Black Swan Society Blogs

On irony

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:41:00 +0100

Regular readers may remember the trauma we experienced with the maths department in respect of our elder son. At the time that this was going on, I was venting to a friend (let's call her Rachel) with kids at the same school. She could relate to my situation, because her own experience of the maths department with one of her older sons (let's call him Tim) was not a happy one.

Tim, Rachel tells me, is one of those people who takes a little longer to grasp a new concept. But, once he's got it, he's got it good. Having done well at GCSE maths, he had opted to take the subject at A level. But things were not going well, and he was becoming steadily more discouraged. At the first progress meeting, Rachel was advised that Tim should give up maths because he was simply never going to get it.

This pushed Rachel's 'I'll show you' button. When it comes to her kids, the mild-mannered Rachel gives me a run for my money in the tigress stakes!

She found her son a private tutor and enlisted the support of the same Ms Verity I have mentioned before. Tim passed A level maths strongly and went on to study it at university.

He has just taken up his first post as a maths teacher... at the very same school he attended himself.

This means that Tim and the teacher who wrote him off will be colleagues... and this is not the first story of this kind I have heard.

Teachers please take care. I have personal experience that crow and humble pie don't taste very good and egg makes an uncomfortable facial accessory.

The same teacher who was so discouraging of Tim, recently advised my younger son - during 6th form induction - not to sign up for maths A levels. This after an impassioned speech to the whole group about how it was the most important subject in the curriculum and an absolute must, yadda yadda. What changed her tune was that she learned that my son and one other child present had been in set 5 of 9 for GCSE maths, and she felt that they would 'struggle'. She had apparently already advised all the kids in set 6 and below against attending the talk on maths at all.

The daft thing is that, 5th set or not, he sat exactly the same exam as the kids in the top set... and he got a solid B. What's wrong with that, I ask you?

He returned from the induction full of doubt, and started casting about for an alternative subject. I was livid, nay, apoplectic. Those of you who know me well can just imagine how this played out.

This is a kid who, since the age of 3, has wanted to be an explosives demolitionist. Never once has he wavered from this goal. If he is to realise this ambition, he will need to study structural engineering. One of the entrance requirements is a solid pass in maths at A level. He knows how hard he is going to have to work, and is prepared for the challenge.

As my husband said, "So, he may struggle. So what? Is there a rule against struggling somewhere? If he struggles, we'll find him some extra help. That's what parents do."

We get the impression that the department - or at least, this teacher - is only interested in kids who are going to sail through and score the sort of results that will keep the school in its lofty position on the local league tables. My mother in law has a sticker on her fridge that says, "The forest would be a quiet place if no birds sang but the best." Our kids may not be among the best, but, by 'eck, they're going to get to sing! To put a (slightly) more polite spin on a South Africanism, that woman does not get to urinate on our son's campfire! It may be that he changes his mind about what his career choice (our elder son did exactly that, shortly after starting 6th form) but it is to be his choice to make! It is not to be foisted upon him by someone with an agenda.

So, tomorrow, he goes into school to sign up for his A level subjects, and maths (with mechanics) will be one of them. He may well struggle, but (as the great Gretzky says) you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

Not all parents are as determined, as resource-rich, as stubborn, as supportive, as teeth-clenchingly bloody-minded as my friend Rachel and me. My heart sinks as I wonder how many young people are giving up on their life's dreams because of what a teacher has said.

Let's be enablers, folks.

A tip for Articulate users

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 13:04:00 +0100

I came across this today, courtesy of a link from one of my Twitter friends. I forget which.

For those who use Articulate and like to try to find ways to push the boundaries of what it can and can't do.

I have tried umpteen times to embed the video in this post, but, while I can see it perfectly in preview, it simply refuses to play ball when I publish. Sorry.

Thou Shalt Learn!

Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:31:49 +0100

Like that will work…not! Seriously, there are several things that have to line up to get social media working for you (which, if you’ve been paying attention, is the new and only sustainable competitive advantage). As I discussed a couple of days ago, your learners have to have the skills. But there are a couple [...]

On value: perceived and intrinsic

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:15:00 +0100

Those of you who are Facebook friends will know that I lost something during my recent holiday. It was something of no intrinsic value, and yet I treasured it enormously. It was something that has been featured on this blog before. It was the bangle my father gave to me for my 17th birthday.

It was the only truly personalised thing he ever gave me, and the only times I wasn't wearing it were the times it was broken. It occupied pride of place on my right wrist through thick and thin for about 30 years (albeit with the aid of several repair jobs). If you have met me in person, you have seen it, even if you haven't noticed it.

It has been swimming, climbing and jetskiing... and survived it all.

But one day during our holiday, my elder son playfully grabbed me by my wrists in the sea. As I felt it move on my arm, I yelled, "My bangle! My bangle!" It took my son a moment to understand the import of what I was saying, by which time the bangle had fallen off. We could see it clearly through the water, lying at my younger son's feet. In distress, I yelled at him to pick it up for me, but he couldn't see it, and - as I watched in horror - accidentally stepped on it, burying it in the sand.

Although we borrowed goggles from kindly people nearby and spent the next 40 minutes or so searching for it, we finally had to accept that it was gone.

I am unashamed to say that I wept huge, wracking sobs for the loss of it. I felt hollow. I even dreamt that night that it was returned to me. I still keep absent-mindedly trying to adjust it on my arm, and there is a faint tan line where it used to be.

Someday, maybe, someone else will find it: a badly made, shoddily repaired silver bangle cut in the shape of an unusual name not their own.... and it will have absolutely no value to them.

Will they even be able to tell that it had once had enormous value to someone else? Will they know as they hold it that there is a woman somewhere out there whose delight would know no bounds if they were to find a way to return it to her?

So it is with learning. Sometimes we share things in this space that have inspired us, or from which we have gleaned enormous value. Sometimes we wax lyrical about something we have found or made or seen... to a round of utter indifference.

And what of it? Does that diminish the value to the beholder? I certainly hope not. There is space for a wide range of value systems and measures.

As learning providers, we need to be careful not to denigrate certain resources simply because they hold no value for us. One man's meat, as the saying goes...

Learning Experience Design Strategy

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:21:16 +0100

On our weekly twitter learning fest, #lrnchat, I regularly identify myself as a learning experience design strategist. I don’t always assume people know what that means, but for that audience I figure they can infer what it means. However, I think the idea is worth exploring, because increasingly I think that not only is that [...]

"Social Media for Trainers" Blog Book Tour Starts Thursday!

Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:08:00 +0100

The Social Media for Trainers blog book tour begins this Thursday, September 2, with a kickoff post from the Centre for Learning and Performance Technologies' Jane Hart. This will be followed by a constellation of blogging stars from the training and eLearning fields.

Is the book right for you? The publisher asked specifically for activities and ideas to help trainers and instructional designers develop an understanding of social media tools at "eye level": What are they, how are they best used, and how can we use them to extend and enhance current practice? The book is available from booksellers in North America now, with UK and EU releases due in the next few weeks. Check out the "look inside" feature on Amazon.com to get a peek.

Take a look at the blog book tour schedule and watch for the posts from my colleagues. Many thanks to them for their help with this project!

More? Follow "Social Media for Trainers" on the book's Facebook page and on on Twitter @SoMe4Trainers (use #SoMe4Trainers).

Tandem Learning Innovation Community: 1st event recap

Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:31:00 +0100

Just a quick post to thank everyone who attended our first official Tandem Learning Innovation Community event. We hosted the event on our new Second Life island and I'd encourage all of you who were unable to make it to stop by any time and take a tour. The island is open and public; we'd be happy to share the space with any member of the TLIC who'd like to run a meeting in SL. Feel free to contact me if you'd like a guided tour or assistance in how to work our browser displays.

I can't thank Earth Primbee (SL name, for those not in-world) enough...he did a fantastic job building the island to suit our needs, and he completed the entire build in just a few days. Amazing. He also served as tech support and transcriptionist during the event. Big kudos on an amazing job and for all of his help!

We had about 15 attendees for our first event, ranging from people in academia, corporate training, consultants and designers/developers. Although we kept the event informal, we spent some time doing introductions and talking about topics we'd like to see discussed in future TLIC events before letting people explore the island.

One of the topics discussed was what new technologies community members would be interested in learning about through TLIC events. Suggestions included:

OpenSim
Unity3D
Alternate reality games (ARGs)
Jibe
Augmented reality
Geolocation technologies

The consensus was that community members would be more interested in hearing about case studies in future events than in seeing new technology demos. We also discussed what major issues organizations are facing in implementing new technologies. The major issues raised included:

access to the technologies (firewalls, hardware, etc.)
interface design issues
ease of use

It was great to see our friends in avatar form and meet new community members who provided great feedback and insight. Plans are already underway for our next event and we're looking forward to some additional announcements to the community in the next few weeks.

In the meantime, we'd love to hear your thoughts on what new technologies you'd like to find out more about and what types of programming for future events would be of interest to you!

Don’t take learning skills for granted!

Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:16:35 +0100

In all the excitement about empowering learners by providing rich information and social environments, it’s too easy to think that “if you build it, they will learn”. Yet the evidence is to the contrary. While there are numerous components, including a culture that tolerates diversity and doesn’t punish honest mistakes, one that is easy to [...]

Designing Social Processing

Fri, 27 Aug 2010 22:16:03 +0100

In reflecting on the presentation I gave earlier this week, I realize that I didn’t make it clear that just making it social will make activities lead to better processing. Of course, my goal was evangelizing, but I reckon I should followup with some clarity. There are some design principles involved. First, the assignment itself [...]

Games for assessment

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:00:00 +0100

Another Twitter conversation, another blog post...another thought-stream based out of ADL's Implementation Fest #ifest (Srsly, this is the most a conference has inspired me to write in a long time. A good, and bad, thing...).

So, let's talk about the opportunities and problems with using games for assessment. Especially when you throw the "s" word in there..."standardized" assessment.

Deep breath.

First, I'll preface by saying that games are a natural environment for assessment...in essence, they are assessing your performance just by nature of the game structure itself. Unless, of course, there aren't clear success metrics and you "win" by collecting more and more meaningless stuff (like Farmville)...but that's a whole other topic. So let's assume there are success metrics built into the game and those metrics align with what your learning objectives are. Its logical that by having someone play a game, you'll see how well they know something or know how to do something. Right?

Nothing is ever that easy. There are lots of aspects of game play that depend greatly on how the game was designed. For one, games have an intrinsic layer of cognitive overhead that may not exist in real life. For example, as I've been learning how to play Call of Duty 4, I first have to master the use of my PS3 controller. No, this isn't a learning game, but the same principles apply...it's why real guitar players get irritated playing Guitar Hero...there are skills that you need to develop to play a game, or to be successful in a game, that don't exist in real life or don't mirror the skills necessary to be successful at real life tasks. I think it becomes clear in first person shooter games, where your ability to operate your game controller does not directly translate to being able to accurately fire an automatic weapon in a combat environment. For any assessment, you have to make sure you're not just assessing how well someone plays the game, but how well they have mastered the real skill or content. In using games for assessment, you run the risk of assessing how well someone plays the game, not the objectives you are hoping to assess.

Another issue with games for assessment is the gender differences in how people play games. I'm about to talk about broad generalizations, so bear with me and recognize that some women game like "guys" and some guys game like "girls"...but there are different ways that people approach game environments and those differences do tend to follow along gender lines. Men are bigger risk-takers and explorers; women like to be guided, understand the environment, and follow the rules. Depending on how you design your game, you risk alienating a whole group of players if you don't consider the gender differences in game play. Worse, if you are using games for standardized assessment, you could be putting about half of the people you are assessing at a disadvantage just by the nature of the game design. Given the general acknowledgment that standardized tests are racially and class biased, adding a layer of gender bias in the game design risks making the concept of "standardized" even more meaningless.

Do I think games can be used effectively for assessment? Yes. Look at surgical simulations, flight simulators...close approximations of performing tasks in real life. Research has proven that successful performance in these simulated environments correlates to successful performance at the actual tasks. Where you can mirror game performance to real performance in this way, I think games are a brilliant and useful measure of assessment. But without careful design, thoughtful reflection on what the game environment adds to assessment, and what the trade-offs are with other forms of assessment, we risk creating another assessment environment that falls short of measuring true capability, potential, or performance.

America's Army and gender bias in game design

Sun, 22 Aug 2010 20:28:00 +0100

Coming out of the #ifest Twitter stream, I once again heard how America's Army was a shining example of how games had been used to improve recruitment efforts. I posed the question...has it improved recruitment of women at the same rate it has improved the recruitment of men? So far, all I've heard back is *crickets*.

For two weeks, I have been looking for data or research on America's Army that mentions gender as a research parameter, but so far, I've found nothing. If you know of any research, I'd love to see it. My hypothesis? Recruitment of women was not as greatly improved after they played America's Army. If that's the case, what does that say about the relative value of recruiting women vs men into our military?

What makes a game successful? Is it ok for public institutions (government, schools, etc.) to measure the success of a serious game without looking at differences in outcomes along the most basic parameters (gender, class, race)? Is it ok to say a game is successful in achieving its goals if we don't consider those issues as part of the discussion?

I'm tired of hearing the marketing spin and the hype around how games can change the world if we're not even asking the most basic questions about WHO games are changing and HOW they are changing them. You won't find a bigger advocate of games for learning and as a vehicle to raise awareness and support behavior change. But not all games are created equal. We have to be vigilant and constantly questioning our design to ensure we're achieving the outcomes we seek. Ignoring questions of gender, class, and racial bias in serious game design makes me question the motives of the design itself and the motives of those promoting a game's "success."

As always, I welcome anyone's comments who can prove me wrong...

Microblogging in the Enterprise: Tips

Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:07:00 +0100

Twitter not quite right for your organization? This came up in #lrnchat last week, and in a Twitter discussion yesterday. Here are tips mostly from Aaron Silvers (Twitter: @mrch0mp3rs) on using microblogging in the enterprise:

-Remember, the practice is more important than the tool. This gives flexibility to change tools later on.

-Having said that: Choose the right tool in the first place.

-Make sure someone is a registered admin. Don't do this with no one in charge.

-If you're using a free account, do your org a favor and link to digital files in these microsharing tools instead of uploading into them.

-There ARE reasons why email works. Use the right tool for the task.

-You want leaders to contribute consistently -- even if it's just once a day, a reply to an employee.

- Write up the "rules" or expectations for your boss person to distribute. Fear is often not knowing what to say.

-Give examples of the kinds of things to use it for to get people acclimated/started.

-With any new communications medium, patience and consistency are keys to adoption. Modeling how to use is important.

-Start w/ a core group, and make sure at least one big manager is involved and posting daily.

And from @ldennison: if you're bringing it into the organization, you're the person responsible for it.

Transforming Business: Social Media and Conversations

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:50:53 +0100

In a conversation with my ITA colleagues (we keep a Skype channel open and conversations emerge daily), we revisited the idea that there’s a higher perspective that needs to be highlighted: social media is a business engine, both internally and externally! Jane Hart’s been helping clients with social media marketing, and this has been an [...]

Social InFormal – it’s the network!

Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:25:35 +0100

Yesterday, I talked about how social added to formal learning. Today I want to extend social learning learning to informal learning. When I talked about the value social adds to formal, it was about processing the information in richer ways, to help facilitate learning. However, the value proposition for informal learning is different. We can [...]

Announcing the 1st Tandem Learning Innovation Community event!

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 20:04:00 +0100

We are pleased to announce the first, official Tandem Learning Innovation Community event scheduled for Friday, August 27th, 2010 at 9:00 am SLT/ 12:00 pm EST. We’ll be hosting an open house on our new Second Life island. The official networking event, led by Koreen Olbrish (SL: Nina Sommerfleck), will be an informal discussion of community topics, including:

• New technologies for the TLIC to explore
• Major challenges in technology adoption for the community to address
• TLIC at DevLearn 2010 – call for interested parties to be showcased

Please let us know if you plan to attend by emailing Jedd Gold via linkedin or at jedd.gold@tandem-learning.com. We will be sending out the SLURL the day before the event to everyone who RSVP’s.

If you haven't yet joined the Tandem Learning Innovation Community, you can request to join here.

We are looking forward to seeing you there!

Social Formal – it’s the processing!

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:40:38 +0100

In thinking about the benefits of adding social to formal learning for a presentation I’ll be giving, I realized that the main reason to extend social activities into formal learning is for the additional processing it provides. While there is processing individually, social interaction provides more opportunities. The types of learning processing that matter for [...]

What is the Important Work?

Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:18:30 +0100

When you look at the changes going on in society, and the implications for business, you realize that there are some significant changes going on. This isn’t news: things are moving faster, we’re having less resources available, our competition is more agile, the amount of relevant information is increasing, customers are more aware, the list [...]

What makes a good learning "tool"?

Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:40:00 +0100

Even though I'm attending through the Twitter stream, ADL's Implementation Fest #ifest is getting me fired up about some learning technology industry issues that just can't be explored in 140 characters. For example, yesterday there was some lively conversation around the usefulness of learning tools.

And I, in a rash statement, said that most learning tools suck.

But let me clarify, because there can be a broad definition of what a learning tool is.

For me, a learning tool is not what I use to design learning experiences (those things might include pen and paper, whiteboard, PowerPoint, Visio, etc.). A learning tool is NOT a reference tool like Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an information portal where you can go, read, and maybe learn something new...but it was not designed as a learning experience. It does not facilitate learning, even though it can enable it. Can you learn from a reference tool? Sure! But good reference tools have good user experience design, not instructional design, making it a reference tool and not a learning tool. There IS a difference.

A learning tool, to me, is something that you use to develop a learning experience. In other words, a tool that allows you to "design" a learning experience and output it into "Voila!" a learning experience. Input = content, output = training. And here's why I think most learning tools suck.

Most tools limit what you can design intrinsically in their functionality. Let's take PowerPoint. What you're going to get is slides. Pretty didactic. Maybe a little video embedded, some nifty animations...but you're not going to get much in the way of learner interaction.

But now I'm going to ask you a question...have you ever learned in a workshop that was guided by a PowerPoint slide? Have you ever been in a learning environment where PowerPoint was the primary learning tool, but the content, activity, discussion actually taught you something? I'm going to guess yes. Maybe you've even been lucky enough to be in a session guided by PowerPoint that made you do something differently when you left. You know what that is? GOOD DESIGN. It's not the tool. Its how you design learning experiences that facilitates learning, not the tool that you use.

So what makes a learning tool "good"? Openness. Flexibility. Interoperability with other learning tools and reference tools.

What makes a tool bad? One that dictates design. I could list some specific examples, but I'm betting you know what they are. Online learning development tools would be a great place to start.

One of my favorite quotes from yesterday's Twitter discussion was from John Campbell @jpcampbell :

what's ur expected output from tools? Learning Content? Why ask the architect to output a house?

Which is my point exactly. Instructional design and learning technology development are two different skill sets. Instructional designers are the architects and technology developers are the builders. You shouldn't build a house without an architectural plan, nor should you expect your architect to go ahead and put hammer to nail to bring his plan to life. There's an essential relationship here that too many organizations neglect to recognize, instead hiring IDs to build their training content using some rapid development tool. Most organizations are guilty of this in someway..."Put together a PowerPoint - led workshop!" "Import our workshop content into a virtual classroom!" "Create an Articulate module!" "Make video clips accessible from a smart phone!" This isn't a fault of the tools, its a lack of awareness of the importance of design. As an industry, we should NOT be designing learning experiences dictated by what tool you have (if you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail) but by the appropriate format to support the goal, supported by the appropriate design for that format. Instructor-led, game-based, online, mobile, print...they are ALL good formats when they are appropriate for the content, designed appropriately, and appropriate tools are used to develop them.

And that's why I think most learning tools suck...because they neglect to recognize the difference between design and development, and the default tends to be development at the expense of design.

What's Your Objective?

Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:59:00 +0100

[Note: This originally ran on Training Magazine’s former “Training Day” blog on 2/12/2010]

Discussion of objectives in training could be a topic for a book all by itself, but lately I’ve run across 2 excellent examples of problems with learning/performance objectives. They provide a good basis for looking at just a couple of common problems.

Example 1: One summer afternoon my friend Jo left her son, 5-year-old Max, in the care of his grandmother. While Max was napping Grandma found a dead rattlesnake in the yard and thought to herself, “This is a good time to teach Max about snakes.”

Her objective: “Max will understand about snakes.”

So when Max awoke from his nap Grandma took him outside and said:
“See, Max, this is a rattlesnake. Some snakes are very dangerous so you must be careful if you are ever near one. They can be hard to see.” Using a hoe, grandma moved the snake into high grass, then onto a bed of pine straw, to show Max how the snake’s colors tended to blend with the setting. Grandma talked about being careful when running around outside barefoot, not bothering or teasing snakes, and taking care when playing near places snakes might be found, like fallen logs or warm rocks.

At the end of Grandma’s lesson she said, “So, Max, do you understand about snakes?”

And Max looked up at her and said,

“Oh, yes, Grandma. I love snakes.”

In the example with Grandma and Max, the problem was an objective too vague: “He will understand “ can be interpreted in more than one way, which is exactly what happened, and Max did not understand in the way Grandma meant him to. This is a common problem in compliance and policy training, where it’s more usual than not to see objectives like, “Learner will know the policy”, “Learner will understand the rules regarding unlawful harassment”. And regarding Grandma, well, as we say here in the American South, bless her heart. She did intend to help Max “understand” (learning) but she didn't specify actual performance. She tried to make the snake training meaningful and engaging. She did not read PowerPoint slides to Max. She included important information (they are hard to see in the ground cover) and offered some helpful tips (don’t tease). But the training did not accomplish what she’d intended.

I’ve seen the opposite problem as well: Objectives (and performance this time, not just "learning") so detailed and specific that the real point of the thing is lost. Which brings us to Example 2: A contractor charged with developing online tutorials on the new employee timekeeping system listed the desired performance objectives (below).

At the end of the training, the employee will be able to:

• Log on and navigate to the employee section of the portal

• Record and review time

• View time statements

• Display leave quota overview

• Generate leave requests

• Access system help resources

• Assign charge object numbers

• Report premium pay hours

The objectives were certainly detailed and specific. The contractor had thoroughly delineated desired performance. After weeks of tedious wordsmithing, next-level management finally signed off on the objectives. Senior management likewise approved of the plan. Everyone involved agreed that, yes, these are the outcomes we’re after.

Several million dollars later the training was launched, and several weeks after that the new time sheet software “went live” to 30,000 workers. And the critical problem with the tutorials quickly, and loudly, and in a most dramatic way, became evident. The list of objectives had not included:

At the end of this training, the employee will be able to
complete his or her time sheet.

[This is not to oversimplify the other problems here, including the evidence that no one ever thought to ask even one potential learner to try the material out, or that much of the training content, like charge object hours, was relevant only to a fraction of the target audience.]

So: Before developing the instruction don’t just write objectives. Write the right objectives. What is this person really supposed to do back on the job? What does “understand” mean, and what evidence will show you that understanding has occurred? Devotees of Bloom’s taxonomy will argue that learner performance like “listing” and “describing” can constitute what he called ”enabling” objectives. That may valid, but they should not be the only objectives: Employees are rarely asked to “list” or “describe” anything, so it’s critical to move on to behaviors closer to desired performance, not just knowledge. And: Enabling objectives are easy to write, and to develop bullet points for, and to develop training around, and to write a quiz to assess. If you feel the training really must address these, fine, but be sure to push past them on to things that more closely resemble real performance. In my train-the-trainer course I don’t want my learners to describe strategies for engaging learners, I want them to deliver a piece of instruction in which they demonstrate the ability to apply those strategies. It’s more work for both learner and me, and much more time consuming, but it moves us far closer to the actual desired performance. And it makes the training worth doing.

Think Goldilocks. Not too little, not too much. And remember in developing objectives to keep an eye on the rock-bottom performance goal: Don’t get eaten by bears.

Other problems with training objectives? I asked Twitter training/elearning/ID folks and here are some of their answers. Perhaps we’ll expand on some of these in a future column.

Gina Minks @gminks, EMC: “When objectives relate to what someone wishes the performance was, even though that may be a fantasy.”
Jeffery Goldman @minutebio, Johns Hopkins Healthcare LLC: “Not setting them at all, not measuring whether they are met in the final assessment, and not providing content to meet objectives.”
Guy Wallace @guywwallace, EPPIC, Inc: “Objectives are not systematically ‘derived’ from solid analysis of ideal performance/gaps & are best guesses.”
Kevin Bruny @row4it, Chesterfield County VA Government: “Once used for design and communicated in training, we tend to forget about them and never return to validate.”
Kara DeFrias @californiakara, Intuit: “People get so wrapped up in objectives they forget to take time to make the actual learning meaningful & engaging.”

--JB

The opportunity for government in the training industry

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:17:00 +0100

I've been following the ADL Implementation Fest #ifest stream on Twitter today and some of the conversation with my PLN has sparked some thoughts, maybe perspective, on how, or where, I see the government being able to lead the way in training. And, what prompted me to write this post, the ways in which its misdirecting its energies.

First, let me say, there are some great examples of people in government doing things the right way. Just from my immediate experience, Dr. Alicia Sanchez, who works for DAU, is the games czar who is helping integrate gaming into their curriculum. Mark Oehlert, also at DAU, is integrating social media technologies to support learning and knowledge management. Judy Brown at ADL is an industry recognized expert in mobile technologies and how they can be leveraged for learning. (Just realized, ironically, that these three will also be showcasing their knowledge at DevLearn 2010. You should go.) These three people, who happen to be people I know and respect, understand the unique positions they hold, and their opportunity to leverage technology for innovative applications. In short, they recognize that they have the chance to DESIGN really cool applications of existing technologies within the government and talk about how these projects are helping to improve learning, collaboration, and communication.

What I'm hearing out of iFest (so far...its the first day...;) is that the focus is still really on what technology can do for you and what technology initiatives ADL has been focusing on. To which I say...REALLY?!?! Sigh.

I don't need or want government agencies to fancy themselves technology companies. They aren't a start up, nor are they Microsoft. In short, there are companies who actually do that. And those companies need to make money doing it, which means that they need to build things that the market needs (even if the market doesn't want it...that's a totally different thing...).

What I'd love to see is that agencies within the government start looking at what REALLY helps support learning...good design. I'd love if they saw themselves as master implementers, not builders. Our government has tons of people that need training, its got tons of money and resources...why not leverage it for those things? Try innovative solutions. Experiment with design. Conduct research to establish best practices. That's what the learning technology industry needs. The government could provide this...it could LEAD this. But for the most part, its not.

If a technology is needed, the market will push it because that's what the market looks for: meeting unmet needs to make money. I'm tired of hearing about how a technology the government is developing is going to solve some problem. Let's face it, even Google has struggled with implementing innovative technologies (see: Wave, Lively) and that's their business...its what they do to make money...and they are arguably the best at it.

I'm hoping that as I hear more at iFest that its focused on design. Fingers crossed. If not, its an opportunity lost...

Admitting limits when you're a "no limits" kinda girl

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:25:00 +0100

Whether or not we like to admit it...there actually IS a limit to what we can accomplish in the little time we have. I'm not saying that our potential is limited...I'm saying that we have capacity issues. There are only 24 hours in a day. We actually need to sleep, eat...we can't just keep going full steam ahead, full out running, all of the time.

Oh, and then there's what other people bring into the equation. We can't control that either, and even the best laid plans sometimes get blown to bits because...well, we're social. We're complicated. We have all kinds of quirky relationship dynamics that guide our actions. And unless you lock yourself away to work away at your goals...sometimes life gets in the way.

So what happens when grand plans meet daily necessities and bump into unexpected events? Limitations.

And this is where dreams die.

The truth is, you can't do EVERYTHING. You need to prioritize. You need to figure out what's really important. And goals...dreams...visions of the future...they can easily get lost in this process. Try to do to much and chances are, nothing gets done. If you don't plan for your priorities, they get lost in the shuffle.

I've been working on admitting limits and setting priorities. Wow, its not easy. Its a process, for sure. I can easily convince myself to give up sleep. To work on vacation. To commit to doing more, to helping, to doing what it takes to get stuff done.

But then, of course, other things don't get done. And some of those things are really important to me. Frustration sets in. Less sleep. Distraction. And everything is affected.

How do you get past the limits?

1. Define your goals
You just aren't going to get there if you don't know where you're going. Write down your goals, make a plan to achieve them and be realistic about what its going to take (time, resources, etc.)

2. Enlist help
I'm horrible at this. You need people to not only to support you, but sometimes to actually help you achieve your goal. In fact, most things you CAN'T do alone. So ask and get people on your team.

3. Give up control
If I'm horrible at asking for help, I'm downright abysmal at giving up control. But once you get people to help, you have to let them help. So give it up. Seriously.

4. Prioritize (really, really)
This is the part of the process where you look around at what your doing and figure out if its getting you where you want to go. Are your actions supporting what you want to achieve? If not, change what you're doing.

5. Pace yourself
Be patient but not complacent. Don't confuse the two. Patience means understanding the realities of how much time things take. Complacent means letting things take too long...and then maybe them never happening at all. So be patient, realistic, and don't burn yourself out. Burn out is just as dangerous as complacency.

Sometimes you need to sprint, but sometimes you really are running a marathon. There are different limits to each and the winning runners acknowledge those limits and work within them effectively.

Your dreams shouldn't have limits, but all of us do. The only way we can reach our dreams is to be honest, strategic, and tenacious about who we are and what we want.

On enablement

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 09:44:00 +0100

I have blogged about this story before (and probably got the details wrong), but it blipped on my radar again today. It is the most standout story of Olympic 400m sprinting for me. Even though 400m was my distance, and it remains my favourite event of the Olympics, I couldn't tell you off-hand who won that year... but the name Derek Redmond stands out in my mind.

I want to draw your attention to the Dad in this video. Watch him fight his way past the officials. Watch him shoo them away so that his son can cross the finish line.

I want to be that person.

Hit ‘em in the gut first

Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:22:23 +0100

I’ve argued before that you need to emotionally hook learners even before you cognitively activate related knowledge. I reckon that learners are more likely to be open to any manipulation you might provide if they understand viscerally why something’s important before they are informed cognitively. Some new research might support this argument. An article points [...]

On belonging

Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:33:00 +0100

Like most people, I have a strong need to belong. To feel accepted. Like most people, I am also picky about where it is that I am accepted and by whom.

When I originally started blogging, I stood in awe of the likes of Kathy Sierra and Stephen Downes (among others). I hovered on the sidelines of the spaces they inhabited and then grew brave enough to contribute my twopenn'orth to the conversations they were having. For different reasons, neither of these two people are particularly strong on responding to blog comments - Kathy (who no longer blogs, to my knowledge) received so many comments that she was physically unable to respond to them all; Stephen believes that his readers' comments have validity in and of themselves, without needing his affirmation or validation (or so I seem to recall from somewhere... blowed if I can find where he said it). At one point, I posted something that took an opposing stance to something Stephen had said and almost fell off my chair when he spread a little link love and referred to my post in his OLDaily the next day.

It was this kind of acceptance that made me feel as if I belonged. And social media are great for this. They are such levellers. For example, to extend the Downes story for a moment, the nature of the relationship I have with Stephen has become increasingly relaxed over the years, as we have become connected in a wider range of social media spaces, to the point where we engage on personal issues as well as shared professional interests.

Switching tack for a moment, let's look at this belonging thing from a slightly different angle:

Because of a quirk of genetics, I always found it very difficult to find clothes that fitted me. I was the woman who hated clothes shopping, because after three stores full of nothing that fitted me, I began to feel like a freak. Things that fitted here, didn't close there, and things that closed there, hung like a sack everywhere else.

Then a wonderful woman called Sarah Tremellen established Bravissimo, an outlet for... well, check it out for yourself.

I don't know who developed her marketing plan, or whether she is naturally insightful, but she has formed a community for women who - like me - had to put up with all the strife that goes with being the shape that we are: quite apart from the struggle to find decent clothing, there are the assumptions about our morals and our intelligence levels, the ribald remarks, the failed attempts to conduct professional conversations with men who later wouldn't recognise your face if their lives depended on it.

I was an early adopter of Bravissimo and am a fan of just about everything about it: the decor in the stores, the defiant quotes on the walls, the professional fitting service. But most of all, I love that I can walk out of their stores feeling like a shapely woman, rather than a freak.

Recently, I was in one of their fitting rooms, when I overheard a woman in the next cubicle make a discovery: due to significant recent weight loss, she no longer fell within Bravissimo's target audience. The store no longer catered to her. She was utterly crestfallen as she said, "It looks like I'm just not a Bravissimo girl any more."

Why do I relate this story?

Because, in spite of the fact that the woman in question had achieved goal weight and all the attendant health and aesthetic benefits, in spite of the fact that she could now buy clothing from any high street store at a significantly lower price, she had effectively ousted herself from the community, and that was causing her genuine distress. And yet, one becomes a member of the Bravissimo community in the first place as a consequence of being excluded from all manner of other communities.

The difference is that Bravissimo deliberately fosters that sense of community, that sense of belonging.

As we build our learning environments and create our communication spaces, let's look for ways to foster that same sense of being part of something that make a person feel special. Something they will be reluctant to leave.

Updates to "Social Media for Trainers"

Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:40:00 +0100

Many thanks to those who have preordered Social Media for Trainers or purchased it for Kindle. A challenge with writing a book about technologies—particularly those that are continually morphing and evolving – is keeping content as up-to-date as possible. Since the book went to press several things have changed:

1. While Facebook terms of service have always been clear that having fictitious accounts was a terms of service violation, it is now clearer that having multiple accounts is forbidden, too. Those wishing to maintain “private” space on Facebook (for instance, to have one’s personal account but also to use Facebook for hosting a course) can do this via the use of groups and fan pages. Facebook offers many options for setting limits on who can see what: Be sure to learn about using lists and other privacy settings. (July 30, 2010)

2. Google has just announced that it will no longer support development of Google Wave and plans to support the service only through the end of 2010. Be on the lookout for new tools from Google. (July 30, 2010).

3. A new tool, Hootcourse, has recently emerged in beta testing and is so far proving a useful, friendly space for aggregating conversations. Hootcourse assigns a unique URL. Learners can access Hootcourse via either Twitter or Facebook. Conversations can be kept private if so desired. See http://hootcourse.com . For an example, visit a bookchat I recently led at http://hootcourse.com/course/523/ (August 8, 2010).

4. Keep up with more frequent updates by following me on Twitter @SoMe4Trainers or on the book's Facebook page

Best,

Jane

10 Social Media Rebuttals

Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:25:36 +0100

Jane Hart posted a tongue-in-cheek video by Ron Desi of 10 reasons why you should not have social media in the organization, and is collecting rebuttals. I figured I should weigh in, so as not to be left out ;), but I’ll go on and list 10 reasons why you should want social media in [...]

The LMS Debate rides again

Sat, 07 Aug 2010 17:00:21 +0100

Well, Saba called me out in an semi-anonymous (there’s a picture, but I don’t know who of, and there’s no name – in social media?) blog post on the LMS debate (a bit late to join the fray, no?). I was surprised they way they referred to me, but there you go(ng). I made a [...]

Collaborative co-design

Sat, 07 Aug 2010 13:11:32 +0100

In my previous post, I mentioned that we needed to start thinking about designing not just formal learning content, or formal learning experiences, but learning experiences in the context of the informal learning resources (job aids, social tools), and moreover, learning in the context of a workflow. I’d sold myself on this, when I realized [...]

Co-design of workflow

Fri, 06 Aug 2010 13:11:33 +0100

I’ve talked before about how our design task will need to accommodate both the formal learning and the informal job resources, but as I’ve been thinking about (and working on) this model, it occurs to me that there is another way to think about learning design that we have to consider. The first notion is [...]

Explorability and Incremental Advantage

Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:40:57 +0100

During a summer internship at NASA, many years ago, I met a researcher who was conceptualizing the interface property of ‘explorability’. I can’t claim that I accurately can communicate the nuances of Jean-Marc Robert‘s model, but I was intrigued with the notion. The idea that interfaces could differ on the extent that they supported experimentation [...]

My Top 10 Learning Tools

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 19:50:58 +0100

My ITA colleague Jane Hart regularly collects the top 100 learning tools via contributions from lots of folks. It’s a fascinating list, worth looking at. I couldn’t use her submission sheet (some sort of system bug), so I thought I’d make an annotated post. There are several categories of tools here. Harold Jarche talks about [...]

On being powerless

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 10:31:00 +0100

For the past few weeks, I have experienced a level of powerlessness I have not known for a long time. The frustration it has caused me and my family has spilled over into other areas of my life.

It caused me to think again of the workplace learner.

My frustration started with something as pleasant as the prospect of our family holiday. We decided to go to Lanzarote, which (for those who don't know) is a Spanish territory, and therefore within the EU.

Because I am married to an EU citizen, I have never before had problems getting a visa to travel in the EU. Things were different this time. The visa service has been outsourced to an organisation which appears to have become a law unto itself.

Previously, because I was already on record at the Swedish embassy, I could apply for a visa through the mail and would receive it within seven days. No problem. This is no longer the case. The requirement now is that I should attend an interview in London and there were no available appointments until after the start of our holiday. When I contacted them to point out the problem this presented, they were utterly unsympathetic. "Reschedule your holiday," was the solution they offered, as if this were the easiest and most obvious thing in the world.

I began casting about for ways to get my visa more quickly when I came across EU directive 38/2004 article 10 which states that, as the (1) spouse of an EU citizen and (2) having indefinite leave to remain (permanent residence) in an EU member state, I am allowed to travel anywhere within the EU in the company of my husband for a period of up to 90 days.

I contacted the visa service with this information. They already knew about it, it seems, but they still insist that I need a visa and they are still unable to assist me. So much for another provision of the directive which says that the spouses of EU citizens will be given priority treatment.

I was sure that they were mistaken and tried to contact the Spanish embassy for confirmation. They never answered either their phones or their emails.

My husband and I searched online and found all manner of precedent:

The visa agency remained unmoved.

We were advised by various sources that it would be illegal to prevent me from boarding the plane and that I should take my original marriage certificate and a copy of the EU directive with me. But I had my doubts about the effectiveness of these pieces of evidence on the person on border control with no authority and a set of rules handed down from on high.

I have made a host of telephone calls and have at last been advised by the border control folks at the UK airport that they will not stop me from boarding the plane. I have also been advised by the folks in Lanzarote that they will not stop me from entering the island.

I don't think I will actually believe it until I am safely ensconced in my villa!

But this saga isn't so very different from the experience of someone trying to upskill in order to be able to do something differently or better in the workplace. We've all been there.

You're not eligible to attend this course. Yes, I know what the employee's handbook says, but you're still not eligible.
You can attend this course, but the next one is running in 6 months. You'll have to reschedule that project.
You need an enrollment key/password to access that material, but we aren't issuing any at the moment.

In the end, we go subversive, or we find ways around the obstacle.

Or, at least, some of us do. I have never been very good at taking no for an answer. I have pushed back all my life. It's one of my most annoying characteristics. But I have seen 'impossible' things happen. Documents that should take 12 weeks to obtain have miraculously appeared with 24 hours. Jobs that have supposedly been lost have been reinstated. Doctors who are unavailable have suddenly become available. Doors that are supposedly sealed shut have swung wide. Of course, there are times when I deem it best to cut my losses and turn away, but these are conscious choices.

But I am stubborn and bloody-minded.

What about those who are not? What about the more gentle-natured people in the organisation? When they identify a development need and are stonewalled, what are they to do? This is a surefire way to generate a team of ' jobsworths' who punch the clock and look forward to retirement.

I can't bear the thought of willingness to learn going to waste. We simply have to find ways to empower people to access the learning that they need in order to do their jobs and do them well, or to upskill to take on another role, if they so desire.

We need to prise open some creaky doors. Of course, there will be resistance, but that's why there are people like (you and) me in this field: to push back against all that 'no-ness', to ask 'why' a lot until the lack of good reason causes the obstacles to crumble.

Ugh! I'm feeling right rebellious today.

School of the Ether

Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:59:45 +0100

Many years ago, Australia reached their farflung learners via the School of the Air. While they’ve now moved to internet technologies,this post on the mobile talks at the eLearning Africa conference reactivated and extended some thoughts. In the course of interviews for the mobile book, Bob Sanregret of Hot Lava (now part of Outstart) mentioned [...]

On principle, practice, experimentation, and theory

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:11:26 +0100

On twitter today a brief conversation ensued about best practices versus best principles. I’ve gone off on this before ( I think Dilbert sums it up nicely), and my tweet today captures my belief: “please, *not* best practices; abstract best principles and recontextualize!” However, I want to go further. Several times recently I’ve had people [...]

Catching up…

Tue, 27 Jul 2010 19:46:54 +0100

It’s been quite a while since I’ve blogged, and it’s not that there haven’t been learnings, it’s just that my dance card was too too full. What with conferences, a week of radical fever, the mobile book manuscript coming due, and a week off in the woods, not to mention a full load of client [...]

Look Inside "Social Media for Trainers"

Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:32:00 +0100

Amazon has just added the "look inside" feature for Social Media for Trainers so be sure to go take a look!

I'm offering daily tips and ideas on social media for trainers via Twitter @SoMeTrainers and weekly-ish tips via a Facebook page.

Check "Where's Jane?" at right for my speaking schedule. Most upcoming events are on the topic of social media for trainers, and several of them are free.

You Can’t (Just) Automate Discoverability

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:47:38 +0100

if you're going to leverage a social platform like Twitter, only people who link to your content will assist in it being more discoverable through search engines like Google or Bing.

It takes a village to build a community

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 19:20:00 +0100

We've been busy behind the scenes planning for the Tandem Learning Innovation Community (TLIC). As excited as we've been to get things started, there are just some logistics that need to get taken care of, things that need to be planned, strategies to be set. And the truth is, we have questions...questions that we need the community to answer. We could certainly move forward with the things, strategies, initiatives that we're interested in, but this community is all of ours and we need all of our input to shape it. So let me pose some questions here with the intent to collect your feedback...let's plan the path forward together...

What technologies are the most interesting to the TLIC? Are there technologies you'd like to learn more about? Are their particular companies or products that would be interesting to feature?

In the interest of continuing a research arm of the TLIC, are their companies that would be interested in participating in or contributing to research or case studies? We have been exploring partnerships with several universities, but would love to see what, if any, interest there is for companies to contribute to the research initiatives.

We're considering moving the community off of the LinkedIn site, although we are hoping to maintain the link to our LinkedIn profiles. If there were no restrictions, what would be useful features/functionality on a community site, or what might you find most valuable?

We're thinking of holding our first networking event on our Second Life island (in development) in early/mid August. We were planning for the first event to be an open discussion to address some of the above questions and pose some additional opportunities. What kind of structure have you found most beneficial in the past for Innovation Community events? What would you like to see more of?

We're looking forward to your input and perspectives and will be announcing details of our first official TLIC event soon! Stay tuned...

Multilinguistic monolingualism

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:58:00 +0100

I've been thinking about the different forms there are of a single language, and how we need to master so many of them during a lifetime.

For example, the language I use at home with my family isn't the same as the language I would use in an academic paper (not that I ever mastered that particular form of English, it has to be said!).

My kids happily use 1337 (leet) speak online with their friends and even in their text messages to one another. Occasionally, they will use elements of 1337 when texting me. Elements of 1337 have informed lolcat (follow the link and have a bit of fun, I dare you!). Even my pedantic septuagenarian mother has adopted some of the shortcut spellings when sending text messages (her most recent message to me included the word 'fite', for example... I never thought I'd see the day!).

My last employer owned the rights to a few courses in business English in a range of delivery media.

Here are some anecdotes that illustrate misapplication of contextual terminology:
A neurosurgery theatre nurse recently told me about a wonderfully talented Vietnamese neurosurgeon who had very little English when he joined the team at the hospital where she works. Being an intelligent and determined man, he learned quickly by listening to and imitating his colleagues. But he learned the hard way that it is inappropriate to tell a patient's family, "Oh, he's toast."

When my husband arrived in South Africa as a child, at the prompting of his classmates, he went and told his teacher to "Go jump in the lake" (although you can be pretty sure what he actually said was "gaw yump in de lake"). She remembered that with fondness when he phoned her some 25 years later to wish her well on her retirement.

A pastor friend of mine went to preach at a church in Mexico, where one or two teenagers, passionately devout about their Christian faith, sported T-shirts with the most profane of slogans, utterly oblivious to the meaning of the words writ large across their chests.

If there are this many forms of the language of which I am a native speaker, goodness knows how many forms there are of the languages of which I am not a native speaker. I wonder how many times I have put my foot in it. I know of one occasion when I politely advised a Swede that my Swedish was poor, but that I could follow if only they would speak 'more badly'. I'm sure there have been countless other occasions.

As national and cultural boundaries are breached by social media, we find ourselves in daily contact with non-native speakers of our language. We might need to remember to cut them a little slack... there may be times when they say something grossly offensive without meaning to do so!

Learning Anorak... deified?!?!

Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:00:00 +0100

I had to chortle. I have a Google alert set to look for references to Learning Anorak (well, I can't have you lot talking behind my back, now, can I?). Recently, this returned a reference to this post about Warhammer.

It seems the god of learning in this fantasy world is called Anorak, and it was he (he?) who taught the humans magic. Sadly, he was killed using the very magic that he had taught these ungrateful wretches.

But how deliciously ironic!

I only wish that there had been a picture to share with you. Failing that, you'll have to settle for my picture, as the living learning anorak ;o)