Sometimes learning professionals (trainers, educators, instructional designers) get caught up in their own world. Here’s another reminder about what’s really important – performance. From e-clipping’s interview on collaborative technologies with Jay Cross:
I made up the word elearning because I wanted to highlight learning, but I don’t think learning is at the head of the train.
It is performance that is at the head of the train and only a fool would expect to get results from the technology alone.
It is the technology in support of key organizational goals that is key, and that involves incentives, leadership, innovation, esprit de corps….and this is all mixed in together.
As a matter of fact I’d be somewhat sceptical of any company that would highlight their intense [use] of collaboration technologies if they left out "What is important to us is to serve our customers and this is how we go about it".
Last week, blogs were being discussed on CBC Radio One and Tod Maffin suggested that blogging was on its way out. A different perspective from Kathleen is that blogs help you get what you need done. She needed help and posted it on a blog, and the right person, with the right experience contacted her.
I absolutely love how the peer-to-peer network in the blogging world led me directly to the right person.
If blogs are also perfomance support tools (in addition to knowledge repositories, etc.) then blogging may be around for a while yet.
We have the basic functionality set up for community of practice on the LearnNB website.
All new information will be posted there.
From Blogoerlert’s e-clippings is More SHOCKING evidence that people can learn from games!!:
But Brenda Laurel, a game designer who has worked with educators, says that anyone hoping to rescue the American educational system with games should be realistic.
"I’ve been involved in trying to insert games into schools since 1976, and I’ve come to the conclusion it doesn’t work," she said.
In her view, American schools have degenerated from learning environments into production lines for children taught to obey authority figures.
But not all is lost, she said. Instead of relying on schools to teach kids how to use games to learn, libraries equipped with computers and video games may be the place where such learning can happen. Ultimately, she said, new forms of learning are about new ways of thinking. And some game designers are working to help foster that change.
This got me thinking again about our local laptops in schools question. Many schools and educators are not receptive to the idea, so why not bypass the reluctant schools and educators and target libraries instead? Maybe our government should fund more computers in public libaries, fund additional operating hours and fund resource specialists. This would breathe new life into our public libraries and allow for experimentation in developing fundamentally new learning environments. I’m sure that the public libraries in New Brunswick would gladly take the +million dollars that are being earmarked for laptops in schools.
This comment on Weblogg-ed by Alan Levine jumped out at me;
It just goes to show that despite pontification about being "learner centered" or "student centered" most institutions, systems, and course management monstrosities are still stuck in the "course" being the basic unit of organization, rather than the student.
It seems pretty clear; the basic unit of learning is the person. This person is indivisible. All learning activities, products and strategies must be centered around the person. We can then go on to develop environments for many people, but the individual is the building block – not the learning object, the course, the programme, or the institution. All of these are temporary organisations that the individual may use, or be part of.
The power of search engines, blogs, wikis, aggregators and other low threshold access tools is that they give control back to the learner. But we don’t have many good design models for the creation of real learner-centric environment. Most of our models are prescriptive, but there is a lot of work being done by Jay Cross, Don Morrison, ISPI and many others, to address this need. These are exciting times for learning professionals who are willing to explore new models with some empowering new tools.
Jay’s comments on this week’s meeting of the Learning Economics Group. Jay has added to Brenda Sugrue’s initial conceptual model, giving us his usual insight into this fuzzy world of learning, technology and business. I like the fact that Jay is pointing out the power relationships (e.g. Boss’s Ego) as well.
Today I attended Robin Good’s free webinar on low-cost videoconferencing tools.
During this session, Robin (aka – Luigi Canali De Rossi) presented 9 systems, varying in price and pricing models. The two top scorers were systems I had never heard of before – Wave Three Session and Marratech. One insight that I picked up from Robin is that vendors need to create diversified products around core technologies in order to achieve mass customisation, because no two clients’ needs are the same. He was also critical of high-priced software, because customers cannot invest a lot of money in systems that could become useless with the next technological advance in a couple of months. It seemed that many people in the multinational audience were vendors, but Robin’s focus is buyers (hurray!).
Robin is an excellent web speaker, and his evaluations are to the point. You can see his other reviews on the Kolabora website. Stay tuned to his website for future live presentations.
Attended a teleconference session of the Learning Economics Group today. This is a non-profit group focused on conducting research, developing tools, databases, forums and the creation of a virtual discussion “space” for professionals, policymakers and others about Learning Economics. LEG kicked-off in early April, but there is already a lot of interest worldwide in their research agenda, from all sectors. FYI, Learning Economics is defined by LEG as the study of the strategic value of learning, both formal and informal, and its economic impact on a corporation or organization.
Attendees included professionals in the field from Shell, Cisco, HP, BYU, SRI, and two Canadians! After introductions, Dan Blair from HP, with Brenda Sugrue of ASTD, gave the main presentation on setting a learning economics research agenda. A key concept in this presentation is the shift of Tangible versus Intangible Assets on the S&P index from 38% intangibles in 1982 to 85% intangibles in 2002. Most economic value is now intangible (think knowledge and knowledge workers). As someone stated, we now know the problem, but we don’t know the answers to “managing” intangible assets. A lot of participation and commentary from attendees, such as Eilef Trondsen and Jay Cross, et al.
Check out the website and join the group, participate, and contribute to the already significant resources that have been contributed by members.
Is there interest in the region to become a special interest group (SIG) and contribute to this forum? I will continue to participate and provide comments to the LearnNB (loosely coupled) community.
From Elliot Masie’s Tech Learn Trends comes this list from buyers of what metrics are starting to be used as indicators of the effectiveness of new approaches to learning:
* Time to Launch a New Product
* Time to Hire and Deploy a New Staff Member
* Time to Compliance for Regulations
* Time to Implement a Systems Change
* Time to Globalize a Process
* Time to Merge with New Company or Organization
* Time to Quality Targets
* Time to Sale
These are the points that learning providers should be addressing in their proposals, and it looks like they’re all about time.