Week 2 of the family scuba certification and training progressed along nicely. My 11 yr-old continued to study independently and did very well in the pool and on his tests. He seems to have a really good grasp on doing everything ‘by the book’ and is very attentive and mature about things. He re-trained me on putting equipment together and buddy checking and I got a “good job Mom” out of it. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve said “good job” to him and I nearly teared up.

My 14-yr old decided scuba is not for her. She just wasn’t having fun in the pool and, since it’s supposed to be a recreational sport, it didn’t make sense for her to continue when she wasn’t really comfortable. I’m glad she tried it. It’s good too because I had my own case of anxiety in the pool and we’ll likely be snorkeling buddies. I’m not, however, throwing in the towel yet and am going to venture into the pool next week again because I didn’t think I gave it my best shot. I will regret it if I don’t.

Next week there may be an additional instructor for crybabies so perhaps that will make me less freakazoid about the whole thing. I feel the need to over train with an instructor vs. re-familiarize myself with the skills.

< overshare > I think that’s because there seems to be this switch that goes on sometimes when you’re a parent and you can easily become hypervigilant. In my mind I’m not really worrying about myself, I’m worrying about something happening to my kids due to my (possible) inability to respond to some problem like entanglement. And I think there’s something else at play – the remembrance of having to be bagged and resuscitated during childbirth eleven years ago. (Short story: my epidural block moved, paralyzing my diaphragm and I could not breathe). So instead of focusing on skills, I’m focusing on mistakes before they are made with a dash of ‘am I getting enough air here?’ I know right?  Why don’t you bring all your baggage into the pool? < /overshare >

My 16 year-old returned from camp and successfully performed all the basic skills without a problem and did perfect on the test. This did not surprise me. He approached driving the same way.

The boys went to a three-hour, instructor-led class and I completed two units of the e-learning course instead. Each unit in the e-learning course looks like it will take about 45 minutes to complete. The course was built with Articulate. There are frequent quizzes (every several slides) which is good because there’s over 100 slides to look at in each unit. I think the material is from the text mixed with video which you can also buy separately from PADI. There are also links to resources. Each unit ends in a test. It’s a pretty standard tutorial.

Now the nit picking…

• I don’t like the word “slide.” It’s a page. It’s the stuff from the book.
• Text appears on the left which mirrors the audio. I know we do this for people who don’t want, don’t have, or can’t hear audio but I get distracted reading while being read to. I wanted a way to hide it.
• If you fail a quiz, it takes you back to the beginning of the section. You can go through the section again or simply turn the pages and correct what you missed without getting any new information. Some branching would be nice that gives more information and a different question.
• When you do fail a question your get “feedback.” Feedback, to me, is the language of IDs. I’d prefer to see “not quite,” “there’s a better answer,” or something less clinical. I like conversational e-learning.

All in all though, it is good for its purpose and good use of the tools at hand. It must have taken a long time to create. Kudos to the creators.

As with a lot of self-paced e-learning, one thing that’s lacking is “high touch” points of the classroom. You don’t get the stories. Like this…

Scuba Diver Girl Janine: Where do I start? I was doing my hypoxic trimix certification in the Caymans and got narc’d. I saw a sponge that I swore looked like Richard Nixon! So I gave my dive buddies the double – V “I am not a crook” gesture. They looked at me like WTF does that mean. Of course when we surfaced and I told them what I saw it was hilarious. I haven’t lived it down!

I think stories from longtime divers (or access to them in a community) to illustrate key safety points (narc’d)would be helpful for all but the psycho hypervigilant mother with a possible lingering case of post-traumatic stress. Hand me a Xanax already and wish me luck.

Cooking analogies have been used to describe blended learning. Instructional designers looking at blended learning through a chef’s eyes might see  a “recipe” of sorts where you put ingredients together using a process. Or, you could look at blended learning from the learner’s point of view as buffet where you pick out what you want from a variety of food. My mentor/colleague Gary Woodill introduced me to the cooking analogy at a newbie elearning workshop we were doing. It is a good one.

However, I can’t help but think that when you actually mix ingredients while cooking the result is usually something that can’t really be “unblended” (although you could pick raisins out of an oatmeal cookie for example). But blended learning and quilting…that to me might be a better analogy, especially when talking about where social networks fit in. I like this definition of blended learning:

“Blended learning is a combination of learning objectives and learning modalities that are strategically combined to achieve a training program’s expected learning outcomes.” -Miner and Hofman, 2009

I hadn’t thought about the analogy between quilting and design of instruction until recently when I found some old quilting projects in need of attention. I share my love of the hobby with the Amish:

Amish quilts continue to be a source of inspiration to quilters. Modern quilt artists are using black with solid colors and discovering the beauty in such basic designs. Amish quilt designs are a result of a belief that art is not a separate thing but that beauty is a part of function, a concept that can be an inspiration to all quilters. – womenfolk.com.

When I design a quilt, I think in terms of its 3-dimensions. A quilt, of course, is made up of three layers (top, batting, backing) assembled by tying, machine sewing, or hand-stitching the three layers together. The top most layer is normally decorative; using an infinite amount of colors, techniques, and patterns. It can be taken apart and rearranged (with some effort but not as much as, say, a pie). The top layer is content. The batting is what makes it a quilt. Perhaps that can be viewed as the human element of learning. The backing is the underside of the quilt. Perhaps that can be the overall learning objective.

You have commercially-made quilts that you can buy somewhere like JC Penney. They are all the same. They are quilted with a machine, not by hand. This is the equivalent of off-the-shelf courseware.

You have template-type quilts with standard patterns from over the years. The can be very detailed or not. You can sew them my hand, machine stitch them, or even tie them (rapid). These are courses you make with template-based authoring tools.

Then you have custom quilts. One-of-a-kind art quilts. Custom content. Entered into award contests.

The picture below is a crazy quilt. No two are alike. They look haphazard. Random pieces are joined by elaborate stitching.

Historically the pieces were a frugal way to use old fabric. Your fabric, each with a memory. Schema. This is what blended learning today might look like with today’s social learning focus. I think what’s especially interesting is that crazy quilts normally don’t have batting. And, if the batting represents the human connection to content and objectives, perhaps our approach to social learning should be letting people take the random pieces of their lifetime and sew them together as they see fit …crazy talk I know.

I just quick wanted to share this blended learning graphic from EMC, a provider of information infrastructure systems (and thanks for letting me use it!).

Because they’ve acquired over 35 companies in the last five years (and have 50 new product launches each quarter), they have 10,000+ people who need an in-depth understanding of products. I would call that a boatload.

I like how they used this three level approach. The formal components include rapid eLearning (Articulate), virtual classroom, and live instructor-led and workshop. Informal learning involves audio and video podcasts, best practice sharing in communities, and coaching and mentoring. EMC used an analytical framework where the level of objective determines the blended learning methodology and delivery approach. A nice model, isn’t it?

Interesting article in Scientific American about research suggesting potential benefits of blogging for those coping with serious illness. Journaling as therapy isn’t new. And, it isn’t surprising that connecting with others and being part of a community (an added value of blogging) is healthful.

However, I can’t help but think that for those looking to improve performance for employees in a stressful workplace (healthcare, military, emergency response workers, etc.) blogging may prove a sound instructional strategy. I know I would rather write than take a one-time course about managing stress. Perhaps a blended instructional strategy? (coping with stress knowledge + technical support + blog + ongoing support = instructional strategy for the problem of [retention, cost of mistakes from stress-related lack of sleep, work-life balance, etc., etc.)

We know the use of technology provides learners more flexibility. (It’s kind of hard to get together physically in a group at 3 AM when you can’t sleep. Or connect with those dealing with similar issues who are not physically close by.)

Neuroscientist Alice Flaherty, who studies, among other things, hypergraphia (uncontrollable urge to write) is quoted in the article…

…blogging might trigger dopamine release, similar to stimulants like music, running and looking at art.

The research is speculative at this point. Many theories. And I’m certainly speculating here. But there are a lot of blogs built around stressful topics so, in practice, perhaps it does lead to physiological benefits like better sleep habits.

Did you notice that no one’s really calling themselves an LMS company anymore? If you use the Wayback Machine to analyze familiar LMS systems, you’d see a transition from standalone e-learning courses to learning management systems to added LMS functionality like authoring tools, learning content management systems, synchronous training platforms, and then to the convergence of learning management with talent and performance management. Most companies are now calling themselves something more than just an LMS company- the LMS is just part of a suite. The first chart below is adapted from one by Bryan Chapman and illustrates the learning & talent management convergence.

In addition to the convergence of learning management and talent management systems, we’ve got this disruptive technology thing going on. (and I do realize that e-learning was very disruptive…)

However, I find myself having two entirely different conversations with people…

One conversation will be about creating tracking workers’ competencies, addressing skills gaps, managing the pre-hire to retire cycle, developing learning plans, and matching gaps to learning interventions. And it will likely flow into discussion around labor shortages, boomer retirements, skills of new workers, etc.

The other conversation will be about collaboration and connections – how to use wikis, blogs, social networks, virtual worlds, etc. and it will likely flow into discussions around control and culture. We’ll talk about open vs. closed, pull vs. push, hosted vs. installed, generational issues in learning, and how to manage change.

Take a look at this second chart, below, which illustrates e-learning 1.0 and e-learning 2.0. If you combined the two charts you’d have 3 little galaxies…LMS converging with talent management and LMS (e-learning 1.0) converging with disruptive technologies. What’s a learning professional to do?

Is this familiar?

• Joe is retiring; Julie is a college graduate just starting her job
• Joe has a boatload of knowledge; Julie has limited knowledge of the job
• Joe is an exemplary worker and is the model for creating competencies; Julie gets a learning plan based on the model
• The learning plan was created and includes online courses, face-to-face instruction, webinars, tutorials, reading, and periodic mentoring by her supervisor.

Meanwhile…

• Julie completes everything in her plan…(oh no, now what?)
• Julie wants connections and to be connected, experiential learning, interaction, and feedback from Joe (and others) before he retires
• Julie starts to look for another job…

But wait…like superman the training dept….

• provides avenues for online social networking (public or add-on to LMS)
• has Joe and Julie work together in a Wiki (public or private)
• blends learning methods & delivery channels
• provides a repository of learning assets that Julie can choose from
• provides access to the Internet

The difference here is about making a space for disruption. Often, an organization will not adopt disruptive technologies because they don’t think they are as good as what they already have. Or they’re too new, too small. Take VoIP as an example. I use Skype almost exclusively but fall back on the land line if it gets really funky. But I am creating a space for it. I don’t want to be the one holding the telegraph…

I don’t think we need two conversations.

Have you ever had a real entry-level job? Not the manager-in-training after getting your MBA job but the teenage job or college student job? You know, jobs for spare change used primarily to buy macaroni and cheese and/or cheap beer? A job in corporate training was not even on the horizon when I started my first job. I would’ve said ‘huh?’ if I learned I would work as a corporate trainer. I wanted to work for MTV – maybe be a VJ like Martha Quinn and interview Steven Tyler of Aerosmith. Yes. Definitely. I wonder what the training would have been like…

Anyway, each of my early, entry-level teenage jobs involved on-the-job training. There was no e-learning for the masses. No Hamburger University. Just job aids and on-the-job training. One of the greatest skills I learned was pre-closing at a fast-food restaurant. Pre-closing involved cleaning and re-stocking everything while working into the wee hours. You were real careful as a pre-closer not to muck up the mayo with mustard and frankly, I was a bitch when the non-closers didn’t respect that. Careless ketchup slathering snobs they were.

This pre-closing skill has followed me everywhere – even into the corporate training area.

In the classroom:

• I would clean up the room, get pencils, paper, flipcharts, etc. ready
• at lunch, I’d get back to the room early and get everything back in order
• at the end of the day, I’d clean it back up and replace supplies that had been depleted

Today though, corporate training can be a bit messy. We blend everything together. We give a ton of options – not just one pencil but pens, sharpies, chalk, crayons, whiteboards, a mouse, a Wii….We even let other people blend it all together. In fast food land, imagine if I had invited the customer back to make their own burger. They probably wouldn’t even have wanted a burger. They’d use the ingredients at hand to make something better, different, unusual, unique. They’d get all wacky creative. Dude, it’s happening.

What’s a pre-closing trainer to do? Probably just welcome them, invite them in, give them access to everything, help them, make sure there is enough of everything, let them bring in their own stuff, let them make a mess, suggest when it makes sense (I’ll bet some fries would go good with that). And, it’s helpful not to bitch.

I am listening to Marc Rosenberg and Pat McLagan’s presentation on Future Trends in Training and Development via and ASTD (American Society for Training and Development) webcast sponsored by Learn.com.

Marc identified six trends:

1. Learning will evolve beyond training.
2. Blended learning will be redefined.
3. Learning will move to the workplace.
4. Learning and e-learning will be less course-centric and more knowledge-centric.
5. Learning strategies will adapt differently to different levels of mastery.
6. “Web 2.0″ will revolutionize learning.

Pat focused on the sea of change we are all dealing with.

My main takeaways: Learning professionals need to wake up and smell the ginormous cup of coffee.  And, learning professionals need to be able to help their learners become learning professionals. Ahaa!

Link to companion T&D article
Link to powerpointslides.pdf

If you’re trying to think of ways to illustrate and sell the whole 2.0 thing at your 1.0 organization, this “Meet Charlotte” slideshow from The Shed might do the trick. It’s downloadable from SlideShare. And, it looks like the nice folks at The Shed will let you customize it so long as you link back to the original. Nice.

[added after original post because I was blind enough to not attribute to the original creator : ( ]
The original inspiration for this style of presentation was “Meet Henry” from Ethos3 which officially reached cult status.

The popular” Meet Charlie” slide presentation by Scott Gavin, using the Ethos3 model is also excellent.

I’ve created one (below) for learning 2.0 reusing content from The Shed . You are welcome to use it/improve it but please attribute it to me, The Shed, and don’t forget the original creators at Ethos2.

| View | Upload your own

This is probably one of those requests that might show up on a listserv, discussion forum, email, or Facebook message to friends. But, what the hell…I’ll throw it out here on the blog…

One of my professors, Dr. Tiffany Koszalka, is looking for assistance…I thought, where better to turn than the edublogger community, right?

“The International Board of Standards for Training, Performance, and Instruction (IBSTPI) is looking at the possibility of creating a set of competencies for online learners. If you have experienced online learning, please help.
This is an exciting project! There is much scholarship on the characteristics of online learners and what makes them successful or not in online or blended learning environments, but there is no definitive set of competencies and performance standards that define the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that make online learners successful. Knowledge of these competencies (online learning knowledge, skills, and attitudes) is critical to instructional designers and educators who create and facilitate online and blended instructional and learning environments.

Below is a url for the survey IBSTPI has create to begin the identification of competencies. The survey is a little long and prompts for responses to some open-ended questions, but the information requested is essential to IBSTPI’s work in this area.

Please take the time to complete the survey and help IBSTPI with its mission. Our hope is to being analyzing data by November 12.”

Take the Survey

Thank you for your support on this study.

Tiffany

Director of IBSTPI

A starter….Self-efficacy, and…

I latch on to just about everything that comes across my screen on social networks and learning. I try not to get too discouraged by the number of new! social network services I’m invited to (or my hesitation at inviting other’ people) but instead get in there and have a go. I try to make connections: Facebook as an LMS? (I tried but doesn’t work for me in the corporate setting because it lacks reporting and, we know how important reporting is. A University would probably find value though).

Here’s one thing that caught my eye…Jay Deragon, in several posts, writes about the future of social networking and includes predictions from several social network executives. Here’s my synopsis:

• Ubiquitous: ‘Social networks will be woven into every product and thing we touch.’ (Karl Jacob, CEO of Wallop)
• Open: ‘We are pushing boundaries of what closed and open mean. It’s very necessary for people to take identities with them and supplement with content from elsewhere.’ (Dustin Moskovitz, co-founder or Facebook) “…portable profile that allows single log-on and pick and choose what to expose on different social nets.’ Rich Rosenblatt, CEO of Demand Media
• Profitable and targeted: business model integrates social networks using ads targeted from social graphs (Moskovitz). As well, the gap between total ad dollars and online ad dollars close. (Safa Rashtchy, from the investment firm Piper Jaffray)
• Fueled by wireless devices: mobile growth complemented by rich media like video will further grown social networking (Rashtchy, Deregon)
• Big chasing the small driven by the growth of user-generated content in niche areas, small players are driving acquisitions.

I agree with these – they’re not all that provocative. For helping people learn I see much discussion on how we can use social networks in new models of blended learning, the call for SSO (please! I’ve run out of password variations), targeting groups, wireless, multimedia, and how acquisitions impact corporate programs.

But what really interested me is Deragon’s idea on a missing piece-systemic thinking. Someone who wrote a bit about systemics and learning, Robert E. Young, writes about how systemics may recognize links between learning and motivation in his call for classroom reform. We can easily make a jump to apply this to corporate learning. An oft-quoted passage from his book in his book, Critical Theory and Classroom Talk, is:

…avoid a split between what men consciously know because they are aware of having learned it by a specific job of learning, and what they unconsciously know because they have absorbed it in the formation of their characters by intercourse with others, becomes an increasingly delicate task…

Don’t we do that? Split how we track what was learned? Is this motivating?

I think this delicacy is especially important in the performance-based training that is becoming common in many corporations. Driven by assigning learning interventions (which include training and other activities) to skill gaps under the umbrella of talent management, we can create a divide between I know what I know because (you told me) I learned it (or should learn it) and “I know what I know because I formed it with others. The latter is not tracked in the LMS. Instead, it’s our own measure. Is there some devaluation of the connections created through social networks because of how we traditionally have measured and tracked learning? Does is make social networks unappealing?

Since processes such as talent and learning management aren’t going away any time soon (quite the oppositve), I think it calls out for the need to keep many elements of subjectiveness attached to the processes associated with corporate learning and talent management and – more importantly – approach the process systemically by looking at the whole vs. the parts.

As “Jane Doe Researcher” I don’t want my performance to be evaluated on what someone else tells me I’ve learned and don’t want to be held to a list of competencies. I’d want my learning to be evaluated based on the character, depth, and richness of what I’ve learned alone and through my connections – globally, locally, within the corporation, and externally. {AND THANK GOODNESS IT IS!}. Does this make any sense whatsoever?