Following on from my previous post, here are some more thoughts about the PUP.
Difficulties with learning media
On a weekly call the feedback from other attendees/participants was that they wanted more video-based guidance (in preference to text instruction that is used a lot on learn.microsoft.com).
Were they correct in thinking the videos are more useful?
In my opinion what is going on here is that video, of course, can be helpful for knowing the steps to follow. I, for example, regularly need YouTube to remind me the steps for doing rarely used things in PPT and XLS files. However, videos are often quickly out-of-date and more difficult to maintain than documentation, so it is understandable why a lot of the Microsoft courseware is not video based.
However, text instructions with limited image support is very tricky to use if out-of-date, there are a few examples where I have simply skipped doing parts of the PuP as I am unable to find the start point in the resources. This again is, I think, in part due to the complexities of the setup needed to complete the whole programme and needing to enable free trials of different components.
Keeping content up-to-date
As mentioned above, keeping IT training materials up-to-date is hard. This is why most L&D departs will outsource this for generic tools (like MS Office tools).
There has been one particularly bad example in PUP where the guidance referred to features not previously introduced in the course. When I raised this in the related weekly live Q&A it was revealed this functionality had actually been depreciated – basically meaning a lot of wasted learner time as I, and others, tried to figure out how to follow the instructions, finding that pages found online also didn’t help, etc.
Enabling trainers/community managers
Many of us will have been in training sessions where the trainer has been hamstrung by permissions, sandbox restrictions or some other kind of technical issue. The champions, who hold the weekly PuP calls, are clearly knowledgeable but have difficulty demonstrating items in the live Q&A as they have their own accounts, setup for their own businesses that are tricky to demonstrate to people using the trial versions.
These champions/MVPs are clearly knowledgible but fall into many of the traps experienced facilitators know to try and avoid – like using acronyms, jumping around tech interfaces without explanation, etc. I doubt Microsoft has provided them with basic facilitation training and instead I presume these are volunteer MVPs doing this for their own CVs rather than being fully supported to do the job.
Ultimately I stopped joining the weekly calls as they were not hugely helpful for some of these reasons.
LMS/system setup
The first blog post mentioned some trickiness in getting things setup. Some of the weeks material has been particularly confusing – for example a video that specifically ends with “let’s get started” and explaining the week’s activities was actually the last thing in the LMS menu for that week. Personally this was very confusing in trying to figure out what I was supposed to be doing – only to watch the video when I had effectively thought “I’ve given up on this topic”.
Possibilities vs Process vs Practicalities
The step-by-step instructions on how to do things in most of the course have not been hugely helpful in trying to work out if any of these tools would be useful in my own workplace scenario. There have been some examples shown but I could have done with a real focus on this to show the possibilities of the tools, with the processes being replaced outlined to show the practical benefits. Again, this is perhaps a classic example of IT training being focused on the tools, UI and making things work rather than than answering the “why”.
At the end of the week by week materials there are some interviews with three people who have transitioned into (no/low code) developers. These were inspiring, for example a Heathrow airport security guard who transitioned into an IT role. However, I still couldn’t see why these solutions worked over simpler options I could think of.
I am going to fail
As I have been unexpectedly busier at work than I was planning and have some travel planned, that I was not anticipating, I am almost certainly going to fail the course.
I have got through all the materials but I am unlikely to finish the assignment in time.
The assignment is actually a nice scenario asking you to put together some solutions for a fake business scenario and related issues. The instructions are pretty clear as are the assessment criteria.
However, receiving the task about half through the programme means there are early modules I struggled to follow (either due to technical or me issues) that I will have to revisit in detail to pass the assignment.
If I don’t manage to finish it will be a shame as the certification in this case would have been nice (given it is a more robust programme than just going through the Microsoft Learn components) even if I am critical of certifications at times.
24/7 live support is the only answer to really handhold someone through new tools when they are new new – i.e. a new concept, with new processes, etc. and not just new UI over a word processor, image work or something else the user is already familiar with. With ChatGPT and other tools we may perhaps be in a position where we can offer true 24/7 support which helps people get through learning experiences and tackle issues. For example, where trying to use Virtual Agents I just kept hitting this error without any clear reason why (I later found a document on the LMS about setup but for some reason this document did not show by default when using the “next, next, next” option in the LMS):
Conclusion
Ultimately we would hope that IT tools are becoming easy to use and intuitive. However, my approach for a number of years now probably remains the same – roughly being:
(1) everyone needs an overview of the process,
(2) they need an idea of the possibilities and benefits from the change and you can
(3) then focus on the “click here click here” type instruction – which, depending on how static the development of the tool is, may be best served in a number of ways (e.g. training if going to be used straight away, ongoing support resources, etc).
Whose Education Is It Anyway? 