Traveling in Cyberspace: Computer-Based Training
R. Jason Weiss
J. Philip Craiger
University of Nebraska at Omaha
Our memories of the Jetsons cartoon are fuzzy, but we recall that
the show presented a futuristic vision of computer-based training as a single robot
teacher instructing a class-not much of a change from the standard classroom as we know
it! In fact, classrooms and teachers are not typically associated with computer-based
training (CBT). CBT offers a more personalized environment in which the learner works at
his or her own pace, alone with the system. While the CBT industry is growing by leaps and
bounds, we have seen surprisingly little related discussion in the various I/O forums. As
a result, we decided to take this opportunity and introduce CBT in this installment of
Traveling in Cyberspace.
The Range of CBT
Computer-based training defies easy definition. The area itself has
known many similar names, as Gery (1987, p. 7) notes: if you don't like
"computer-based training," you can call it "computer-assisted
instruction," "computer-mediated development," or even
"computer-enhanced teaching!" In its broadest sense, CBT is a method by which
computers are used to deliver training in particular knowledge or skills. CBTs vary in the
sophistication with which the material is presented, the amount of interaction
between the user and the CBT, and the fidelity of instruction. The following
descriptions of these dimensions draw heavily on Lee and Mamone (1995) and Gery (1987).
Presentation sophistication. Presentation sophistication is
basically about what is popularly known as multimedia. The simplest presentation
system delivers instruction exclusively via a computer monitor, and may be completely
text-based. Those who scoff at such an "antiquated" presentation should know
that CBTs have existed since the 1960's (e.g., Skinners programmed instruction modules;
Kulik, 1994), long before the days of multimedia! Nonetheless, the widespread availability
of computers equipped with sound cards and powerful graphics adapters allows for
presentations including realistic sound cues and full motion video. For example, one
customer service CBT system we've seen features sound clips simulating telephone calls to
customer service and on-screen video clips in which a supervisor describes each lesson's
learning points.
Amount of interaction. Gery (1987) defines the amount of
interaction as a function of the degree of learner control and the level of interactivity
demanded by the CBT. In the sense used here, interactivity is used to describe a
"learning process in which the learner and the system alternate in addressing each
other. Typically, each is capable of selecting alternative actions based on the actions of
the other" (Gery, 1987, p. 217). A CBT system with little interactivity or learner
control presents information in a predetermined sequence. These systems are often called page-turners
because the CBT is functioning as little more than an electronic book (albeit one which
may have sound and video). A high level of interactivity with little learner control
results in a system in which learners communicate a great deal with the CBT, but have
little control over the flow of the lesson. In contrast, high learner control and low
interactivity makes for a CBT similar to the "help system" on your computer. You
can get information on various topics and jump to particular material at will, but there
is no further interaction with the system. Finally, when learner control and interactivity
are both high, the CBT is a loosely structured system in which the learner chooses what to
study, and all aspects of the system are highly interactive.
Fidelity of instruction. Fidelity of instruction is preserved to
the degree that the CBT simulates the environment in which the knowledge or skill is to be
reproduced by the learner. For example, last year we tried out a CBT system used to train
"411" operators. The system was based on a highly detailed simulation of a 411
operator's workstation, including a window reproducing the operator's computer monitor,
and simulation of incoming calls. The learner could even ask the caller different
questions to probe for more information, if necessary, although the caller got pretty
testy after a while! At each step, the CBT provided feedback and permitted the learner to
go back and perform the necessary behaviors correctly. Obviously, this system offers a
high degree of fidelity which should therefore result in a high degree of training
transfer. Lower on the fidelity scale, we find more limited simulations. The least
instructional fidelity is represented by text displays which simply set out information on
the knowledge or skills to be learned, but offer no simulation of the work environment.
To sum up our discussion so far, computer-based training systems are
computer programs which instruct users in particular knowledge or skills. CBT systems vary
in the sophistication with which they present the tutorial (i.e., their use of
multimedia), the amount they interact with the user, and their use of simulation to
achieve instructional fidelity. Applications of CBT systems range from new hire training
to supplementary training in interpersonal skills to "just-in-time" training in
which incumbents receive training only when they encounter a novel task requiring the
application of new knowledge or skills. The remainder of this discussion addresses the
pros and cons of CBT from the organization and the user's standpoints.
Benefits of Computer-Based Training
Computer-Based Training offers promise to both organizations and
learners. For the organization, CBT has been linked to improvements in training efficiency
and overall cost reductions. Learners enjoy more engaging, individualized instruction with
immediate feedback about their performance. We will now discuss these benefits in greater
detail.
Organizational benefits
Increased training efficiency. Because of the upstart costs
associated with developing customized CBT systems, businesses demand an accounting of the
potential for return-on-investment (ROI). Recent studies have compared multimedia CBT and
traditional classroom training across numerous applications and subjects. A consistent
result is that CBT reduces training time by 25 to 50%, with equivalent or better retention
and transfer. For example, Adams (1992) reviewed six controlled studies that compared
traditional classroom instruction to equivalent multimedia instruction at Xerox, IBM,
Federal Express, and other companies. The results suggested that CBT provided learning
compression rates of 38 to 70%. Union Pacific Railroad experienced 35% and 50% reductions
in learning time for two courses delivered to several hundred employees. Finally, Hall
(1995) reviewed over 130 companies who use multimedia CBT and found that, in contrast to
traditional classroom training, CBT resulted in reductions in training time ranging from
20-80%, with 40-60% being the most common.
Reduced expenses. Custom-developed CBT systems typically require
a sizable up-front cash outlay. However, the per-learner cost for the CBT continually
drops as the number of learners increases. As a result, CBTs eventually prove more
economical than traditional training methods. Costs are reduced in other ways as well.
Before CBT, companies without on-site training had to pay for employee travel to training
sites (e.g., Williamson, 1994). Because CBT systems can be distributed easily via CD-ROM
or the Internet, the need for employee travel is greatly reduced.
Improved tracking of learner progress. Computer-based training is
unparalleled in its ability to record all aspects of a learner's development. One can
track the amount of training completed by the learner, his or her performance in each
training session, and what types of errors he or she committed. In this sense, CBT systems
offer the tools to be extraordinarily specific in assessing the learner's performance.
Learner Benefits
Individualized and systematic instruction. A long noted advantage
of CBT systems are that they can provide individualized instruction to learners. Similar
to a human tutor, sophisticated CBT systems can adjust the sequence of presentation and
difficulty of the material based on a learners progress through the system, or even
based on individual differences (e.g., learning style, self-efficacy; Craiger, Weiss,
& Hawkins, 1997). Unlike one shot traditional classroom learning, CBT systems
allow learners to return to subject matter as many times as required to master the
material. Multiple presentations of the subject matter, often presented in different
formats/media and varying levels of specificity, leads to over learning, which can
lead to higher information retention.
Anyone who has ever taught a class or a training workshop knows the
difficulty of providing systematic instruction over time. CBT systems are inherently
systematic in their presentation of subject matter; concepts are never missed or given
different emphasis. Moreover, the computer-based implementation of course content allows
system developers the latitude of embedding sophisticated branching and navigation
modules, thereby permitting the computer to make judgments (not to be overly
anthropomorphic) about the depth and breadth of instruction required based on a learner's
progress.
Active and interactive learning. The nature of a traditional
classroom setting, including moderate-to-high teacher-to-student ratios, limits an
individual students ability to become active in the learning process. We are sure that
everyone has had the experience of sitting in a classroom or workshop and thinking to
ones self I already know this part, cant we move a little faster? or even worse,
Slow down!!! Im not getting it! Few people have the patience to sit through a
situation where everyone gets the same information at the same time and pace. Inevitably,
some learners who already know the information become bored and eventually tune out
the training completely. In contrast, the computer is infinitely patient in dealing with
the varying attention span of individuals. If a learner becomes distracted, the computer
will wait for him or her to refocus on the task, an inherent consequence given that the
learner is dictating the progress of training.
Immediate feedback. We often tell our students on the first day
of class that they should expect to participate in class discussion and answer questions
because if they dont, we wouldnt know if they were grasping the material until the
mid-term exam. When learning a new concept, students need immediate feedback, and CBT
systems accommodate them. Even with moderate student-to-teacher ratios, classroom
instruction does not allow for high rates of responses from a large number of individuals:
when a question is answered correctly by a student, the teacher moves on. Often, students
who didnt know the right answer dont have the opportunity to ask why the right answer
was correct or why their answer was wrong. CBT systems permit learners to participate and
find out if his or her answers are correct or incorrect based on their own individual
responses.
Problems Associated with Computer-Based Training
While CBT offers incredible promise, it is not without its pitfalls.
Organizations may balk at the steep development costs for custom CBTs, and the time needed
to create a truly robust system. Also, it is often difficult to make changes once the CBT
is complete. Finally, learners must adjust to the relative inflexibility of CBT systems.
We discuss these issues in further detail below.
Organizational Problems
Cost/fidelity/time tradeoff. Numerous off-the-shelf CBT systems
exist, e.g., CD-ROMs that can be purchased at your local software store that teach you how
to use your word processor. These systems, often selling for under $100, are limited to
specific and common tasks, and vary widely in quality. In contrast, customized CBT systems
are developed from scratch and allow developers to tailor the system to a particular task,
job, or subject matter. As a prominent CBT developer told us, you must pick your
priorities when you go with customized CBT: you can have a system developed quickly,
inexpensively, or with a great deal of fidelity, but you can never have all three at once
(R. Allen, personal communication, April 19, 1996). Taking advantage of the power and
flexibility of CBT requires a lot of time and money for planning the system, programming
it, and adding the multimedia capabilities. A simple transcription of a training manual
into electronic form will be no more powerful to educate than the original hardcopy. The
point here is that if you want to reap the benefits of a powerful CBT system, you must
also accept the demands of development.
Maintaining a CBT is difficult. Once you have your CBT up and
running, what do you do if you want to change it? Some custom-CBT vendors we've spoken to
provide a maintenance package for buyers to adjust surface elements of the system, such as
particular wordings. However, subtle changes in the target job may necessitate a fairly
detailed reworking of the CBT by the vendor (or your in-house developer), adding cost to
an already expensive proposition. For jobs that change frequently, it may be more
appropriate to use a modular approach, with smaller CBTs each teaching a facet of the job.
In this manner, adjustments can be made to one module while the rest of the CBT system
remains usable.
Learner Pitfalls
CBT inflexibility. While every effort is made to accommodate the
many different ways in which users may interact with the system, ultimately CBTs are
inflexible in two ways. First, one is limited to a few methods of communication with the
system, such as the keyboard, mouse, and touchpad (Hartley, 1980). Eberts and Brock (1988)
predicted an eventual role for natural language voice control, and the wide availability
of voice recognition systems leads us to expect to see related CBT implementations in the
near future. The second source of inflexibility is that the learner's responses must
correspond to those programmed into the CBT (Eberts & Brock, 1988). CBTs attempt to
get around this by limiting the ways in which a learner may respond to the system;
however, the need for such provisions exposes a weakness of CBT.
Well, that sums it up for this introduction to computer-based training.
In future installments we will discuss other topics in computer-mediated work. If you
would like to contact us, we can be reached via e-mail at pcraiger@unomaha.edu and weiss@unomaha.edu.
References
Adams, G. L., (March, 1992). Why Interactive. Multimedia &
Videodisc Monitor, pp. 2025.
Craiger, J.P., Weiss, R.J., & Hawkins, M. (in preparation). Effect
of feedback type on task self-efficacy: A computer-based instruction application.
Eberts, R. E., & Brock, J. F. (1988). Computer-based instruction. In
M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 599-627).
North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Gery, G. (1987). Making CBT happen: Prescriptions for successful
implementation of computer-based training in your organization. Tolland, MA: Gery
Performance Press.
Hall, B. (July/August, 1995). Multimedia trainings return on
investment. Workforce Training News, 15.
Hartley, R. (1980). Computer-assisted learning. In H. T. Smith & H.
R. G. Green (Eds.), Human interaction with computers. London: Academic Press.
Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based
instruction. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O'Neil, Jr. (Eds.), Technology assessment in
education and training (pp. 9-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lee, W., & Mamone, R. A. (1995). The computer-based training
handbook: Assessment, design, development, evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Williamson, M. (1994, December). High-tech training. Byte, 19,
pp. 74, 75, 78, 80, 84, 88.