Endgame - Encouraging Completion In E-Learning

E-learning – at least to the extent that it is delivered in self-study format – suffers in the same way as all of its distance learning predecessors: from high drop-out rates. Although most learners start with good intentions of completing, far too high a proportion never achieve the benefits they were seeking when they were enrolled. In this chapter, I explore whether drop-out rates are any real indicator of the success of e-learning and, to the extent that they are, what can be done to reduce them to manageable levels.

Lies, damn lies

E-learning has to watch out, or it will get itself a bad reputation. Statistics from Corporate University Exchange, based on a study of 4148 online learners, show drop-out rates standing at about 70% compared with an average of 15% for classroom training. Now, as we all know, there are ‘lies, damn lies and statistics’. Before we commence the mandatory wailing and gnashing of teeth (whatever that is), we should be a little more discriminating. First of all, e-learning is not a method in itself, it is a channel, just like the telephone, TV, the radio and, of course, direct face-to-face communication. As a sophisticated channel, based on a huge network of powerful computing devices and delivering its output through screens, speakers and printers, e-learning supports a wide range of learning methods, including self-study, real-time events, asynchronous discussion, not to mention exploration of the World Wide Web. Not all of these methods suffer from high drop-out rates. In fact ‘dropping out’ only really means anything if you consciously ‘dropped-in’ in the first place – which typically means some sort of formal learning event like a course.

To the extent that e-learning is real-time, like virtual classroom events and chat rooms, dropping out is no more of an issue than it is in a virtual classroom. Peer pressure and social etiquette usually requires participants to stay the course and see the event out, however switched off they may be (although virtual learners have the advantage of being able to read their emails or play Solitaire while continuing to take part in the event). A bigger issue is getting people to the events, as any classroom trainer will tell you as they survey the list of last-minute cancellations.

So, our problem is with formal, self-study learning; which should not be surprising, as all previous self-study methods have suffered in exactly the same way. The problem is not the channel – in this case e-learning – but the mechanism, self-study. Although self-study offers the learner huge advantages in terms of self-pacing, flexible timing and the absence of potentially embarrassing ice-breakers and role-plays, it can suffer from one or two of its own absences, not least people and, from the learner’s perspective, any sort of self-discipline. As trainers we have two choices: either we give up on self-study and throw away the potential benefits, or we tackle the motivational problems and make it work. I’m for the latter.