What makes this training Branching Scenario vs a Linear Sequence?

In her blog Cathy Moore, the author of Map it, mentions 4 reasons to use a branching scenario:  1. Recognizing and challenging their assumptions; 2. Recovering from mistakes in a long process; 3. Navigating extended, ambiguous situations; 4. Deciding when to stop gathering information and act. She concludes that this type of training is useful when trying to achieve deeper change (as opposed to surface training). Consistent with Moore’s assertions, Conversations that work treats a topic that lends itself to Scenario Based learning. 

Clark and Mayer’s definition of Scenario Based Training, “a preplanned, guided, inductive learning environment designed to accelerate expertise, in which the learner assumes the role of an actor, responding to a work realistic assignment or challenge, which in turn responds to reflect the learners choices” (Clark & Mayer, 2012) is consistent with the features of Conversations That Work!. If we go through the list of characteristics that define Branching Scenario, Conversations that Work! Is a clear example of such a training. It can also be helpful to compare and contrast these features to those of a linear sequence when analyzing the training. 

Effective scenario-based training must balance the freedom that the learner gets to make decisions and mistakes, and the structure that helps avoid unproductive and frustrating trial-and-error situations. It is worth noting that mistakes are treated very differently in both types of training. Contrary to directive design, scenario-based eLearning doesn’t see errors as negatives, to be avoided or corrected immediately. Rather, “scenario-based eLearning makes different assumptions - mainly that mistakes can provide a useful learning experience” (Clark & Mayer, 2012). Although feedback is mentioned in the graphic below, I want you to imagine the different outcomes and possibilities that thinking of mistakes as failures, (or errors) versus learning opportunities can bring to a learner. 

Desktop Computers or Mobile?

For analysis purposes, I tried the training Conversations that Work! on my laptop computer and my mobile phone. I understand that a laptop is still considered mobile, but I have no access to a desktop at the moment. As a user, the experience was the same on both platforms, albeit the screen on my mobile was a little harder to manipulate. I appreciate a learning experience that can be done on a mobile phone, as I can sneak in 10 spare minutes and try it.  I am also aware, from my days of working with lower-income, Hispanic communities in California, that sometimes, mobile phones are the only platform that people have access to. Designing nuggets of on-the-go, just-in-time learning, that MAY be experienced on mobile phones, can be very effective for learners who have little time and limited technology available. 

There is a place in e-Learning for both desktop and mobile learning. Both have wins and drawbacks. Ivec mentions 3 instances when mobile learning might not be the best choice: 

1. If older employees don’t feel comfortable with the technology 

2. If the organization doesn’t provide devices or hardware (tablets, laptops, phones) 

3. If the LMS does not support mobile learning software. 

I would add that if the training is very long and complex, mobile learning would not be ideal (especially if we think of devices like mobile phones or small tablets).  However, Ivec says, if the training is designed for on-the-go, or it is begging for mobile capabilities, like touch screens or gestures, mobile learning might be the best option.