Here’s how you’d check the schedule from Los Angeles (LAX) to San Diego (SAN) on October 3rd:
Odds are, you got that right. And if not, odds are you can look at your answer and see the differences.
The original course was in a mainframe-based CBT package, so you’d receive feedback based on your exact answer.
- Example: if you put a zero in the date — 03OCT — that was fine; the system made leading zeroes optional, so your answer would be correct, and we’d say so.
- Example: if you didn’t start with an A, the feedback would say that the entry needs to start with A for “availability.”
My point here is that, contrary to my own expectations, I could help a complete novice use this basic entry correctly with fewer than 50 words of explanation.
Sure, there was more to learn about the availability entry. With each learning point, though, I saw that often people didn’t need anywhere near the amount of background or explanation that I might have thought.
Not every learner necessarily likes this. I believe some people prefer, or at least think they prefer, lots of detail, lots of explanation, lots of “facts.” Training without screen after screen of bullet points seems alien to them. They’re accustomed (or conditioned) to think that lecture is how learning happens.
That’s why a focus on outcomes is vital. If people perform X correctly with less instructional time, it’s hard for a client to argue “we should spend more time on X.”