Why do we train? Because people have a need for training. To keep up with the evolution in a sector, to learn new techniques necessary to gain a competitive edge, or just because we are curious about what's new.
The key thing here is, it's an ongoing thing. It's continuous and essentially never ends. This has always been the case. Perhaps some time ago education was divided into formal (before work) and informal (on the job), but this is long ago. All forms of training and education are now constantly happening.
If we take this for fact, then why is it that so few organizations consider one of the forms of learning as existing only as projects? All too often, e-learning is merely a project. The disadvantage of this is the lack of knowledge built in the organization of how to manage the learning process. After the project has been delivered, only rarely any evolution is observed in the course material and the former project team usually has often duties to attend to.
I've been working on e-learning policy for a while now and this always strikes me as a waste of resources. The policy is too often dependent on the work of the few, instead of the commitment of many. E-learning has grown up. It's time to leave the project status behind.
As I look around me, some have already made this transition, others have not. It of course also depends on the size and objectives of the organization. But policy choices are easy. The real work is done afterwards.
18 Dec 2007
E-learning materials acquisition requires more than money.
I've been reviewing some demos that explain and train for diversity. The really good quality and the nuanced message they give was a pleasure to watch. They were sent to me by Shamima from the Grimsby Institue in the UK.
Even though the discs were just demos, they showed really well the possibilities of the medium. Surprising as well is the depth one can attain with a well balanced mix of graphical, textual and video elements.
But far from this post being nothing more than a positive review of the demos - which of course it is as well - I want to share something I thought while watching.
As this is -or rather, was, because the project is almost through- a really good example of a shareable e-learning material, I doubt I would be able to convince our policy staff to have it translated and used in our network. Probably not because of the cost. Money is something usually available for good projects. Rather, I would imagine it to be hard to get the diversity issue so much on top of a usually crowded policy agenda that it would seem worth spending the money for it.
So the choice for e-learning in our environment (multi-culture, multi-language) becomes difficult because of what is made is not necessarily what is felt as needed. It's a challenge I certainly want to tackle.
Even though the discs were just demos, they showed really well the possibilities of the medium. Surprising as well is the depth one can attain with a well balanced mix of graphical, textual and video elements.
But far from this post being nothing more than a positive review of the demos - which of course it is as well - I want to share something I thought while watching.
As this is -or rather, was, because the project is almost through- a really good example of a shareable e-learning material, I doubt I would be able to convince our policy staff to have it translated and used in our network. Probably not because of the cost. Money is something usually available for good projects. Rather, I would imagine it to be hard to get the diversity issue so much on top of a usually crowded policy agenda that it would seem worth spending the money for it.
So the choice for e-learning in our environment (multi-culture, multi-language) becomes difficult because of what is made is not necessarily what is felt as needed. It's a challenge I certainly want to tackle.
30 Nov 2007
Are we good at change?
Well, no of course. We resent it. I resent it. I'm not saying we don't see the advantages of it. We're even eager to change, but we don't like transitions. This is what makes change hard.
When we see e-learning take off in our institutions, we often have success in a first phase. The trouble starts in the second phase, when people are used to good content with good support and active coaching. Then they suddenly discover that the distance to teachers is almost gone. And guess what happens next? The learner realizes he or she is in control of the experience. So then the learning institutions find themselves in the position of being transparent in the learning experience and entirely oblique in the management and curriculum processes.
To conclude for now, can we change our structures to accommodate the new expectations of learners? I really can't say, but it will probably be inevitable and the best adapted organizations will be the ones that are most open to change to follow this movement. Change management will have to evolve into an ongoing process, as it already is in commercial organizations.
When we see e-learning take off in our institutions, we often have success in a first phase. The trouble starts in the second phase, when people are used to good content with good support and active coaching. Then they suddenly discover that the distance to teachers is almost gone. And guess what happens next? The learner realizes he or she is in control of the experience. So then the learning institutions find themselves in the position of being transparent in the learning experience and entirely oblique in the management and curriculum processes.
To conclude for now, can we change our structures to accommodate the new expectations of learners? I really can't say, but it will probably be inevitable and the best adapted organizations will be the ones that are most open to change to follow this movement. Change management will have to evolve into an ongoing process, as it already is in commercial organizations.
29 Nov 2007
Mobile learning objects and subjects
Mobile learning is hot and will only become steamier. But lest we burn ourselves, perhaps one or two comments from m-learning speeches and conversations at Educa.
On the job training and especially on the spot training is perhaps the most interesting form of training. It doesn't require the worker to leave her or his workplace and can be organized in the most versatile way.
First of all, m-learning is mostly m-training. This means it's mainly about small objects being ported to mobile devices. Not only device characteristics cause this, but also the learning itself. With the new portable devices such as Playstation Portable, the first constraint is partly lifted. This means that true m-learning will become more feasible. What's still needed is a good educational approach to the m-objects.
Second, it means teachers will become coaches even faster, because training and learning is out of the controlled environments.
The first remark will get solved through technology. The question I'd like answered is, will the teachers like coaching?
And the answer of course is: they must.
In some conversations during the Special Interest Group lunch, I was told that coaches/teachers are welcoming the new tools as they are so much faster and easier to use. The trouble lies more with the institution management which is concerned its teachers will not want to adapt to the new model. So my question is valid, even though the barriers are not with the coaches but more in the social organizations and the management.
On the job training and especially on the spot training is perhaps the most interesting form of training. It doesn't require the worker to leave her or his workplace and can be organized in the most versatile way.
First of all, m-learning is mostly m-training. This means it's mainly about small objects being ported to mobile devices. Not only device characteristics cause this, but also the learning itself. With the new portable devices such as Playstation Portable, the first constraint is partly lifted. This means that true m-learning will become more feasible. What's still needed is a good educational approach to the m-objects.
Second, it means teachers will become coaches even faster, because training and learning is out of the controlled environments.
The first remark will get solved through technology. The question I'd like answered is, will the teachers like coaching?
And the answer of course is: they must.
In some conversations during the Special Interest Group lunch, I was told that coaches/teachers are welcoming the new tools as they are so much faster and easier to use. The trouble lies more with the institution management which is concerned its teachers will not want to adapt to the new model. So my question is valid, even though the barriers are not with the coaches but more in the social organizations and the management.
Why authority is suspect
Authority is no more. And let's be thankful it is. I just attended the speech from Andrew Keen and his frightening message of internet killing our wisdom. I think it's a load of soft smelly street ornament.
I won't go into the exact contents of his speech. It can easily be found in his book, on the web and perhaps he'll try shoving it down your throat as well.
What I will focus on, is the underlying message of elitism. Unpopular though hippies may be nowadays, they did one important thing and that is do away with authority. I don't mean there are no longer people who are experts in a subject. It does imply that expertise in one field no longer leads to authority beyond that. Or even of authority in the field itself.
Is this necessarily bad? It is if you like authority. It is not if you prefer genuine experiences. In general, authority inhibits true delving into the other as a person. It requires formal obligations to be observed which are generally counterproductive in achieving true interaction. And in learning, true interaction - both live and virtual - is the prime objective (apart from the others, such as don't disturb foreign worlds with a lower level of development).
So authority is not bad just because it's not democratic. Democracy is a lofty goal, not a label you can stick on something, though that's a different discussion. Authority is bad because it keeps us from being our true selves. If I am put in the role of expert and others expect me to be an authority, it prevents me from expressing my doubts which are inherent and necessary in any learning environment. If I can be just a contributor, my expertise can be judged objectively.
We don't need another generation of power hungry authority figures. And especially not male ones.
Recognize the model? Male, ageing, expert: the professor. Yesterday's authority.
Web 2.0 liberates us from him. Let's keep it this way. Collaboration does that.
I won't go into the exact contents of his speech. It can easily be found in his book, on the web and perhaps he'll try shoving it down your throat as well.
What I will focus on, is the underlying message of elitism. Unpopular though hippies may be nowadays, they did one important thing and that is do away with authority. I don't mean there are no longer people who are experts in a subject. It does imply that expertise in one field no longer leads to authority beyond that. Or even of authority in the field itself.
Is this necessarily bad? It is if you like authority. It is not if you prefer genuine experiences. In general, authority inhibits true delving into the other as a person. It requires formal obligations to be observed which are generally counterproductive in achieving true interaction. And in learning, true interaction - both live and virtual - is the prime objective (apart from the others, such as don't disturb foreign worlds with a lower level of development).
So authority is not bad just because it's not democratic. Democracy is a lofty goal, not a label you can stick on something, though that's a different discussion. Authority is bad because it keeps us from being our true selves. If I am put in the role of expert and others expect me to be an authority, it prevents me from expressing my doubts which are inherent and necessary in any learning environment. If I can be just a contributor, my expertise can be judged objectively.
We don't need another generation of power hungry authority figures. And especially not male ones.
Recognize the model? Male, ageing, expert: the professor. Yesterday's authority.
Web 2.0 liberates us from him. Let's keep it this way. Collaboration does that.
28 Nov 2007
In-company e-learning for theoretical backgrounds
There seems to be a quite radical fissure between the models of pricing for e-learning in academia and business. While in business the main focus is on measured progression of skills, University students are more attracted to the advantages in term of experience. Skills are perhaps still not measured as much in university as in businesses.
The question one might have, and certainly the one I continually contemplate, is what exactly is measured.
In traditional business training, often procedures are taught. An acquired skill can be measured on the job or at the end of the training. Much less attention is given to the underlying views and principles as this would require a more theoretical exam. Perhaps what the business context might use e-learning for is exactly this. Training is often quite fast in a class environment, but conceptual knowledge is sometimes considered too boring or even unnecessary for in-company training.
If we accept this to be normal practice, we could also enhance the learning experience for company training by providing interesting background materials for the in-class training through e-learning.
The question one might have, and certainly the one I continually contemplate, is what exactly is measured.
In traditional business training, often procedures are taught. An acquired skill can be measured on the job or at the end of the training. Much less attention is given to the underlying views and principles as this would require a more theoretical exam. Perhaps what the business context might use e-learning for is exactly this. Training is often quite fast in a class environment, but conceptual knowledge is sometimes considered too boring or even unnecessary for in-company training.
If we accept this to be normal practice, we could also enhance the learning experience for company training by providing interesting background materials for the in-class training through e-learning.
27 Nov 2007
Off to Berlin
Tonight I'll be in Berlin, at the Online Educa Conference. It'll be intense and hopefully also . We're a slightly bigger delegation, two from last year's one. I hope to find enough inspiration to blog live from some of the talks.
I brought my camera to make it slightly less boring so I'm all set to go. Weather's typical for this time of year, cloudy with some drizzle. Last year it was sunny but cold. Taking pictures would have been easier then, but I didn't bring a camera as I was there only two days. Well, you can't always get what you want.
I visited the Copendia site yesterday and it seems interesting enough. Though they seem mostly to work commercially, I wonder if other ways of exchanging materials would also be possible. I'll be sure to get a demo of their software and the technical underpinnings.
Time to empty my desk and hit the road - or rather, the sky.
I brought my camera to make it slightly less boring so I'm all set to go. Weather's typical for this time of year, cloudy with some drizzle. Last year it was sunny but cold. Taking pictures would have been easier then, but I didn't bring a camera as I was there only two days. Well, you can't always get what you want.
I visited the Copendia site yesterday and it seems interesting enough. Though they seem mostly to work commercially, I wonder if other ways of exchanging materials would also be possible. I'll be sure to get a demo of their software and the technical underpinnings.
Time to empty my desk and hit the road - or rather, the sky.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
