Here is a thought-provoking post from Patrick Dunn of Networked Learning Design about our mysterious job! I recognise myself and my colleagues in some sections, find myself rejecting parts, congratulating myself occasionally and emphatically saying "I wish!" now and again. How about you?
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
The flat world... NOT!
Thanks to George Siemens for this link (via his newsletter) - as he says:
"While "the world is flat" is a wonderful ideal, it's not reality. It's not reality globally...and it's not reality within Canada (or US, Europe, Middle East, Africa, or where ever). Consider this animation of global economic activity (via Creativity Exchange)"'Swhat I've been saying all along. Look at all those spikes! And just take a look at my home continent (Africa) and play spot-the-spike for a moment. It breaks my heart!
Introducing the new technology
Thanks to Ewan McIntosh for the pointer to this funny-but-true look at coming to grips with new technologies (via YouTube). Some of us have been in the position of both the helper and the helpee before, and this scenario will ring a few bells!
Where is your mind?
During the recent Connectivism Conference, Bill Kerr posed the following question:
“What is the mind, where is it and how does it work?”This question formed part of his challenge to connectivism as a learning theory. However, it struck a chord with me last night when my husband read me a report called The Power of Hope in Time magazine of 12 February.
The report is largely based on an anecdote from the author, Scott Haig, MD. He was treating a patient with terminal lung cancer that had metasticised. The patient's brain tissue had been completely replaced by brain tumours, and he had entered the final moments of his life. He had been unconscious and completely incapacitated for some time. Then, suddenly, in the last moments of his life, this man regained consciousness and made very lucid farewells to his family.
As Dr Haig says:
"it wasn't David's brain that woke him up to say goodbye that Friday. His brain had already been destroyed. Tumor metastases don't simply occupy space and press on things, leaving a whole brain. The metastases actually replace tissue. Where that gray stuff grows, the brain is just not there. What woke my patient that Friday was simply his mind, forcing its way through a broken brain"All our advanced, sophisticated understanding of the brain has still left us a long way short of finding, let alone understanding the mind. If a man with effectively no brain still has a mind, still has a will, where does that leave us? Will our on-going study of the physical brain really tell us what we need to know about that which makes us essentially who we are?
There are so many sciences associated with the brain. Haig summarises:
"Neuroanatomy is largely concerned with which spots in the brain do what; which chemicals have which effects at those spots is neurophysiology. Plan on feeding those chemicals to a real person's brain, and you're doing neuropharmacology. Although they are concerned with myriad, complex, amazing things, none of these disciplines seem to find the mind. Somehow it's "smaller" than the tracts, ganglia and nuclei of the brain's gross anatomy--but "bigger" than the cells and molecules of the brain's physiology. We really should have bumped into it on the way down. Yet we have not. Like our own image in still water, however sharp, when we reach to grasp it, it just dissolves."Haig is not the first doctor to be amazed at the power of the mind over the brain. Extensive research identifies that a specific part of the brain deals with such-and-such a skill, then along comes a girl with half a brain or a young man with no brain to speak of ("Is Your Brain Really Necessary," Science Dec. 12, 1980, p. 1232.) and defies all that we think we know. People constantly learn new skills and/or rehabilitate from the loss of physical and neurological functions - the mind forcing the brain into new pathways by dint of will. As Haig says elsewhere in the article, "a mind or will, clearly separate, hovers under the machinery, forcing it toward a goal."
I know it sounds cheesy, but Haig's article made my heart sing - we truly are wonderfully made, and we are a long way from unravelling the mysteries of how it all works! I will quote his final paragrph in its entirety to end this post:
"But many think the mind is only in there--existing somehow in the physical relationship of the brain's physical elements. The physical, say these materialists, is all there is. I fix bones with hardware. As physical as this might be, I cannot be a materialist. I cannot ignore the internal evidence of my own mind. It would be hypocritical. And worse, it would be cowardly to ignore those occasional appearances of the spirits of others--of minds uncloaked, in naked virtue, like David's goodbye."
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Mark Berthelemy on Will Richardson on "unlearning"
Mark usually uses his blog to point at a resource/asset/post and say: this is interesting, this is new, this is something to watch. He doesn't often share his world view at any length. This post, however, is an exception. He has unpacked Will's post on the steep "unlearning curve" and added his own perspective on some of the issue raised.
In a bizarre reversal of roles, today it is my turn to point at a post and say: this is interesting, this is something to watch. It will be interesting to follow any further exchange of views that grows out of this.
February's big question
The big question for February is "What questions should we be asking". Of course the responses to this will vary widely depending on each individual's field of interest and endeavour. As usual, I will make no pretence at having an objective, global view, but will seek only to speak from my own persepctive.
As a learning designer, I find that the people who requisition learning are often out of touch with the ultimate user audience: namely the learner. In fact, on a current project, I had to explain to one of the client reps what a learner was. This is the person I care most about. I wish the only question ever needed on a learning solutions project was: What will work best for the learner? In the absence of this idyll, I would like to ask:
- How do we bridge the divide between he-who-signs-the-cheques and he-who-will-use-the-resource?
I'm sure I'm going to kick myself as I later think of a far more relevant question, but this is where my head is at today.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Elluminate rocks!
I've been attending the Online Connectivism Conference. This has been the first time that I have encountered Elluminate and I'm smitten. The real time presentations (audio plus slides), the concurrent chat, the option for an open mike, the opportunity to occupy on a synchronous basis the same virtual space as people I have only encountered asynchrnously before. It's all too cool for words.
Friday, February 02, 2007
Tagged: how do I blog?
I've been tagged by Vicki Davis who wants to know how I blog. Vicki herself has published a very insightful and articulate post on the matter. She is a woman with her ducks very much in a row. Mine (ducks, that is) are somewhat less disciplined. So how do I blog?
- First thing every morning, I check my emails. Next thing, I catch up on my bloglines. Next, I check my CoComment. In one of those places, I am likely to come across something that sets off sparks in my brain. If they are small sparks, I will answer the email or comment on the blog post. If there is a major electrical short, I will write a post of my own. My thoughts often take shape as I write. These posts may be a bit rambling, and are likely to include a soapboax moment.
- Life is full of learning experiences, and I often think in allegories. If something has happened that has made a strong impression on me, or taught me a valuable life lesson. I will record the experience and what I learnt from it. In these cases, I tend to record the story chronologically and let it unfold for the reader as it did for me.
- If I have attended a lecture, a seminar, a conference. I will record my reflections on the event. Drawing out the highlights and lowlights. This style of posting is more common in my Ardent Student blog, where I am journalling my way through my MA course.
- My husband and two sons are all the family I have in the UK. Everyone else is ranged from Wellington, New Zealand in the east to Portland, Oregon in the west and Stockholm in the north, to Perth in the south. These people are not interested in my musings about the various aspects of my job, or what I think about learning, thinking, knowledge, etc. They care about me. About my boys. About my husband. They want to know that we're happy and healthy, and they want to share in our lives as much as the enormous distances allow. For these people, I have a family blog, where I record humorous anecdotes, achievements, events, milestones, news updates. Inconsequentialities to the rest of the world, but life blood to us and of vital interest to grannies and aunties who haven't seen us for years. These are usually related in such a way as to have maximum impact - building up to the punchline, or emphasising the ridiculous. Inform and entertain.
- Like Vicki, I seek to be honest in my blog. To be me. I have no patience with or stomach for subterfuge. Some people are quite critical of blogs that draw heavily on personal experience. I guess that's why they don't read mine. I can only provide my own perspective with any accuracy, which is what I do. That perspective may change tomorrow, but what you read in my blog today is a picture of me as I am today.
Where does real end and virtual begin?
This is very much a thinking-out-loud post, and I welcome any thoughts, rebuttals and contributions you might have!
A colleague and I were having this conversation yesterday on the train after Learning Technologies 2007. The conversation was sparked off when my colleague asked if I had ever ventured into the world of Second Life (I hadn't). I mentioned that fact that Sweden was opening an SL embassy. I also touched on some of the other matters I covered in my post on that topic.
I discovered that this is a point that has been exercising him for some time, too. If you can buy properties in SL on eBay, are they virtual? If a thing has sufficient value to a person to warrant them spending hard currency on it, doesn't that make it "real"? And from there, a natural segue to money itself. Even hard currency isn't real. Notes are in fact promisory notes - they aren't money, at all. They're a phyiscal manifestation of a virtual commodity. As I understand it, there is even an exchange rate between SL money (I really must find out what it's called!) and $ or £ or € or whatever. If this is the case, does that not lend weight to the argument that realness and virtuality are no more true of one than the other?
Then we moved on to the things we pay hard currency for. For example, you pay to go to the movies, to a rock concert, to the theatre, to ride a scrambler, drive a tank, ride a roller coaster, adopt a monkey in the zoo, to stay overnight in a 5 star hotel. What are you actually getting for your money? You don't actually own anything afterwards that you didn't own before, and you're broker in fiscal terms. So what is it? An experience? Entertainment? Well, is this real or virtual? How is it any more real than the experience you have online? Than the plot of land you buy in SL? Than the house/family you create in the Sims? Than interacting with your tamagotchi? And on that point, since a tamagotchi is a physical object that you must keep with you, that you must interact with by means of direct touch to meet its many and varied needs, that has a lifespan, how is that a "virtual" pet? Electronic, yes. Virtual, no.
And simulations have been used as valid learning environments for ages. Especially when real world mistakes could lead to loss of assets, money and lives. So is that learning "virtual" or "real"? I would have to say that the learning was real, even if the environment was virtual. But hang on a minute! How virtual is the environment? The learner pilot (for argument's sake) is really a learner pilot. The cockpit is really a cockpit, even though it isn't attached to an aeroplane. The controls really are controls and the pilot will use them exactly as he/she would if there were a plane attached to the cockpit several thousand metres above the earth. The scenario is virtual. True, but the pilot must respond to them exactly as if it were real or his flying career will end before it has gotten off the ground.
Ooh, it's a proper can of worms this! Once you get the lid off, there's no way of knowing where those little blighters might end up!
Reflections on Learning Technologies 2007
Yesterday I spent the day at the Learing Technologies 2007 exhibition. I would have loved to attend the conference, but at close to £900, my line manager was unconvinced of the ROI to the team (to be honest, at that price, I wasn't so sure myself!), and I certainly didn't have the readies to sponsor myself. So if you're looking for info about that aspect of the event, I apologise.
The exhibition aspect was interesting, with all the usual suspects present and correct.
I have to devote a brief moment to the take-aways and freebies that were on offer, since these always fascinate me. Some people seem to go to conferences and come away with carrier bags of souvenirs. I, on the other hand, usually come away empty-handed. Perhaps I don't the right "look". One exhibitor was dishing out cameras, another was handing out radios (astonishingly, I was given two of these - neither of which works). There was the usual supply of chocolate and pens of varying qualities. One stand had sticks of rock with their company logo in them - ingenious, I thought. One had large, brightly coloured fabric flowers, but these weren't strictly free - one had to sign up for their IT courses to qualify.
Inherent in the exhibition format is the open seminar. These run for half an hour with a 15 minute break between them. I had highlighted a selection of these that I wanted to attend. As is increasingly the case, I was disappointed by most of the presentations. The speakers were usually suffciently engaging, with slick visual aids, but they mostly didn't tell me anything new. I know for a fact that I'm not at the leading edge of knowledge and understanding about learning, so it bothers me that providers seem to be lagging behind even me.
One speaker, whose product impressed me more than most, did himself no favours in my eyes by stating early on (and reiterating at regular intervals) that learning was the process of getting information into your head. The implication being that, unless you had committed a piece of information to memory, you hadn't learnt it. I am very worried about the integrity of a product developed by people who miss the point of the nature of learning in the early 21st century.
I was fortunate to be able to attend the "great balloon debate". The premise was that there were 9 people in a hot air balloon on their way to the mythical kingdom of Elernia. Sadly, I can't name all 9 from memory, but I have a handy list: analyst; learning designer; change management expert; hardware specialist; software specialist; evaluation specialist graphic/interface designer; marketing consultant; project manager. The balloon is sinking fast and three people must be thrown overboard to save the rest. Each person got three minutes to explain to the audience (inlcuding the king and queen of Elernia) why they deserved to keep their place, and the audience voted. The first people to go were: hardware specialist; evaluation expert; graphic/interface designer.
Alas, the balloon continued to sink. Each person got a further two minutes. The next three out were: analyst; change management expert; marketing consultant, leaving the learning designer; software specialist and project manager. Of these, the learning designer scored the highest. Clive Shepherd suspected (as did I, to be honest) that the room was well stocked with learning designers who had voted nepotistically. However, a show of hands revealed just two or three of us.
Immediately after that came the final open seminar of the day which, contrary to expectations, was pretty packed. The subject was m-learning and it proved to the most interesting session of the day. The presenting company, LINE Communications talked us through a case study of a recent project of theirs: they had created an m-learning solution for a driving academy catering largely to young adults. I was pretty impressed to learn that, even before this, the driving academy had equipment to record a learner driver's performance during the lesson and upload it to the LMS back at base. If I tried to describe all the bits and bobs of the solution, I would do it an injustice, so, if you are interested, I suggest a visit to this page on their website. They get my vote for best solution. Usually, when I am getting stressed about deadlines etc., project managers will try to restore perspective by pointing out that this learning: no-one is going to lose their job or their life if we miss a deadline. However, in teaching people to drive safely, in identifying the hot issues for young drivers and addressing them head on (urk - uncomfortable phrase), if it is effective, this learning is in fact going to save lives. What a thing to be able to put on your resume!
My other (purely subjective) impressions are that:
Adobe probably had the highest attendance figures to the demos that they did at their stand on a rolling basis - and people seemed pretty impressed with their offering.
Atlantic Link is the company I would most like to own, being small, passionate, fleet of foot and accommodating of client needs.
Happy Computers Ltd wins the award for sheer gung-ho out there-ness (they were the distributors of the flowers I mentioned). They seem to be the kind of IT trainers that I aimed to be myself, and their stand was a happy, chaotic contrast to all the sleek, muted conformity around them.
Saffron Interactive takes the award for the most original attention grabbing methods with their barman-and-waitress mimes.
The best freebies must be the camera, but I can't give the company a plug, since I don't know who they were.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Defining learning design
I have often felt that defining a learning designer's role is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. Especially when I am trying to explain to an "outsider" what it is that I do. However, I think I might have just found a new favourite blogger in the shape of Patrick Dunn of Networked Learning Design, who goes a long way towards giving the role some shape. I am just disappointed that I couldn't find an RSS feed to the blog so that I could subscribe (happy to be proved wrong, by the way).
Thanks to Mark Berthelemy who emailed me the link to this post about the learning designer as an architect. The fact that the link came from Mark is no coincidence: we work together on the same team: he as a solutions architect, while I am a learning designer. The boundary between his role and mine has never really been clear. There are things that I think I should so and things I will need Mark to do. These are unlikely to mirror exactly the things he thinks he should do and the things he needs me to do. I confess I am probably the more precious of the two when there is overlap.
However, I have a tendency to approach each project with a sense of panic that I have no idea how to do this. In my more objective moments, I see this as a good thing. Each new project is a whole voyage of discovery. A new adventure with a new destination. What are the learner's needs? What do we want the learner's experience to be? What tools are there out there that will help us achieve that? Which of those tools will work within the client company's constraints? How are we going to engage the learner? And a host of other questions. I have no interest in duplicating the last project for the new client. As Patrick Dunn suggests, we can use patterns and prompts to get the creative juices flowing, but who wants to get stuck in a mechanistic re-use rut? Bleagh!
Kathy Sierra: Randomness and Serendipity
There is a disadvantage to Kathy's enormously popular blog, Creating Passionate Users, and that is that the comments come in so thick and fast, there isn't really the opportunity for a genuine exchange of ideas. Blogs with readers in the hundreds still generate conversation in response to their posts. Blogs with readers in their thousands, markedly less so. When yours is comment number 32, you know that there is scant chance that the blog owner will read it, much less engage with it (Kathy is more diligent than most at this), but the chances of other readers reading and engaging with your comment are even more remote. Hence any comment you make is likely to become a unidirectional salvo.
As a consequence, while Kathy's posts very often strike a chord with me, I seldom comment on them. Kathy is one of those bloggers you really feel you get to know as a person, since she writes passionately (well duh! with a blog name like that), and she shares personal experiences and insights. In spite of not commenting very often, I remain a passionate reader of since we have a shared passion for the ultimate client, the end-user. Although our user audiences differ, the principle remains the same.
After all that preamble, I would like to draw attention to this post: Add a little more random to your product. As a designer of learning resources, I increasingly find that it is necessary to "add more random". The learner is less patient with linear navigation and increasingly wants to explore. Providing the means for a learner-driven adventure in information is tougher, but more rewarding. I am especially keen to create resources that can be used after the initial learning/familiarisation exercise as a random reference resource.
The allegory isn't perfect, but think of a dictionary - and I don't care whether that dictionary is online or taking up six inches of shelf space. Very few people actually sit and read a dictionary (some do, and I say: whatever floats your boat, friend!), however, most homes and offices have one. When a person wants to check the spelling of a word, they reach for the dictionary, check it out, type/write the word and move on. When a kid has just learned to swear and wants to see if the f-word is listed in so august and respectable a publication, he and his mates will sit giggling over the thing for hours as they seek out ever ruder words, little realising the enormous (completely legitimate, totally un-profane) learning exercise they're undertaking. When you encounter an unfamiliar word, you reach for the dictionary, check out the meaning and move on with the thing you were reading. Reaching for the dictionary is a reflex action. Why? Because it delivers the goods so much of the time that it makes it a sensible option.
That's my goal. That's the kind of resource I want to build: Ms Manager sitting in her office faced with a situation she has never encountered before. I'd like her to be reaching for the learning resource we created for her, finding her answer and moving on with her life. Not because it bigs me up in any way, but because then the resource is fulfilling its raison d'etre.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Web 3.0
Okay - we're at the extreme reaches of my knowledge and understanding here, and the air is thin! You have been warned.
This article appeared in the Daily Yomiuri last week. It attempts to identify Web 3.0, a task about which it says, "The first thing to understand about Web 3.0 is that there is little general agreement about what it really means, even among the experts". A blogger in my blogroll recently dipped a toe in this water recently - I could have sworn it was Vicki Davis, but I now can't find the post. However, this is a topic that has had a fair amount of coverage in the blogosphere lately. Check out the following posts, some of which overloaded the wiring in my low voltage brain:
- Welcome Web 3.0
- Web 2.0 and 3.0 for dummies
- Web 2.0, Web 3.0... and Web 4.0 (just to make me feel totally behind the times!)
- Web 3.0 - You ain't seen nothing yet
I might be wa-ay off beam here, but it seems to me that metatagging is going to play a huge role in 3.0. But surely metatags are applied by the people who publish the material, and who's to say that the material they publish is accurate - or event that the metatags are appropriate?
At the moment, when I want to know something, I type in keywords and get a list of publications which contain those words - even when they don't actually relate to each other in any meaningful way. Under this system, I briefly scan the most promising looking of these and decide for myself, based on a process I couldn't begin to understand, let alone describe (but which may well have something to do with George Siemens's theory of connectivism) whether the material is valid and reliable.
From what I hear, in 3.0. I should be able to type in a question, rather than a series of keywords. What I'm not quite clear on is whether 3.0 is going to present me with a shorter list of publications, each of which is an accurate match to the context of my words or, whether it will go one step further and provide me with a definitive answer gleaned from the content of the sites trawled. To my limited imagination, the latter sounds like pie in the sky. The former sounds a big enough ask!
In order to be able to achieve the former, my search engine will have to make sense of my question, and align it accurately with the metatags of the published material online in order to make the matches. The latter would seem to require an in-depth grasp of content that I can't even begin to get my head around!
What worries me a bit is what will happen to the process of assessing material for validity and reliability. Having said that, at a stretch I can handle the idea of 3.0 handling validity, but reliability?
Hoo boy - I see another steep learning curve looming on the horizon!
Virtual embassies
As I read the posts in my aggregator every morning certain words are guaranteed to jump out at me. Predictably, these are words that relate to aspects of my personal and/or cultural history. Perhaps I've finally identified a tendency of mine to which I can apply the word atavistic. By extension, I also prick up my eyes, so to speak, when encountering words that relate to my husband's personal and/or cultural history.
Hence my heightened interest when I encountered this post from Mark Oehlert with the word Sweden in the title. I have never ventured into the world of Second Life, but I have been interested to note how it is gaining traction with a most unlikely audience. I have heard of organisations creating SL info portals. Obviously recognising that SL provides access to a market with money to spend, not just a bunch of teenaged computer nerds (I apologise for the stereotype - but I don't think it's a million miles from most people's unconscious assumptions). It seems like a good PR exercise. After all, companies have been creating websites for years to reach the audience of people who venture out into the www.
I was fascinated when Mark attended an SL book signing, bought the book with SL money (sorry - I don't know the proper name for the official currency) and received a hard copy of it through the mail. I also read recently of the sorts of money some people were making selling SL characters, assets and accessories on eBay.
The lines are blurring. I can fully understand Sweden's thinking behing the SL embassy. Their physical embassies have a presence online via websites which serve as an information portal. Why not then a virtual embassy in SL? What I wonder is, can you apply for a visa via the SL embassy and then receive the hard copy via the post? And if so, would you pay for it with SL money or the currency of the country in which the embassy is based?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Some things don't work online!
This morning I discovered something that hasn't worked online: candlelit romance.
Tuesdays I work at home. Because my laptop has recently decided not to maintain connection to my wifi, I am compelled to do this on the family PC until such time as the problem is solved (by someone more techie than me!). This morning, I find that my efforts are somewhat hampered by the large quantities of wax all over the keyboard! It seems my younger son was attempting to romance the current object of his affections via msn-by-candleight last night. You have to give him credit for originality, but the resultant conjoining of some of the keys is a tad inconvenient, to say the least.
If anyone out there has successfully managed to foster an atmosphere of romance online, I would appreciate any tips that you might have that I can pass on to my son.
Oh, and if anyone knows how to get wax out of a keyboard...
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Stranded!
So England hasn't quite finished dishing up quirky weather conditions (see my previous post about the wet drought). Today the wind is blowing so hard that all the rail services from London have been suspended. And guess where I am!
I don't normally work in London, but today I stood in for my ailing boss (who must for the first time be even just a little grateful for his condition) and ran a workshop for some colleagues. Afterwards, I took a rare opportunity to have lunch with my husband - what a civilised way to spend an hour! Then it was time to make my way home, except I arrived at Euston station to be greeted with an unbroken line of CANCELLED CANCELLED CANCELLED across the schedule. I made my way back to my husband's office, where he set me up in a corner with Internet access. From here, I was able to catch up with my emails and blog subscriptions. I love the fact that, in a completely strange environment, I can still be "in the office".
Of course, I don't love the fact that there is still no way home for the foreseeable future. Our two sons are reacting very differently to the prospect of a night without the parents in the house.
Anybody know a way I could email myself home?
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
A very wet drought
England is in the grips of a drought. It's the wettest drought in recorded history. I kid you not. Many parts of the country have had hosepipe bans. Yet it has been piddling down very Englishly for days on end. Driving the 20 miles (32kms) to work last week, I passed whole pastures that were underwater.
In some parts of the country the hosepipe ban was lifted. I had a mental image of people dashing out in their wellies to stand in an inch of water and water their gardens with hosepipes. Hmm. Perhaps not. They would be more likely to use the hosepipes to syphon the water off into the drains!
In some parts of the country, the hosepipe ban remains in force. Last night on the news, some poor woman from the water company had drawn the short straw and had to try to explain to the news-watching public why this was the case. Of course it had to do with the reserves - these need to be built up so that there is enough water put by for the summer. But when the water table is so high that rivers have burst their banks left and right, it's hard to imagine that the reserves are anything other than overflowing.
The footage consisted of the woman sitting in stationary position, explaining the matter. With this approach, I don't think the authorities are going to persuade the general public to take the drought seriously, when the evidence of their eyes tells them a very different story.
So how does this relate to the world of learning, knowledge and information? The information we give to people must make sense with what they already know, or what they can see for themselves. If it doesn't, we are going to have to work really hard, not only to provide more information as to why this is the case, but to get them to accept this information and shift their paradigms as a consequence... and that's a hard sell. Those good old fashioned barriers to learning are notoriously hard to shift when they are self-erected-and-maintained.
I was thinking about how this water company representative might have communicated her message more convincingly and thought of this:
- Pictures of the flooded pastures and valleys - commentary to the effect that anyone seeing this sight could be forgiven for thinking that there was a surplus of water in England right now
- Picture of underground water reserves - commentary to the effect that the water supply that feeds our homes and our industries is drawn from here. When it is full, it looks like this (archive picture or graphical representation). Right now, it looks like this (picture of marker, or graphical representation). In order to get through the coming summer, we need at least this much (picture/graphic)
- Brief, simple chalk-and-talk type explanation of why all this above ground water doesn't automatically mean full underground reserves
- Specifics - in order to get the water we need
- it will take at least 3/2/17/whatever more days/decades/weeks of heavy rain in the right areas,
- these areas are x, y and z,
- the forecast for those areas for the next few days is good/bad/indifferent.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
The big question for January: speed v quality
Tony Karrer has persuaded me that I have input to make on this month's Big Question, namely:
What are the trade offs between quality learning programs and rapid e-learning and how do you decide?I thought I would duck it, since I have thus far not had any exposure to rapid e-learning per se, but Tony felt differently. He said:
"Karyn - the question is not as much about "Rapid eLearning" as it is about speed vs. quality. And I'm psychic, so I know you face that issue on almost every project you do. :)"And, in a way, he is right, of course. I have been in this field in its various guises for 20 years now and although my involvement with e-learning only goes back two years or so, the challenge of quality v speed has been ever present. If I were to be flippant, I would probably say: quality every time.
Like anyone (I presume), I prefer to be given enough time and budget to produce a learning resource that will do the job, while looking good. Impress the learner while meeting his needs, why not? Of course, it's easy to say that when time is short we focus on functionality and forget form, and this is what the client usually suggests when proposing a gasp-inducing timeframe. The sad reality is that functionality takes wa-ay longer than form to produce. And I speak as one for whom form is important.
The bitter pill is that, when the schedule (or the budget for that matter) is tight, scoping has to be very tight and some things just ain't gonna happen! There is a serious risk of cutting corners in the analysis and scoping phase of the project, but I suggest that this is false economy. When I'm under time pressure I am even more in need of a tight scope in order to produce an effective resource within the limits placed upon me.
Even when the schedule is tight, the end product must WORK. It must deliver the goods, or it has been time (and therefore money) wasted.
One of the biggest frustrations when there are tight schedules is access to SMEs and stakeholders. Since they have different priorities (usually the day job), they can sometimes take their sweet time getting back to me! It is very important to have a good rapport with these folks.
So I would suggest that the following factors are required:
- A diligent, somewhat ruthless analysis
- A tight scope - signed off in blood, for preference ;-)
- A resourceful, comprehensive design that will enable a quick build...
- The tools to achieve a quick build (products like exe or Etomite are good for elearning materials)
- Fast turnaround times on edits and amends
- Easy access to and excellent rapport with SMEs (no "us and them)
- QA that focuses first on functionality and then on form
- A team that cares about the learner
- A team that is prepared to send out for pizza and get the job done
- A mutually accepted and respected process of change requests
There's probably a lot more I should have mentioned and I'm quite likely to have omitted points that are so vital and integral as to be invisible...
Monday, January 08, 2007
Priorities
So it seems Ruth Kelly, Former UK Education Secretary, is sending one of her kids (a child with substantial learning difficulties" to a private school.
Opinion is divided in the Labour Government as to whether this is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing. Tony Blair supports her right to choose the school that she feels will best meet her child's needs (Tony Blair himself has come in for criticism in the past regarding his choice of school for his own children). One Labour MP, however, told her "You should set an example as a minister and support your local school."
If he is able to be a politician first and a parent second, good luck to him. Ms Kelly is quoted as having said "Like any parent, my first thought was to do the right thing for my child." I'm with her: family first, career second. End of.
But for those whose finances don't allow them the luxury of that choice, it is sad that the state school systems are inadequate. The fact that the members of the government themselves are opting out of the education system that the rest of us must make do with is an indictment indeed.
Assessments in elearning
Tony Karrer has posted an interesting look at assessment in elearning, citing Will Thalheimer's post on the subject. Sadly, this reflects my own take on the matter, and not just in respect of elearning, but I find that fewer and fewer instructor-led courses are using anything more than happy sheets.
In my last job, I introduced level 2 - level 1 was already in place, and it was seen as being pretty "out there" to take it to the next level. They patted themselves on the back for being so progressive.
I had a go at getting level 3 in place, but this required the cooperation of line managers so it was pretty patchy. Those who cared about learning and development bought into it, but they were in the minority.
As for level 4... Every time I raised the subject, I got shot down in flames. I was assured I didn't need to produce ROI - my job was secure. There was no way I could get them to drop the knowing smiles and understand the benefits of researching the ROI of the learning I was developing - especially since it was all totally new stuff.
Ironically, within months of my leaving, my replacement was made redundant and advised that it had been a mistake to have an in-house training programme. Without evidence of ROI, she had no evidence to the contrary. All we had was the large collection of emails the staff had sent me before I left, highlighting the difference the learning had made to them, which wasn't considered valid. Secure, huh?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
