
Unlike the Excel pre-assessment,
each competency area was assessed
individually. Learners received a rating
of expert, proficient, intermediate or
novice, along with training prescribed
based on the learners' responses.
For instance, a low answer on only one
question would prompt one related
training suggestion; low answers
Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Training Industry Magazine - May/June 2021
