MAXIMIZING LEARNING

Our definition of learning makes it clear that people acquire and develop skills

and knowledge, and change behavior, as a result of an interaction between forces

within the learner and in the environment. In this section of the chapter, we

present factors that have been shown to affect learning and discuss their outcomes. We discuss three primary areas as we
emphasize ways to maximize

learning, namely trainee characteristics, training design, and the transfer of training

(see Table 3-1).

Trainee Characteristics

A learner or trainee’s personal characteristics will influence how he or she learns

new tasks and new information. Three such characteristics are trainability, personality,

and attitudes.

Trainability. Trainability focuses on the trainee’s readiness to learn and combines

the trainee’s level of ability and motivation with his or her perceptions of

the work environment.23 A simple formula to convey this is:

Trainability = f (Motivation × Ability ×Perceptions of the Work Environment)

[TABLE 3-1 Issues

Involved in

Maximizing Learning

Trainee Characteristics

Trainability

Motivation

Ability

Perception of the work environment

Personality and attitudes

Training Design

Conditions of practice

Active practice

Massed versus spaced practice sessions

Whole versus part learning

Overlearning

Knowledge of results (feedback)

Task sequencing

Retention of what is learned

Degree of original learning

Interference

Transfer of Training

Identical elements

General principles

Stimulus variability

Support in the work environment

Opportunity to perform

Transfer-of-training climate]

This formula illustrates that a trainee must have both the motivation and the

ability to learn; if either is lacking, learning will not occur. The equation also

shows that a very high level of one cannot completely overcome a very low

level of the other. In addition, if employees perceive little support in the work

environment for learning new knowledge or skills, they will be less likely to

learn and use them. Thus, it is important to note that trainability is not just a

function of the individual trainee, but also of the work environment in which

the learner will be asked to use what is presented in an HRD intervention.

Trainability is extremely important in HRD. Placing employees in programs

they are not motivated to attend or are not prepared to do well in wastes time

and resources. Trainees with less ability take longer to learn, which can increase

the length of the training period and the expense involved in conducting training.

In fact, it is possible that such trainees may never learn to the levels desired

by the organization.

To illustrate this, suppose a service technician for an office equipment

company is in a training program designed to teach selling skills for the equipment

being serviced. Selling requires skills in oral communication and interpersonal

relations. If the technician lacks either skill, it is likely that learning to sell

effectively will be difficult. The technician may want to learn and try hard to do

so, but this low level of ability will hinder learning. Similarly, if the technician

has excellent communication skills but sees selling as unpleasant or distasteful, or

does not think learning to sell will help to achieve his or her own personal goals,

no effort may be made to learn the sales skills. A number of studies have shown

the clear links between ability and learning.24 The same is true for motivation,25
as well as for perceptions of the work environment.26

Over the past several years, researchers have studied the notion of pretraining

motivation.27 Findings from this research include:

• The way trainees perceive training (e.g., as remedial versus advanced, or as an

unpleasant task versus an opportunity) affects levels of learning, perceptions

of efficacy, anxiety, and perceptions of fairness.28

• The way in which individuals view their own ability (as a fixed entity or an

acquirable skill) affects anxiety level, efficacy perceptions, and the learning

of declarative (factual) knowledge.29

• Experiencing negative events on the job prior to training can increase trainees’ motivation

to learn and their performance in training.30

• A number of other factors have been found to increase individuals’ motivation to

participate in and learn from training. Factors investigated include involvement

in decisions about training, perceptions that participation in training will lead

to benefits (e.g., increased job performance and career advancement opportunities),

and perceptions of support (or a lack of obstacles that might hinder

using learned training in the work environment).31

• Characteristics of the organization (e.g., policies and guidelines regarding training

participation) have been linked to participation in developmental

activities.

• These findings are useful in that they suggest ways in which organizations

can increase the motivation to participate in and learn from HRD interventions.

For example, to ensure that trainees perceive the value of what is

being presented, they must see training as an opportunity, as a way to

address a need they have, and as a way to achieve valued outcomes. Further,

trainees must perceive the organization and their immediate work environment

as supporting participation in training and using what has been

learned.33 However, for an interesting study of the potential downfall of

allowing trainees some choice in what training they receive, see the boxed

insert nearby entitled “The Perils of Participation.”

An experiment on the impact of ability and prior job knowledge on learning

finds that general cognitive ability (i.e., intelligence) has a direct impact on “the

acquisition of” job knowledge, but prior job knowledge has almost no effect on

the acquisition of subsequent job knowledge.34 This finding suggests that cognitive
ability rather than prior job knowledge should be used to select trainees into

programs designed to teach complex tasks.

Trainability testing is one approach that can be used to ensure that trainees

have both the motivation and the ability to learn. This approach focuses on measuring

the motivation and relevant abilities of candidates for training and selecting

for training only those who show a sufficient level of trainability. For

example, military researchers developed a questionnaire that measured motivational

and personality factors to predict success in combat training. The questionnaire

measured such things as independence, sociability, and motivation to serve

in a combat unit. The combination of questionnaire responses and other predictors

was strongly related to training success.

Another approach to trainee testing is to allow candidates to complete part

of the training program and use their performance on that section as a predictor

of how well they will perform during the remainder of training. For example,

Arthur Siegel described a method called miniature training and evaluation testing,

in which U.S. Navy recruits were trained on a sample of important tasks and

tested on their ability to perform these tasks. Using eleven training and evaluation

modules, the approach yielded better predictions of success for several jobs

than the test normally conducted by the Navy.36 In a manufacturing setting,

BMW took a similar approach when it opened its first U.S. auto manufacturing

facility in Greer, South Carolina. To lure the company to South Carolina, state

government officials offered generous tax incentives. The state also agreed to

create training facilities to BMW’s specifications and worked with them to

recruit and train potential BMW employees. Once trainees completed their

training, BMW selected only those they wanted to hire to be among the initial

1,500 associates in its new plant. BMW stated that it was looking for associates

with a strong commitment to quality and teamwork, and this procedure allowed

the company to select the very best among those who had completed the rigorous

training program administered by the state’s technical college system. The

quality and success of the cars made at this plant (including the Z3 roadster), as

well as subsequent expansions of the plant and workforce, indicate that this “train, and then select” strategy was successful.
Similarly, from the research literature, a meta-analysis of research studies examining the use of work sample

tests of trainability concluded that such tests predict success in training and job performance for untrained job applicants.
Trainability testing has also been effective in predicting the training success of older workers.
Personality and Attitudes. Although not explicitly mentioned in the definition

of trainability, a trainee’s personality and attitudes can also have an effect on

learning (see Chapter 2). Ray Noe suggested that an employee’s attitudes toward

career exploration and job involvement impact learning and its applications to

the job.39 Other research has shown that job involvement, expectations for training,

and trainee confidence are all related to success in training.40

Personality is the stable set of personal characteristics that account for consistent

patterns of behavior. Personality traits that are related to employee learning

include locus of control, the need for achievement, activity, independence, and

sociability.41 Murray Barrick and Michael Mount reported the results of a metaanalysis

showing that two personality dimensions—extraversion and openness to

experience—are valid predictors of success in training.42 Joseph Martocchio and

Jane Webster found that an individual’s level of cognitive playfulness (which is in

part the spontaneity, imagination, and exploratory approach a person brings to

task performance and learning) affects learning, mood, and satisfaction with training.

43 They also found that individuals with low levels of cognitive playfulness

are affected more by positive feedback than individuals with higher levels of cognitive

playfulness. As further research is conducted on the impact of personality

characteristics on success in training, it may be useful to include measures of relevant

traits in the selection process before trainees are sent to expensive or

lengthy training and other HRD programs.44

To summarize, assessing employee’s relevant abilities, motivation, and personality

prior to HRD programs can be important in maximizing the chances

that learning will occur. This approach to maximizing learning fits with Glaser’s

notion that knowing the initial state of the learner is an important part of effective

training.45

Training Design

Training design involves adapting the learning environment to maximize learning.

Training design issues include (1) the conditions of practice that influence

learning and (2) the factors that impact retention of what is learned.

Although much of the research on this topic was conducted before 1970,

new research in instructional psychology has revived interest. While the information

presented in the following sections can be helpful in designing an effective

training program, not all the findings will work in all situations. Recall Gagné’s
arguments cited earlier about traditional learning principles. There is no substitute

for conducting a thorough task analysis and clearly specifying what is to be

learned (task analysis will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4).

Conditions of Practice. At least six issues have been studied that relate to

practice and learning. They include active practice, massed versus spaced practice

sessions, whole versus part learning, overlearning, knowledge of results, and task

sequencing.

Active practice suggests that learners should be given an opportunity to

repeatedly perform the task or use the knowledge being learned. if a paramedic is learning how to operate the “jaws of life”
(to extract passengers

from vehicles damaged in accidents), the training sessions should include multiple

opportunities for the paramedic to operate the “jaws.”

Researchers have also been interested in whether mental practice, the “cognitive

rehearsal of a task in the absence of overt physical movement,” can

improve task performance. A meta-analysis of many studies concluded that mental

practice is effective for both cognitive and physical tasks (though more so for

cognitive tasks). This study also showed that the effect of mental practice on performance

decreases as the time interval between practice and performance

increases.47 These findings suggest that trainees should be encouraged to mentally

rehearse the tasks they are learning to perform outside of the training environment

as one way to enhance their performance.

Massed versus spaced practice sessions involve whether to conduct training in

one session or divide it into segments separated by a period of time. For example,

is it better to study for an examination over a period of several days (spaced

practice) or in one cram session (massed practice)? In general, information and

skills can be learned either way, but spaced practice sessions with a reasonable

rest period between them lead to better performance and longer retention of

what is learned than a massed practice session.48 Daniel Willingham reviewed

100 years of research, and concluded that massed practice or “cramming” was

the least effective strategy for learning and retention.49 As one recent example,

students taking an introductory statistics course were compared. Some students

took six exams during the semester, plus a cumulative final exam, whereas students

in other sections took two exams during the semester, plus the identical

final exam. Students taking the bi-weekly exams outperformed students who
took the two midterm exams, both in final exam performance, as well as in

their overall course grade.50 For difficult, complex tasks, an initial massed session

followed by spaced practice sessions has led to improved performance.51

Using a massed rather than a spaced practice session is often a matter of practicality

winning out over science. Time and resource constraints may influence

organizational decision-makers to schedule a single training session, even though

a series of spaced sessions would be more effective. However, HRD professionals

should realize that under these conditions retention can suffer. It may be necessary

to schedule follow-up sessions to boost retention. Furthermore, the effectiveness

of approaches used to motivate trainees during training may be affected

by whether massed or spaced sessions are used. One research study found that

trainees assigned specific, difficult goals in massed practice performed more

poorly than those told simply to do their best, whereas those in spaced sessions

assigned specific, difficult goals performed slightly better than those told to do

their best.52

Whole versus part learning concerns the size of the unit to be learned, that is,

should trainees practice an entire task (or study certain material as a whole), or

should the task or material be learned in separate parts or chunks? Gagné argued

that procedural material (material organized into a series of steps) should be analyzed

and divided into subunits, with the trainees mastering each subunit before

performing the entire procedure. Actually, the answer to which method is most effective appears to depend

on the nature of the task to be learned. When the subtasks are relatively easy to

perform and are well organized (interrelated), the whole method is superior. Otherwise,

the part method has proven to be more effective.54 For example, operating

a chain saw involves adding fuel, holding it properly, starting it, making various

cuts, and turning it off. Given that these subtasks are interrelated, it makes sense

that they be learned together. The task of supervising others, however, includes

subtasks such as scheduling, evaluating employee performance, disciplining, planning,

and delegating work. These subtasks are less closely related and would best

be learned by focusing on each subtask separately. To teach someone how to

drive a stick shift automobile, which approach would you use?

Overlearning is defined as practice beyond the point at which the material or

task is mastered.55 For example, an instructor teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation

(CPR) in a first-aid course would be using overlearning if trainees were

“revived” a training dummy.

The rationale in favor of overlearning is threefold. First, overlearning may

improve performance in a variety of different situations. By developing stronger

associations between the parts of a task (or unit of knowledge), it is less likely

that situational changes will interfere with learning. Second, overlearning provides

additional practice in using a skill or knowledge when there is little opportunity

for doing so in the job setting.56 For example, overlearning the procedure

to handle an engine flameout would be useful in pilot training because pilots

don’t often face this situation when flying. Third, overlearning should make

what is learned more automatic, thereby improving performance in stressful or

emergency situations.57 For instance, soldiers repeatedly practice their maneuvers

and tasks, so when orders come to attack, these tasks will be second nature and

can be performed quickly and correctly.

Research indicates that overlearning does, in fact, increase retention of what

is learned.58 As stated by Daniel Willingham, “Practice makes perfect—But only

if you practice beyond the point of perfection.”59 Quite obviously, its major

drawback is that overlearning can increase the time and expense of training.

Knowledge of results, or feedback, provides objective information regarding the

adequacy of one’s performance, and it can come from observers, the performer,

or the task itself. A sizable body of research suggests that feedback enhances

learning and retention.60 Trainers and educators generally agree that feedback

improves learning. However, a meta-analysis of research on feedback interventions

found that feedback actually decreased performance in one-third of the studies

examined.61 Avraham Kluger and Angelo DeNisi theorize that this has to do

with the level of control individuals go through when learning and performing

tasks. They argue that individuals proceed through three hierarchical levels of

control (task learning, task motivation, and metatasks or self-regulatory actions),

and that feedback changes the individual’s locus of attention to a particular level

of control. They suggest that the effectiveness of feedback decreases as the individual

moves through the levels from task learning to task motivation to metatasks.

Kluger and DeNisi’s theory supports the use of feedback during skill and knowledge acquisition, but suggests that feedback is
less effective (and may even

harm performance) when individuals perform back on the job.

learners determine whether they’ve performed something correctly, and

motivational—when it is valued by the learner or indicates valued outcomes.62

The effectiveness of feedback also seems to depend on how it is provided,

especially in regard to timing and specificity. To ensure that the learner clearly

understands the relationship between the feedback and the behavior, it should

be provided as soon as possible after the behavior occurs. Furthermore, the

judgments individuals make about feedback (whether it is connected to factors

inside or outside the trainee’s control) can affect efficacy beliefs, with feedback

attributed to factors within the trainee’s control increasing perceptions of

efficacy. In addition, recall the research cited earlier that found that the impact

of feedback may be moderated by elements of the individual’s personality

(i.e., cognitive playfulness).63

Finally, task sequencing suggests that tasks and knowledge can be learned more

effectively if what is to be learned is divided into subtasks that are arranged and

taught in an appropriate sequence. Gagné and colleagues provide guidelines for

how task sequencing can help in learning intellectual skills, motor skills, and attitudes.

64 The success of an intelligent medical diagnosis-tutoring program called

GUIDON supports this approach, as does the research of Philip Decker and

others on behavior-modeling training.65 However, more research is needed before

definitive conclusions are reached about the effectiveness of task sequencing.66

To summarize, research on the various conditions of practice offers some

practical guidelines for designing more effective HRD interventions. In general,

overlearning, feedback, and practice sessions spaced over time tend to increase

learning.

Retention of What Is Learned

The goal of training goes beyond ensuring that the trainee learns the task or

material being presented. It is equally important that newly learned material is

retained. Three additional issues that influence retention are the meaningfulness

of material, the degree of original learning, and interference.

The meaningfulness of material is the extent to which it is rich in associations

for the individual learner. For example, a new way of soldering circuits

might be quite significant to an electronics enthusiast, yet absolutely meaningless

to a professional athlete or hair stylist.

and remember.67 For example, college humanities students were asked to rate

the meaningfulness of three Bible passages. Later in that same period, they were

given a pop quiz, and asked to recall as much of each passage as possible. For two

of the three readings, greater meaningfulness significantly related to greater recall

of the content of the passages.68 In general, then, training should be designed to

be more meaningful to employees to encourage learning retention. Overviews of

topics at the beginning of training sessions can help trainees understand the course content as a whole. Using examples and
terminology familiar to trainees

and mnemonic devices (such as creating a word out of the first letters of items in

a list) also increase meaningfulness by providing more associations.69 Textbook

writers (us included) often seek to use this principle when introducing and presenting

material in each chapter.

The degree of original learning also influences learning retention.70 The

more effectively information is initially learned, the more likely it will be

retained—after all, you can’t retain something you never had to begin with.

Though this is not surprising, it does reinforce the research on overlearning,

massed versus spaced practice, and whole versus part learning as ways to ensure

initial learning.

Interference can also affect the extent to which learning is retained. Interference

can be of two types.71 First, material or skills learned before the training session

can inhibit recall of the newly learned material. For example, an accountant

who is an expert on the New York tax code may have difficulty remembering

recent instruction regarding the tax code and procedures for Florida. The

accountant’s prior knowledge is so well learned that he or she may automatically

follow New York procedures when helping a client who must file in Florida.

Second, information learned after a training session may also interfere with

retention. For example, a firefighter trained to operate the power ladder on the

city’s older fire trucks may have difficulty retaining that knowledge if a different

sequence of steps must be learned for the same operation on a newer fire truck.

Both types of interference are similar in that the learner is required to make

different responses to the same situation. The more responses one learns, the

greater the chances for interference in learning to occur.

Transfer of Training
Transfer of training is an important and recurring theme in the HRD literature.

72 A main goal of HRD is to ensure that employees perform their jobs

effectively. In addition to learning and retaining new material, employees must

also use it on the job to improve performance. The transfer of training to the job

situation is critically important to the success of HRD efforts.

Transfer can take different forms. Positive transfer occurs when job performance

improves as a result of training. Zero transfer occurs when there is no

change in job performance as a result of training. Negative transfer occurs when

job performance worsens as a result of training. Negative transfer may seem

unlikely, but recall the detrimental effects interference can have on learning

and performance. Tennis players, for example, may find that their tennis shots

become less accurate after learning how to play racquetball. Although the two

sports seem similar, an accurate tennis shot requires a locked wrist, yet racquetball

players use their wrists during the swing. Therefore, the player’s tennis stroke

may become more “wristy” after learning racquetball, leading to less accurate

shots in tennis.

Another distinction that should be made is near transfer versus far transfer.

Near transfer involves the ability to directly apply on the job what has been learned in training, with little adjustment or
modification; far transfer has to do

with expanding upon or using what was learned in training in new or creative

ways.73 Other writers have referred to this as a distinction between skill reproduction

and skill generalization.74 For example, in a study of assertiveness training,

a negative relationship was observed between near and far transfer: trainees

who had done well demonstrating their mastery of the training content did less

well in a surprise test of their ability to demonstrate transfer outside of training,

and vice versa.75 Context obviously plays a part in whether an organization

should be more concerned with near transfer, far transfer, or both, but in most

cases, far transfer is the best indicator that training has been successful.

Timothy Baldwin and Kevin Ford developed a model of the training transfer

process.76 The model suggests that training inputs—including trainee characteristics,

training design, and the work environment—affect learning, retention, and

transfer, with trainee characteristics and the work environment affecting transfer

directly. Baldwin and Ford were critical of the lack of a strong theoretical framework

and the limited number of research studies in this area, because this limited
their ability to generalize findings from studies of transfer of training to organizational

settings. Despite these concerns, these principles and the results of recent

research offer many ideas for maximizing training transfer. These include the use

of identical elements, general principles, stimulus variability, and the degree of

support for transfer in the work environment.

Identical Elements. The principle of identical elements, first proposed by

Thorndike and Woodworth in 1901, suggests that the more similar the training

and the performance situations are in terms of the stimuli present and responses

required, the more likely it is that training transfer will occur.77 For example, if

customer service representatives are expected to handle complaints from angry,

impatient customers, practice with such customers (possibly via role playing) can

improve the transfer of training. But if the only examples used in training are

customers who are polite, reasonable, and patient, training transfer to the job is

less likely.

Similarity has two dimensions: physical and psychological fidelity. Physical

fidelity is the extent to which the conditions of the training program, such as

equipment, tasks, and surroundings, mirror those in the performance situation.

Building a highly realistic airline cockpit simulator, with the same controls,

appearance, and physical sensations as experienced in true flight, would be an

attempt to achieve a high level of physical fidelity. Psychological fidelity is the

extent to which trainees attach similar meanings to both the training and performance

situations. Psychological fidelity is encouraged in a learning experience

that imposes training task time limits that are similar to those on the job.

There is some evidence that psychological fidelity is more important to training

transfer than physical fidelity, but more research is needed to support this

claim.78

The principle of identical elements is particularly relevant to simulation

training, such as with the use of case studies, business games, or role plays. However,

increasing fidelity often involves increasing complexity and costs, which determine the supportiveness of the work
environment during needs assessment,

and that areas found wanting should be modified to increase the chances

training will transfer back to the workplace. Also, organizations that promote a

continuous-learning environment stand a better chance of having what is

learned transfer back to the job.85 Recently, Martin found that peer support
was an important determinant of whether or not training transferred in a

corporate field setting. The opportunity to perform what has been learned back on the job is an

important element of the work environment. Work by Kevin Ford and colleagues

is useful here. They define the opportunity to perform as “the extent to

which a trainee is provided with or actively obtains work experiences relevant

to tasks for which he or she was trained.”91 The opportunity to perform is influenced

by both the organization and the individual. Ford and colleagues investigated

the effects of three groups of variables (organizational level, work level, and

individual characteristics) on the opportunity to perform. They found that subjects

did have different opportunities to perform trained tasks on the job and that

the variables that most influenced their opportunities to do so included supervisors’

attitudes toward training, work group support, and the trainees’ self-efficacy

and cognitive ability.