Roger Kaufman is an associate professor in the Department of Business Administration at the University of California, Berkeley. It has served as an important research field for strategic planning in public and private organisations and is a key player in building effective training and performance support tools. This discussion on education planning explains how to integrate the organizational model (OEM) into the planning of the education system. [Sources: 2, 3, 5, 10]
Organizational success depends on a holistic approach that provides added value to internal stakeholders and improves the performance of external organizations. There is an important focus on the social value for all stakeholders, but the organisational elements of the institution are equally important and must be linked and coordinated in the strategic plan. [Sources: 11]
Gilliam (1994) describes the major changes that organizations face today and in the future, including the shift from manufacturing to a service-oriented economy and the increasing influence of international markets. A major advantage of effective education and development, she said, is that it can provide organizations with a pool of talent for future promotions within the organization. Participation in a needs assessment can improve the satisfaction of employers and participants with training, justify the cost of training and share important data with organisations. [Sources: 6]
Allison and Rossett (model TNA), proposed in 1987 and adapted by Etling and Maloney (1995). The authors also present the benefits of a needs analysis that, according to their model, takes into account the needs of employees, customers, suppliers, partners, other stakeholders and the organization. [Sources: 4, 6]
The OEM model provides a framework for assessing whether we have a good balance between the needs of the individual elements of a subsystem and the overall organisation as a whole. Each needs to be precisely defined and correlated with the others so that what we use, do, produce and deliver can provide added value to external customers and society. Changes to external environments should be monitored continuously and can alter or update the function of individual element subsystems at a certain level of function complexity and / or complexity. [Sources: 6, 7, 11]
The analysis of improved performance also includes the inclusion of organizational analyses, which is rare in the description of job analysis. Nolan (1996) adds to this by arguing that performance analysis can be based on the organizational structure of the organization and not on the individual elements themselves, and this should be viewed in the context of an analysis of overall performance, not just the performance of individual elements. [Sources: 6, 10]
Clark (2003) supports the model analysis by claiming that it identifies criteria that meet performance requirements at the organizational level at the individual process level. The model includes questions such as “What are the key elements that define development and what produces the organization?.” Using these questions to examine each element, the models identify gaps between poor and good performers. Through this analysis, analysts using this model have closely studied the five OEM variables to determine what organizations are doing and doing. [Sources: 0, 6, 7]
According to the authors, the reason for implementing TNA is to acknowledge real problems within the organization, to receive support from top management, to develop evaluation data and to decide on the costs and benefits of training. Companies must therefore design their human resources management to meet the needs of building the skills needed to improve performance. During the development phase, the instruction designers and developers create and assemble concepts for the design phase. [Sources: 3, 6]
In 1998, I founded a team of Human Performance Professionals to advise organizations on strategic planning and performance improvement. I first met Roger Kaufman when I attended a training session at the University of California, the Center for Human Resources Management (CHRM) in Berkeley. I share the story about him here because he was a valuable influence and resource. [Sources: 1, 8]
Analysis, synthesis and implementation provide a model for needs assessment, which defines the results to be achieved at the social, organisational and individual level of performance. Gary Dessler (1998) was a participant in the training, which consisted of five steps that began with a brief introduction to the “Organizational Elements Model” (OEM) approach to human performance. The specificity of the OEM approach has its roots in Roger Kaufman’s work on child development, but differs in its ability to influence indirect effects on process and behavior. OEM is concerned with the holistic perception of the world by a child and has a particular focus on the relationship between the child’s cognitive and emotional development and its behavior and its emotional and cognitive development. [Sources: 6, 7, 9]
Swanson (1994), for his part, divides task analysis methods into task types. In this case, the job and process analysis take into account the student, the organization and the task to create the training. [Sources: 6]
In contrast to other training areas, the OEM model is the subject of a lot of research, theoretical and development, especially in terms of its conception and implementation. However, it has been observed that OEM models are good at assessing the capabilities needed for the whole. Within the framework mentioned above and the literature at the TNA level, we are able to identify three types of needs assessments. [Sources: 6]
Sources:
[0]: http://bahrsshepherds.com/kim%20e-port/acts1234.htm
[1]: https://eppic.biz/2013/10/04/my-1st-friday-favorite-guru-roger-kaufman/
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Kaufman
[3]: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/addie-model-safety-training-how-does-yours-measure-up-terry-penney
[4]: https://extension.unr.edu/publication.aspx?PubID=3557
[5]: http://www.realincomes.org.uk/decisions.htm
[6]: https://silo.tips/download/identifying-training-needs-of-operating-core-staff-a-case-of-the-gambia-ports-au
[7]: https://www.wowessays.com/free-samples/good-example-of-organizational-elements-model-essay/
[8]: https://alchetron.com/Roger-Kaufman
[9]: https://www.megalore.org/www/Netclass/itechistory/Itech.htm
[10]: https://eric.ed.gov/?q=planning&ff1=autKaufman%2C+Roger
[11]: https://nanopdf.com/download/pathfinders-roger-kaufman-and-dale-brethrower_pdf
Transactional Distance (Michael Moore)
In this essay, I use a tool called 4 (r) to examine the work of teachers and educators as the doors of schools and universities close and lessons abruptly go online. In an online environment, the impact of online education on the learning experiences of teachers, pupils and students is examined. [Sources: 5, 7]
Moore defines transactional distance as the psychological and communicative space between teacher and student. He defines it as a function of three variables and recognizes that dialogue, structure and autonomy determine the relationship between teachers and learners and their experience of learning at a distance. Moore suggests that in an online environment, there is a “transactional” distance between the teacher, the student, and the learning environment. In the context of distance learning, transactional education means an environment that has the effect of spatially separating the teacher-learner relationship. [Sources: 1, 3, 8, 12]
In 1996, Bischoff, Bisconer, Kooker, and Woods applied Moore’s theory of transactional distance to the hiring of health professionals. Relative Proximity Theory borrows from the gaps that are necessary for analysis to achieve a “transactional” distance between the actual and the desired states. Kang and Gyorke (2008) deepened the relationship between Moore and his Transtatic Distance Theory by comparing it to the CHAT (Cultural Historical Activity Theory). [Sources: 7, 9, 13]
Moore and Kearsley confirmed the most commonly cited definition of transactional distance in education. They concluded that Moore’s transactional distance theory can be applied to distance learning in a variety of contexts, including health care, employment, education, and the workplace. [Sources: 6, 13]
Moore is currently working to bring the past and the historical background of distance education into the present through the Museum of Distance Education and Technology in Second Life. What we have read so far shows Michael Moore’s commitment to improving and delivering superior quality distance learning. This story lives on in the form of the Michael Moore Institute for Distance Learning at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. [Sources: 1, 7, 13]
The Zhang scale of transactional distance provides a numerical measure of transactional distance based on the five-point Likert scale. It was revised and refinements and validations were used in structural equation modeling. [Sources: 2, 7]
A number of researchers have used Moore’s theory to measure the transactional distance of students who conduct research in virtual groups and collaborative environments. The scale has built up a series of statistically valid and reliable scales for measuring the transactive distance. [Sources: 7]
Moore built on Wedemeyer and others by introducing transactional distance (1983-1993), which, due to the distance of technology, represents the perceived gap between students and teachers. Moore’s explanation of the theory of transactive distance states that “the distance between education and transactional distance is a psychological construct that depends on the relationship between teacher and student, not vice versa. Moore posits that transactional distance is embedded in the cognitive space between teacher and student that must be crossed, and that potential misunderstandings between teacher and student are excluded. Through his Transactions and Distances (TD) model, Moore claims that DE is about teachers and students acting together in an environment where uniqueness is separation. [Sources: 0, 4, 6, 12]
In the early 1980s, Michael G. Moore began to use the term transactional distance and incorporate this idea into his teaching concepts. It was not until 1993 that the theory of transactional distance was fully implemented. Based on this theory, Moore concluded that there are two constructs associated with the distance between education and transactive distance: psychological and geographic constructs, including physical distance (e.g. distance from technology) and geographical distance. [Sources: 10, 11]
Around the turn of the millennium, distance learning had developed from a synonym for distance learning to a largely web-based distance learning. Moore’s model of transactional distance broadened the field’s horizon and opened up a way to understand distance as a variable that changes over the course of the lesson. This opened up a wide range of possibilities for conceptualized distance, such as transactive distance and distance from technology, and other forms of distance between education and the world around it. By the end of his career, his theory of distance transactions had paved the way for the conceptualization of distance in both physical and geographical terms, and as these variables change over time as lessons progress, horoscopes expanded in this area. [Sources: 7, 10, 12]
This provides a means to investigate the understanding and perception of the sudden transition to distance learning. As we process Moore’s work on transactional distance learning in one-way online teaching methods, we note that one of the most important aspects of his model of distance learning is to look at the interplay between structure, dialogue, and learning autonomy through the lens of creativity. [Sources: 5]
Moore (2012, 1993, 1989) may recognize that collaboration influences the way we structure and communicate our seminars, and certainly helps to reduce the transactional distance between students and teachers. He could see how we can minimize transactional distance by supporting students or teachers in their learning experiences as virtual educators. [Sources: 5]
Sources:
[0]: http://amandaszapkiw.com/elearning/principles-of-design/module-1/moores_model_of_interaction.html
[1]: https://wikieducator.org/WikiEdProfessional_DE_Concepts/Michael_Moore
[2]: https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/24916/32767
[3]: https://blog.tcea.org/transactional-distance-theory/
[4]: https://futuremakers.nz/2020/08/04/rethinking-distance/
[5]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2020.582561/full
[6]: https://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer232/johnston232.html
[7]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_distance
[8]: https://k3hamilton.com/LTech/transactional.html
[9]: https://corksea.wordpress.com/2013/03/02/edtech-504-synthesis-of-transactional-distance-theory-summer-2012/
[10]: https://rampages.us/caoliver06/2016/06/02/transactional-distance-theory/
[11]: https://sites.google.com/a/nau.edu/learning-theories-etc547-spring-2011/theory/theory-of-transactional-distance
[12]: https://distance-educator.com/introduction-to-distance-education-theorists-and-theories-michael-g-moore/
[13]: http://www.stirlinglaw.com/deborah/stir4.htm