Ogl 554 final
deefer
module3example.pptx6/24/25
Welcome to the NNPP Scenario Design Training
Goals:
Interactive, job-relevant instruction
Engage learners using adult learning theory
Shannon Rolsheim
Welcome everyone! I’m Shannon Rolsheim, and today’s session is focused on developing your scenario-based instructional skills. We’ll use our redesigned “Introduction to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP)” lecture as our case study. The goal is to help you move from passive content delivery toward interactive, job-relevant instruction that engages learners using adult learning theory.
I created this updated training because our original NNPP session, though rich in content, was built for lecture format and contained material unsuitable for public distribution. This version builds on that core but shifts toward instructor development. You’ll learn how to identify and apply scenario-based learning in Radiological Controls Technician Qualification School (RCTQS) settings, including how to design and justify your own instructional scenario using NNPP content.
As instructors at RCTQS, you play a critical role in shaping the next generation of Radiological Controls Technicians (RCTs). You’re not just passing along procedures; you're preparing individuals to think clearly and act decisively in high-stakes environments.
This training was created with that in mind. It’s not just about meeting a new standard or checking a box but about giving you practical tools that make your instruction more engaging, more relevant, and more reflective of the real-world challenges our technicians will face.
When learners see themselves in the scenarios, when they can picture the decisions they’ll need to make on the job, they learn more deeply and retain more. This approach not only benefits your students, but also supports your professional growth as an instructional leader in the nuclear program.
Why this Training?
Organizational Alignment and Rationale
Mission Alignment
Instructor Need
Student Feedback
Training Response
This training was built to support you, the instructors leading the next generation of RCTs.
The mission of RCTQS is to train RCTs to perform safely and accurately in high-stakes nuclear environments. Everything we do, from instructional design to delivery, supports that mission by preparing technicians to think critically and act with precision.
Our recent needs assessment revealed two key issues. First, instructors shared that they need more support in developing and applying scenario-based teaching methods. Second, both current and recent students expressed a clear desire for more real-world, judgment-based training, something that moves beyond lectures and into applied decision-making.
This training module directly responds to those needs. It equips instructors with practical tools to create and implement instructional scenarios that mirror real operational challenges. By embedding scenario-based learning into our lessons, we’re enhancing relevance, promoting retention, and reinforcing the safety-focused thinking that defines our work in the Navy nuclear program.
Course Objectives
Define the core principles of adult learning theory and their relevance to technical instruction.
Explain the purpose and benefits of scenario-based learning.
Identify appropriate opportunities for integrating scenario-based instruction into the RCTQS curriculum.
Develop a lesson plan that includes scenario-based strategies aligned with learning objectives.
Implement a revised instructional scenario in a training setting.
Evaluate the effectiveness of scenario-based instruction using feedback and reflection tools.
Alright, let’s take a quick step back and look at the big picture of what this course is all about. By the end of the full training course, instructors will be able to:
Define the core principles of adult learning theory and their relevance to technical instruction.
Explain the purpose and benefits of scenario-based learning.
Identify appropriate opportunities for integrating scenario-based instruction into the RCTQS curriculum.
Develop a lesson plan that includes scenario-based strategies aligned with learning objectives.
Implement a revised instructional scenario in a training setting.
Evaluate the effectiveness of scenario-based instruction using feedback and reflection tools.
Over the course of this training, we will have walked through a full journey, from understanding the foundations of adult learning theory, all the way to implementing and sustaining scenario-based instruction in our own classrooms.
We started in Module 1 by breaking down the core principles of andragogy, why adults learn the way they do, how learning styles differ, and why relevance is so critical in technical instruction like ours. Then in Module 2, we dove into the what and why of scenario-based learning: how it works, why it’s effective, and what it looks like in action across technical settings. Module 3, which is what this module is, will focus on designing those scenarios and making sure they’re aligned with our learning objectives and structured appropriately using Bloom’s Taxonomy. In Module 4, which is also what we are doing to an extent, we will get hands-on with adapting our current lessons, working together to give and receive feedback, and anticipating the common hurdles we might face during rollout. Module 5 is all about implementation: actually delivering these lessons, gathering student feedback, and reflecting on what worked and what we could tweak. And finally, Module 6 will bring it home with strategies for keeping the momentum going: things like peer coaching, building a support network among instructors, and creating sustainable practices that stick over time.
By the end of this course, you should feel confident in defining adult learning principles, designing and applying scenario-based strategies, and evaluating their effectiveness in a real training environment. And more than anything, I hope you leave with tools that make your instruction more dynamic, more relevant, and more effective for the next generation of RCTs.
4
Learning Objectives
Describe the components of strong instructional scenarios
Analyze existing content for scenario opportunities
Select suitable objectives for scenario development
Create an outline of an instructional scenario
Justify design decisions using adult learning theory
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Provide peer feedback using a rubric
6.
In this module, we’ll explore the anatomy of effective instructional scenarios. You’ll analyze training objectives, redesign content for deeper engagement, and provide and receive peer feedback. By the end, you’ll have a complete instructional scenario outline drawn from NNPP training, tailored for your RCTQS classroom.
These objectives mirror what you’ll practice today. As we work through the slides, you’ll build skills in scenario design, evaluation, and reflection. By the end of this session, you’ll be able to:
Describe the essential components of a well-constructed instructional scenario
Analyze an existing RCTQS lesson (e.g., Intro to NNPP) to determine where a scenario could enhance learning
Select a training objective appropriate for scenario-based learning
Create a written outline of an instructional scenario aligned with a selected RCTQS learning outcome
Justify your scenario design decisions using adult learning principles
Provide constructive peer feedback on a scenario outline using a structured rubric
Why Scenarios Work
In NNPP Training
Why should we build scenarios into our Intro to NNPP training? Because the NNPP’s real-world complexity makes it perfect for immersive learning. Scenarios make abstract concepts, like cradle-to-grave nuclear stewardship, concrete. They also help reinforce the safety culture by walking learners through judgment-based decisions.
This approach aligns directly with the adult learning theory developed by Malcolm Knowles. According to Knowles, adult learners benefit most when training is:
Relevant to their work
Problem-centered, not content-centered
Built on the learner’s prior experiences
Focused on self-direction and internal motivation
Scenario-based learning checks all these boxes. When we give RCTQS instructors tools to simulate realistic dilemmas, we honor their experience and empower them to become active participants in both teaching and learning.
Image taken from: https://dev.pressbooks.usnh.edu/teachingandlearninginadulthood/chapter/traditional-adult-learning-theory-and-models/
6
Rationale and Goals
So, Why Scenario-Based Instruction?
Supports adult learning
Increases learner engagement
Prepares learners for real-world performance
1.
2.
3.
Now that we’ve covered what you’ll be able to do by the end of this module, let’s talk about why we’re using scenarios as the central instructional method.
Scenario-based learning is especially well suited to our environment here at RCTQS and within the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.
First, it supports adult learning by anchoring instruction in real-world relevance. Adult learners are more motivated when they can clearly connect what they’re learning to what they’ll actually do on the job. Scenarios bring that connection to life.
Second, they boost engagement. Instead of sitting through a passive lecture, learners are placed in a role, often one they already relate to, and are challenged to think, act, and reflect. This interaction increases retention and deepens understanding.
And third, they prepare learners for actual performance. In our high-stakes, high-accountability environments, knowing facts isn’t enough, technicians must be ready to apply judgment under pressure. Scenarios help cultivate that readiness.
So with that in mind, let’s look more closely at what actually makes a scenario effective, especially in our unique training context.
7
Anatomy of a Strong Scenario
A specific RCTQS objective
A realistic Navy or Shipyard setting
A decision point or problem trigger
Learner-driven action
Clear consequences and discussion
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A well-constructed scenario includes:
A specific RCTQS objective (e.g., “Explain the organizational structure of the NNPP”)
A realistic Navy or shipyard setting (e.g., radiation level anomaly in drydock)
A decision point or problem trigger
Learner-driven action
Clear consequences and discussion
This structure is drawn from widely accepted instructional design principles, including case-based learning, Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction, and Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction. It ensures your scenario is engaging, relevant, and instructionally sound.
Insert mini quiz here:
Purpose: Reinforce understanding of scenario elements.
Sample Questions:
Which of the following is NOT a key element of a strong instructional scenario?
a. Decision point
b. Slide deck
c. Triggering event
d. Realistic setting
True or False: Scenarios should always have only one correct outcome.
Which instructional theory emphasizes starting with real-world problems to engage learners?
a. Behaviorism
b. Constructivism
c. Andragogy
d. Cognitive Load Theory
Answers: 1-b, 2-False, 3-b
Objective: “Apply PPE protocols to radiological deficiencies.”
"You are the RCT. During containment work, a crew member enters without proper PPE. You notice midway through the operation. What actions do you take, and how do you document the event?"
Objective: “Understand PPE protocols.”
"Sailor Johnson forgets gloves. What should he have done?"
Scenario Quality: A Quick Comparison
Weak Scenario
Strong Scenario
Let’s compare two scenarios designed around a PPE protocol learning objective.
The version on the left asks a simple recall question. It’s static and doesn’t reflect decision-making or role ownership.
The version on the right puts the learner in a realistic, time-sensitive situation where they have to assess, act, and justify. That’s what makes it a strong scenario. Our goal is to move learners beyond ‘what should be done’ to ‘what would you do, and why?’
1-B, 2-False, 3-B
Deconstruct a Scenario
Identify the learning objective
Map the problem trigger
Describe the decision point
Think about possible outcomes
Critical thinking and reinforcement of safety culture
10
Activity
LO1: Describe Components
Let’s walk through a real example adapted from our Intro to NNPP training:
Scenario: “A Radiological Controls Technician (RCT) discovers elevated radiation readings in a drydock bay after a routine survey.”
Now, open your worksheet and work with a partner to:
Identify the associated learning objective (e.g., recognize abnormal readings and initiate the proper response).
Map the triggering event: what initiated the learner’s response?
Describe the decision point: what should the learner do next?
Think about the possible outcomes: what if they follow protocol vs. skip a step?
How does this scenario support critical thinking and reinforce our safety culture?
Deconstruct a Scenario
Identify the learning objective
Map the problem trigger
Describe the decision point
Think about possible outcomes
Critical thinking and reinforcement of safety culture
11
Activity
LO1: Describe Components
Let’s walk through a real example adapted from our Intro to NNPP training. This activity supports Learning Objective 1: describing the components of a strong instructional scenario. As we break these down together, think about how each part, from the trigger to the outcome, helps learners engage and build critical thinking. This is the foundation we’ll build on in the next design steps.
Scenario: “A Radiological Controls Technician (RCT) discovers elevated radiation readings in a drydock bay after a routine survey.”
Use the whiteboard or projector to model the first two steps, then prompt learners to complete the rest in small groups. Offer guiding questions aloud to encourage thoughtful analysis before transitioning.
Associated learning objective:
Guided questions:
“What is the core skill or knowledge the RCT is using in this situation?”
“Which part of their qualification does this relate to?”
“If this were your trainee, what performance standard would you expect them to meet in this moment?”
Recognize abnormal radiation readings and initial appropriate radiological response protocol, including notification, area control, and documentation.
Bloom’s Level - Applying: from learning objective 3. Select a training objective appropriate for scenario-based learning.
Triggering event:
Guided questions:
“What specifically caused the technician to stop and take notice?”
“Was this part of routine work, or something unexpected?”
“Is the trigger data-driven, environment-based, or procedural?”
The RCT detects elevated radiation levels that exceed expected background values during a routine survey. This triggers the need for immediate assessment and response.
Decision Point:
Guided questions:
“If you were the RCT, what would you need to decide next?”
“Is there a standard procedure? What makes this decision high stakes?”
“Could someone hesitate here, and what might cause that?”
The technician must decide whether to:
Immediately halt operations and notify chain of command
Isolate and secure the area to prevent personnel exposure, and
Initiate required contamination/radiation level verification and documentation procedures
Possible Outcomes:
Guided questions:
“What happens if the technician does everything right? What’s the ideal chain of events?”
“What could go wrong if they delay or miss a step?”
“What systems or people are impacted by their choices?”
Action:
Follows protocol
Outcome: The area is secured quickly, exposure risk is mitigated, the event is documented and reported per NNPP standards. Root cause can be investigated. Reinforces safety and procedural discipline.
Action:
Skips or delays a step
Outcome: Personnel could be exposed, the radiation source may remain uncontrolled, regulatory compliance could be violated, and trust in safety culture may be undermined. Possible event reportable to NAVSEA or higher authority.
How does this scenario support critical thinking and reinforce safety culture?
Guided questions:
“What judgment skills does this scenario require?”
“How does this situation reinforce the idea that everyone is responsible for safety?”
“Why might this be a better learning tool than just reading a procedure?”
Requires the RCT to analyze data (radiation readings) and interpret whether action is needed, applying both technical knowledge and judgment.
Reinforces the expectation of procedural compliance even in routine settings.
Encourages discussion of “what-if” consequences that highlight the importance of vigilance, documentation, and chain-of-command communication.
Demonstrates how decision-making under uncertainty is part of the technician’s role in upholding NNPP safety standards.
Deconstruct a Scenario
Identify the learning objective
Map the problem trigger
Describe the decision point
Think about possible outcomes
Critical thinking and reinforcement of safety culture
12
Activity
LO1: Describe Components
Great work discussing that example together. Now let’s shift the focus from analyzing a shared scenario to developing your own.
We’ve seen how a routine drydock survey turned into a critical learning opportunity. Now, think about a lesson or objective you teach regularly, how could it be made more engaging or realistic through a scenario?
“Lesson Analysis” worksheet
Take out the “Lesson Analysis” worksheet. You’ll use it to pinpoint a training objective, identify a possible decision point, and brainstorm a situation that could trigger active learning.
Use your worksheet to:
Identify the learning objective (e.g., describe early program decisions and their long-term impact).
Pinpoint the triggering event: what’s pushing this decision?
Discuss the decision point: what are the pros and cons of each reactor design?
Explore possible outcomes: what might happen based on different recommendations?
Link this back to current-day implications: how does this scenario deepen understanding of why the NNPP operates the way it does?
Let’s get started!
From Analysis to Design
You've practiced identifying key scenario components.
Now, it's time to create your own.
Let’s shift from evaluating to designing.
So far, we’ve focused on deconstructing existing scenarios, mapping the problem trigger, decision point, and outcomes. Now it’s time to flip that. You’ll be the designer. We’re shifting from analysis to creation, pulling together everything we’ve explored so far to build something meaningful.
15
From Objective to Scenario
Activity
LO2: Analyze existing content
Before that though, let’s work through a real training objective adapted from Intro to NNPP: “History of the NNPP”. This one shifts focus from radiation response to historical understanding and strategic decision-making. Learning Objective 2 asks us to analyze existing content for scenario opportunities. In this section, we’re taking traditional lecture material, like this Rickover history slide, and examining how we might convert it into an engaging, applied experience. This helps us bridge between passive content and active learning.
Keep in mind the next two slides are directly from the lectures as is the narrative I will be reciting with it. While we are going through this scenario, I want you to think about how this scenario could evolve.
Invite learners to consider how this scenario could evolve: What would a follow-up decision point look like (e.g., Nautilus design challenges)? Use this historical anchor to show how scenario-based training builds layered understanding.
16
A typical slide from the old NNPP lecture (e.g., "History of NNPP")
Case Example: NNPP Lecture Slide
In the late 1940s, the United States government established the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) in 1946. The Commission was granted full responsibility for the development and regulation of atomic energy within the country. At that time, the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP) was not considered a high priority by the AEC.
Despite this, the Bureau of Ships within the U.S. Navy recognized the potential application of atomic energy for naval propulsion. Although the idea of using atomic energy for ship propulsion was not a new concept, the necessary technology to construct and operate a nuclear-powered ship did not yet exist.
17
A typical slide from the old NNPP lecture (e.g., "History of NNPP")
Case Example: NNPP Lecture Slide
Nonetheless, the basic requirements for such a system were understood. It would need to generate adequate power output, operate safely and reliably, and consist of durable equipment suitable for operation by Navy personnel.
18
From Objective to Scenario
Activity
Hyman G. Rickover
Admiral, Director of Naval Reactors
Washington, DC
LO2: Analyze existing content
Before I gave you this example, I asked you to think about how we could evolve this scenario. Here is an example of what I meant:
To better integrate adult learning theory and make it more interactive, an idea would be to present the information in a scenario first. See below scenario:
Scenario: “It’s 1950. You’re part of a Navy engineering team tasked with selecting which nuclear reactor design to pursue: a pressurized water reactor or a liquid metal-cooled reactor. You’ve just received word that the Soviet Union has detonated its first atomic device. Your team must make a recommendation to leadership, knowing that urgency, safety, and long-term operability are all critical factors.”
Invite learners to consider how this scenario could evolve: What would a follow-up decision point look like (e.g., Nautilus design challenges)? Use this historical anchor to show how scenario-based training builds layered understanding.
What are some examples you came up with?
Activity
Design your scenario
Choose your
objective
Frame a learner
role
Set a scene
Build a
challenge
1.
2.
3.
4.
LO3/LO4: Select suitable objectives & create outlines
Now it’s your turn. These next steps target Learning Objectives 3 and 4: selecting appropriate objectives and creating a clear scenario outline. You’ll now choose a specific training outcome and use the anatomy of a strong scenario to frame a challenge that reflects that learning goal in action. Use the scenario design template to:
Choose an NNPP or RCTQS objective
Frame a learner role (e.g., RCT, instructor, auditor)
Set a scene (shipyard inspection, drill, handover brief)
Build a challenge with multiple outcomes
You’ll use this to facilitate learning and discussion in class.
Justify your scenario
LO5: Justify design decisions
Time for some reflection. Why did you make the design choices you did? Which principles of adult learning (relevance, self-direction, problem-orientation) are present?
Here we focus on Learning Objective 5, justifying your design decisions using adult learning theory. This is your chance to think critically about the structure you’ve created and explain why it will be effective for adult learners in your context.
Use the justification form to explain how your scenario supports engagement and knowledge transfer.
Peer Feedback and Rubric
LO6: Provide peer feedback
Our final objective is about giving meaningful, constructive feedback. As you evaluate your peers’ scenarios, you’ll be using a rubric to reflect on alignment, realism, and impact; and offering suggestions that help strengthen instructional quality across the board. Share your outline with a peer. Use the structured rubric to offer feedback on:
Relevance of the objective
Realism and clarity of scenario
Potential for learner engagement
Alignment with adult learning theory
This collaborative process improves both your scenario and your instructional mindset.
22
Wrap-up and Application
Challenge: Choose one lesson you teach and sketch a basic scenario to pilot next month.
As we close out today’s session, take a moment to reflect on what you’ve created and practiced. You’ve deconstructed real instructional content, built your own scenarios grounded in Navy operational contexts, and given and received meaningful feedback all with the goal of enhancing learner engagement and judgment.
Scenario-based instruction isn’t just about interactivity, it’s about readiness. When we design training that mirrors real-world conditions and decision-making, we help prepare our learners for the complexity and responsibility of their roles in nuclear operations.
So, what’s next? Your challenge going forward is simple but powerful: identify one lesson you currently teach and redesign part of it using a scenario framework. Focus on a single learning objective, build in a realistic challenge, and test it with your next class.
We know this is an ongoing process. With each scenario you refine, you’ll strengthen not just your content but also your learners' confidence and critical thinking. You’ve just added a powerful tool to your instructor toolkit.
Before we close completely, let’s take a moment to summarize some of the key takeaways from today’s training.
Key Takeaways
Scenario-based learning supports adult motivation and engagement
Strong scenarios mirror real Navy environments and decision points
Effective design starts with clear objectives and realistic challenges
Your role as an instructor is to guide, not script, learner decisions
Peer feedback is essential for refining and strengthening scenario design
Before we wrap up, let’s review a few key takeaways from today’s training.
First, scenario-based learning isn’t just a trend, it directly supports how adults learn best. When we connect training to real experiences and decision-making, learners engage more deeply and retain more.
Second, effective scenarios are grounded in the real world, they reflect the challenges and judgment calls our technicians will face in Navy environments. They’re not abstract stories but mirrors of operational reality.
Third, scenario quality begins with clarity: what’s the learning objective, what’s the trigger, and what outcome do we want learners to wrestle with?
And remember, your role as an instructor is to create the space for exploration. You’re not giving answers, you’re crafting situations where learners can build confidence in their decision-making.
Finally, peer feedback is critical. It sharpens your design thinking, exposes blind spots, and models the kind of collaborative improvement we expect in the field.
If you leave today with one idea, let it be this: when we train through scenarios, we’re not just delivering content, we’re preparing minds for complex, real-world work.
Questions?
Training Evaluation Form.
Thank you for being here.
One final note. Before we officially close, I’d like to ask that you take a moment to complete the training evaluation form. Your feedback is incredibly important, not just for improving this module, but for continuing to align our training with your needs and instructional challenges.
I truly appreciate your time, your input, and the energy you brought to today’s session. The work you do at RCTQS has a direct impact on safety, readiness, and mission success, and your willingness to explore new strategies like scenario-based instruction makes a real difference.
If you have any final questions, thoughts, or ideas you’d like to share, now’s the time. Otherwise, thank you again for being here, and I look forward to seeing how you apply this work in your future training sessions.
25
References
Abuhassna, H., Adnan, M. A. B. M., & Awae, F. (2024). Exploring the synergy between instructional design models and learning theories: A systematic literature review. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(2), ep499. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14289
Bengry, S. (2014, September 19). The revolution of self-directed learning [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L9qU7Y-oaA
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9077-3
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G. M., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Orvis, K. A. (2018). Antecedents and outcomes of informal learning behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(2), 203–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9492-y
Digital Learning Institute. (n.d.). Mayer’s 12 principles of multimedia learning [Blog post]. Digital Learning Institute. https://www.digitallearninginstitute.com/blog/mayers-principles-multimedia-learning
Drewery, D. W., Sproule, R., & Pretti, T. J. (2020). Lifelong learning mindset and career success: Evidence from the field of accounting and finance. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 10(3), 567–580. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-03-2019-0041
26
References
Finlay, J. (2010, May 17). Andragogy (Adult Learning) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLoPiHUZbEw
Hammond, C., & Feinstein, L. (2005). The effects of adult learning on self-efficacy. London Review of Education, 3(3), 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460500372754
Karthik, B. S. S., Chandrasekhar, B. B., David, D. R., & Kumar, D. A. K. (2019). Identification of instructional design strategies for an effective e-learning experience. The Qualitative Report, 24(7), 1537–1555. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3870
Khalil, M. K., & Elkhider, I. A. (2016). Applying learning theories and instructional design models for effective instruction. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(2), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00138.2015
Learning, G. (2016). Learning and transfer of training [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEfYUEVKzc0
Masie, E. (2020, September). Talking with the GOAT: From E-learning to empathy with Elliott Masie [Audio podcast]. The L&D Lounge.
Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
Mustafa, B., & Lleshi, S. (2024). The impact of lifelong learning and investments in employee development on employee productivity and performance. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(8), 2024175–2024175.
Noe, R. A. (2020). Employee training and development (8th ed.). McGraw Hill.
27
References
Oakley, B. (2014). Learning how to learn [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erJiJLQcGVg
O’Neill, L. (2022, March 1). Big three learning theories: Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQjN5fT3zbY
Ruhose, J., Thomsen, S. L., & Weilage, I. (2019). The benefits of adult learning: Work-related training, social capital, and earnings. Economics of Education Review, 72, 166–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2019.05.010
Steele, C. (2019, July 8). An essential guide to andragogy for learning businesses. Leading Learning. https://www.leadinglearning.com/guide-to-andragogy/
Stovall, J. (2018). How to get serious about diversity and inclusion in the workplace [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/janet_stovall_how_to_get_serious_about_diversity_and_inclusion_in_the_workplace
Tempelaar, D. T., Niculescu, A., Rienties, B., Gijselaers, W. H., & Giesbers, B. (2012). How achievement emotions impact students’ decisions for online learning, and what precedes those emotions. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 161–169.
Wisc-Online. (2017, October 25). The multimedia principle [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbvpPdxoJiI
Wisc-Online. (2018, October 30). The contiguity principle [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Di3rw-t0BI
