The latest issue of T+D has an article claiming that training is broken because it doesn’t deliver results as promised.  There is a kernel of truth in the article but the case is overstated.  There is nothing wrong with modern training methods that use active learning and collaborative tools to deliver the content.  But what is causing the failure of training is the support of the company after the training.  The authors argue for performance systems that deliver “just-in-time” training as a solution.

That is a good idea but again, I see the need for follow-through management which was championed in Wick, Pollock, Jefferson, and Flanagan’s Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning. I believe this will fix whatever ails training.

Had lunch with a colleague who just came back from the Campus Technology conference in Boston. Sounded like a great time and there are just wonderful things happening in educational technology. But, everything still seems to be either a variation on blogs, wikis, Moodle, or Second Life. Where are the really new groundbreaking tools?

I built Research Based Training because I mistakenly thought Evidence Based Training was taken.  But it is not and now the Evidence Based Training Ning Network is up and running at http://ebtraining.ning.com/.  See you there!

It started with Kruse’s article on the need for evidence-based training and continued with Ruark’s article in T+D.  Then, I read Christensen’s Disrupting Class in which he details in Chapter 7 the need for better education research.  After I read Clark and Mayer’s e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, I was inspired to create an online network to begin the movement for evidence-based training.  So, like most people, I went to Ning.com and created a social network - Research Based Training.  Please join the conversation.  And if you are building your own network and resources for evidence-based training, please tell me so we can link to you.

Gave my presentation on using blogs, wikis, and Second Life for college teaching and learning to the second Camp Delphi session for new online teachers.  Some interesting comments from the participants:

1.  What exactly is the difference between a blog and a discussion board?

My answer:  There are similarities but I find blogs easier to use because of the ability to center comments around a posting and the archive ability is easier to use than searching discussion boards.

2.  What is the value of the wiki in the classroom?

My answer:  It makes it easier to blend resources (video, text, photos, etc.) in a wiki page thus making it easier to access disparate resources and show their connection to each other.

3.  Why is Second Life so much like real life in that people tend to make a virtual classroom where you sit and watch PowerPoints?

My answer:  Second Life is still new and people are still exploring the possibilities.  It’s like the early films which essentially were recordings of stage plays.  It wasn’t until some filmmakers started to see the narrative possibilities of film (such as time-lapse, focusing in on action, special effects) that the medium came into its own.

So, how did I do?  How would you have answered these questions?

I grew up on James Burke’s Connections programs and loved the way how he showed that even the most obscure historical events were connected to each other.  This and Cosmos were the two most influential programs in my life.  So, I am especially excited to see Burke’s latest project - The Knowledge Web:

“The Knowledge Web is an interactive learning tool, an online resource that enables users to explore the history and creation of ideas. Users journey through a rich, three-dimensional database of knowledge, made up of thousands of history’s key people, places, and inventions, interlinked in thousands of ways, to discover the remarkable serendipity behind humankind’s tireless commitment to invention and innovation.”

They are accepting educators as beta testers.  This is a remarkable opportunity and I am seriously thinking of jumping in.  Here’s the video.

This has amazing potential for teaching! A visual organizer for students to develop their critical thinking skills and to better understand the great debates.  What a great use for wikis and social networking.

Although I may do some test audio blogging from my cell phone.

More than a blog posting but less than a wiki - Knol.

Came across this old personal clipping from EdTechPost: a matrix of uses for blogs in education posted back in 2003.  Since that translates to about 50 years in Internet Time, I wonder if Scott’s matrix still holds true.  It does for me (with some additions based on wikis and the rise of personal video) but does it hold true for you?

Jarche writes an interesting post about the difference between content and context.  According to him (which he cites from another source), “content” comes from the “main information nodes” (created by professionals and sophisticated amauters) while “context” is what users generate as they interact with content.  I can see this in things like the Amazon.com reviews where the content is the book listing and description and the context is the user reviews.  But, in cases like Wikipedia, I believe it is harder to distinguish between content and context. An even more ancient example would be the Talmud which seems to be context that has become content.

The importance of distinguishing between content and context is that good content encourages more context.  Thus, content providers should not fear the stealing of their content because what is happening is actually the creation of context which depends on even more content to thrive.  This reminds me of George Lucas’ decision to encourage fan-created context around his Star Wars content which increases the demand for even more original Star Wars content.

Jarche predicts that this difference is the key to the killer app in education which I wholeheartedly agree.  As more universities embrace active learning and Web 2.0 educational tools, they are finding that the better classes are where the students and teachers cocreate the learning.

The Pocket Video project is going well after we hit a snag.  With our first camera, we were able to capture some great test videos.  The problem was using the university’s email system to get the videos out to the various teachers and students.  Even with the relatively small size of the videos, we quickly overloaded email inboxes.  We also thought some more about the process of capturing, organizing, and storing videos which led to the realization that we would quickly overwhelm the teaching assistants with work.

Our solution was to buy a slightly-more expensive Pocket Video camera that could store videos on SD cards.  This means that each student would be responsible for their own videos and we can set up the e-portfolio system to be self-managed.

That is the thing with innovation; it’s always a bumpy road.

Courtesy of Harold Jarche:

Mahara is an open Source E-Portfolio tool which integrates well with Moodle through the single sign-on system.  What I especially like about this tool is the use of views to determine what parts of your portfolio can be viewed by who.  Thus, you can have one view that is geared toward business clients while another view can be for an academic audience.  Very neat feature!

The second tool, Deki Wiki, is a wiki tool which features either a free download or a free hosted service.  It’s main advantage seems to be that it integrates well with Google, Live Office and Flickr.  Judging from the free hosted service, this Wiki appears robust enough for a small training or education class.  Based on the demos, the free download product offers more features.

Something that amuses is the juxaposition of articles in a magzine.  For example, in the July 2008 edition of T+D there is a great article on the need for a research phase in ADDIE (the training model of analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation).  Why the need for research?  Because only research can provide accountability and that other professions have adopted the model of “evidence-based practice” (EBP).  That means that their is continuing and rigorous research that guides and validates the practices of the field.  As Ruark (the author) argues, the learning and development has relied on technology to justify its practices with just enough research to give the appearance of legitimacy.  To turn learning and development into an EBP, Ruark suggests the following four steps:

1. Form a research consortium.
2. Institute research criteria.
3. Use incentives.
4. Implement practice-based research.
5. Collaborate.

This will put the science of learning and development on the same level of technological advances in the field which will give greater credibility to the practice of training and development.

Ironically, the next article after this is an announcement from ASTD on a survey about informal learning in the workplace.  Even though there was no consensus on how to define informal learning, ASTD concluded that informal learning is highly prevalent.  But the examples they give are more on how employees use technology such as Google and social networking sites to find and exchange information, place televisions in common areas, encourage employee-created podcasting, and internal wikis.  Low-tech examples included shared lunches and rearranging the office furniture.  Essentially, anything that isn’t “easily recognizable as formal training and performance support” is considered informal learning.

As any beginning researcher is taught, before you can study a phenomenon, you have to define it or at least develop some scope of the subject.  And this is especially important if you are going to argue the alleged benefits of informal learning over formal learning.  Otherwise, you cannot legitimately make claims such as “examination of recent trends suggests that it [informal learning] is the natural learning complement to a world that is increasingly on-demand” when the first part of your sentence admits that there are “difficulties inherent with encouraging, regulating, or even defining the nature of ‘informal’.”

Viewed against Ruark’s article, this is clearly the case where the perceived benefits of new technologies are obscuring the actual effects of a new learning technique.  It is good that ASTD is going to research informal learning but they need to approach it with a better definition and a more objective attitude.

P.S.  And the more detailed results from the Informal Learning Study are not at www.astd.org/content/research.  Where are they?

See you on July 7th.