The annual predictions for e-learning in 2011 are in at eLearn Magazine. Some will say this much of this is already happening – and it is for some – but corporate e-learning is still heavy into creating e-learning courses using rapid e-learning tools and web conferencing tools for live online training. The social/collaborative solution is still a line item on a planning sheet.

Some bullet points based on others predictions:

• More content curation
• Grassroot changes with new technologies in the  classroom
• Learning in the context of real work vs. artificial course
• Return to “just in time” model
• Informal learning will rise in importance
• Demise of course in favor of deeper uses of of technology
• E-learning with substantive purposes
• Gamification of learning
• More draconian policies and procedure limiting use of social media
• Killer augmented reality app will be developed
• Shorter programs
• Learners as designer
• Learning apps
• Video galore
• Continued unhappiness with LMSs
• More switching to cloud computing
• Adapting to iPad and tablets
• Learning apps as extensions vs. “all-in-one” solutions
• Apps replace e-learning courses
• Uptake of service to support persistent referencing of web resources
• Ambitious educators venture out more.
• Increased  concern for accreditation of e-learning from academic institutions
• Increased interest in teaching and learning theory
• More blending live (hybrid)
• More sharing of open resources
• Science of e-learning will continue to develop
• Augment reality gets easier
• Situated learning grows thanks to mobile
• Educational institutions actually change

I found the predictions encouraging in a “new moon rising” way. Mine…

Virtual classroom tools haven’t changed much over the past several years. That will change. Personal videoconferencing, telepresence technologies, tablets, and integration with existing systems will drive innovation in this area. We’ll see a flood of enterprise-level mobile apps developed. More outsourcing, especially to niche providers, will lead to more internal vendor management. We’ll see more stand-alone and integrated collaborative platforms designed to capture expert knowledge. On the horizon: alternate reality games and other social gaming.

Let’s see how I did last year…

We will see more “platform as a service” (PaaS) solutions with further computing enhancements to support the “micro” movement. Aggregators, mobile support, and real-time collaboration will bring a new level of complexity to the increasingly distributed, knowledge-driven workplace. As we process more fragmented information and sources, content curators will be needed to support transfer of learning. Tight budgets and renewed fear of travel will bring more innovative blended learning solutions that include online presence support, 3-D immersive environments, and gaming solutions. “Rogue” will give way to acceptance as companies reconcile the privacy and productivity concerns associated with social media. As a result, we’ll see the formation of richer online networks and communities. On the horizon … augmented reality.

Meh. Some progress…
I’m of the opinion that we won’t see sustainable changes (loss of the course mentality) until 2015.

Is this the adoption curve for next generation of e-learning? I’m beginning to think it is. And I’m thinking it may stay that way unless there is an awareness of personal beliefs as it relates to usage of e-learning.

An older paper by Dr. Irina Elgot I recently ran across doing some research really resonated with me. Called “E-learning adoption: Bridging the Chasm“, the paper considers possible reasons for e-learning not reaching its full potential. Elgot mentions the socio-cultural, intra-and interpersonal factors, with a special focus on the personal decisions made by [instructors].

Elgot…

“…suggests approaching the e-learning innovation as a multidimensional process located in two planes: the plane of technology and the plane of pedagogy (or teaching and learning). Conflating these two separate aspects when evaluating the progress of e-learning adoption is counter-productive. At any given point in time both individual and institutional adoption of e-learning can be undergoing different adoption cycles; and it appears that currently the adoption of e-learning technologies, especially LMS, is located at a more advanced adoption stages compared to the teaching and learning innovation.”

“This is why research in e-learning adoption…indicates that the roots of the problems with e-learning are primarily associated with teaching and learning processes, rather than with the use of technology per se. This can be referred to as the e-learning chasm. The chasm, in this case, is not located within a linear adoption process but between the two interrelated but distinct components of e-learning: adoption of the e-learning technology innovation and adoption of the e-learning pedagogy innovation.”

So if an instructor thinks voicing over his or her PowerPoint and uploading it into the LMS is the right approach, he or she will continue to instruct that way regardless of delivery channel. Elgot says, to overcome the e-learning chasm, instructors need to make their theories explicit. I just don’t see that in corporate L&D, especially when SMEs create the content. If your e-learning is not reaching its full potential. maybe its because people don’t know they always approach instructing the same way and can’t envision another way because they’ve never been exposed to it. When you’re a hammer everything looks like a nail, right?

Curve via Scott McLeod (who’s wondering if we’re too harsh on our teacher’s kids and suggesting that over time, “we [edubloggers] begin to normalize these actions and internalize them as ‘best’ or ‘desired’ practice.” (I’d say yes to the latter.)

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.

Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

So there you go.

I mispronounced epistemology several times during a class last year. This is probably why: from Greek ἐπιστήμη. It’s like the symbol formerly known as Prince. My professor pronounced it so it sounded nearly sensual: \i-ˌpis-tə-ˈmä-lə-jē\. I’d probably get it right if I remembered the second syllable is pissed.

Why would you take a class where you have to pronounce epistemology anyway? Yawn. Anyway, my nemesis. Epistemology. Perhaps I’ll fake sneeze when I say it next time so half the class says gesundheit! (American translation: gazoontite) and only the other half is thinking DOH! I’ve had trouble with mispronunciations ever since I can remember leaving me wondering if I’m phonetically challenged or just dumb.

Isn’t this just the best digressive start EVER? Can you even digress if you’ve not yet focused at all? Apparently.

Tony Bates. Author of Books. Ph.D. in educational administration. Global consultant. Brilliant. Probably can pronounce that word with ease….answers three questions that end up being words to work by.

• Design deliberately. He says the design of an e-learning course reflect the (often unconscious) epistemological position of the instructor/course designers SO if you want to exploit the learner-centered social constructivist approach to today’s social learning supportive technologies, you need to deliberately design. He notes that LMSs (the ones without collaborative tools) tend to be used in a objectivist way which implies that we’re behind the eight ball to start with. You may not agree but I think a lot of people just go with the gut.
• View e-learning as a curricular and instructional decision. Dr. Bates thinks we tend to see e-learning mainly as a ‘delivery’ decision. He suggests that it become a curriculum decision too especially if technology tools are deliberately chosen and used to support a particular epistemology (noting that slow uptake of web 2.0 tools is that they don’t support the predominant objectivist approach in North America).
• Use. Understand. Share. Be helpful. “Instructors should certainly know how to use the Internet and computers, but much more important is that have a good understanding of epistemologies, learning theory and instructional design; alternatively they need to be prepared to work collaboratively and respectfully with those that do have this knowledge.”
  

I think this gets at the core of what needs to be done to solve problems around poor e-learning courses and, as Dr. Bates notes, slow uptake of social learning. Of course he speaks of higher ed, where it’s more acceptable to talk about epistemologies and pedagogies and social constructivism (because they are in the business of learning). Talk like that is mostly poo-pooed in corporations. Perhaps it shouldn’t be. Theory application to design – especially when unconscious decisions are at play – seems to be one way to break out of a rut.

I haven’t supported all of this in the past. I’ve gone with the gut. Banned the blah blah blah stuff from my work vocabulary. This is probably why I sway toward starting e-learning with “course” in mind. Or content. You?

I will be traveling to Australia for the first time in April and I leave in just two and a half weeks. I’m speaking at the AITD conference in Sydney. Totally awesome. Freaking. AWESOME.

I did the Visa thing last month but, true to form, when it comes to traveling, I’m just getting around to asking myself smaller questions about currency, electrical adapters, cell phones, what the heck to wear based on seasonal temperatures, and what to see when I’m in  tourist mode. I’m an organized procrastinator – which means I’m terrific at organizing for tomorrow – so I have a comprehensive list of stuff with checks and question marks next to each thing listed. (Sidebar… as I’m writing this I see I’ve got a beautiful, helpful email from Cathy Moore in response to a Tweet for tips along with several responses there from recent travelers and residents of Sydney. Another use for Twitter.)

OK, so more important than the travel details is the talk. I titled it “E-Learning 2010: Innovation and Implementation.” I’m also doing a social media pre-conference workshop. (It’s a ‘laptop optional’ session so requires some planning for those who do and those who do not have their laptop. Been there done that, check.)

So the workshop is good to go and the ’2010′ presentation is primarily done. I’m at that point of tweaking, timing, and making the presentation run smoothly, when all conditions are ideal, while also having a plan-b. I’m using a lot of actual examples of courses so need offline versions of courses to run that are short enough – but understandable – while trying to get the clearest view on a screen and, of course, adequate audio.

My small dilemma is where rapid e-learning fits (rapid used here = rapid development using simple authoring tools). (Rapid, of course, can also mean rapid deployment or rapid consumption. In my experience though it usually is about development using the type of authoring tools non-programmers can use.)

See,the presentation is not about what will be…it’s about what is happening in 2010 and how people are doing it. What’s innovative and implemented today. None of us will deny that rapid e-learning is today. I think it’s a safe bet to say it dominates the e-learning market alongside PowerPoint.

So that’s where I am. I do have rainbows and unicorns to show and talk about – what I see around the corner or being implemented by a few early adopters – but where does rapid e-learning fit in? Somebody help me out and point me to innovative uses of those tools they’ve seen. Because I’ve only got 2 1/2 weeks!

Oh, and last thing…what souvenirs to bring back for the kids? Coins are a hit for the youngest along with anything relating to the platypus because he just did a report on that. Teens? Perhaps the greatest gift is me staying there ; ) My husband hopes I do come home.

Did you ever see the “results not typical” comment at the bottom of an ad for some product? In the US, it once was* a legal loophole. Something like this:

“This miracle powder worked for this genetically engineered buxom red head with six-pack abs but probably won’t work for fat brunette cows eating Chicken McNuggets in front of the TV.”

It’s (1) potentially damaging (I almost tore my rotator cuff hurling a McNugget at the TV screen) and (2) costly (people blow a ton a money buying “results not typical” products and subsequently consulting with psychiatrists only to learn that it’s all their mother’s fault anyway).

Part of my job (and my nature) has  always been searching for the best, most innovative examples. In my mind, I see inspiration in the “non-typical.” I search for what is typical among non-typical programs and write about it. I hope to inspire. I hope people say, “we could do this…”

But be warned. If you don’t take a “results not typical” mindset when it comes to e-learning, you should. Be inspired but don’t try to be something you can’t. And don’t think you’ll do better than everyone else that is equally typical. You won’t.

Here are the slides from a webinar I did on “Google Tools for Online Learning” earlier today along with some links that I promised.

Google products covered:

Alerts

Blogger

Blog Search and Book Search

Calendar
(Doug Belshaw example)
How to use Google Calendar as a tool for lesson planning

Search (including simple uses)
(Maurer and Sapper reference: “ is learning still a necessity?)”

Docs

Gmail

Reader

Custom Search

Groups

iGoogle

Mobile

Video
Why businesses use Google business video

Sites|

Desktop

Chrome

Wave

Chinnery, G.M. (2008). You’ve got some GALL: Google-Assisted Language Learning. Language Learning & Technology, February 2008, Volume 12, Number 1, pp. 3-11.
Educause (2008). 7 Things You Should Know About Google Apps. Educause Connect.
Google for Educators

Posts from our group blog, Workplace Learning Today:
Why Google Apps Are Moving Out of Beta

The Risks of Cloud Computing

Thanks for attending.

I received the following question via the Google Talk widget on my blog:

“I saw the ad for the Multi-Generational report you did. I like the alternative viewpoint that maybe the multi-generational thing isn’t a big deal as it is being discussed at all the industry trade shows. I am not yet buying into the idea that we need to create Facebook, SecondLife, learner-driven content (e.g., wiki, texting) type learning simply because the younger generation learns that way.”

That last part – basically the idea that we need to use “2.0″ tools and technologies because young people learn that way is something I hope no one buys into. People across generations expect rich, collaborative learning which may or may not be enabled by Web 2.0 tools.  Don’t you? I don’t want to listen to this & then respond. Train, learn. It’s content-centric.

I want learning that is social. Don’t you? I want some structure – maybe contextualized concepts – that allow me to construct my own meaning through interactions with others. There is still structure. Guide, learn. It’s learner-centric.  I’m doing that now. I try to construct my own meaning based on the question. Your responses will further guide me.

I think this is the struggle. How to make e-learning less content-centric and more learner-centric. Short answer: quit trying to control everything. Quit trying to elicit a specific response. Be a guide. For everyone. Being a Web 2.0-enabled guide depends on your environment. However, they are conducive to social learning. And people expect that. Don’t you?

If you buy this learner-centric environment enabled by the Web 2.0 tools that are so shiny now, where does that traditional e-learning course you’re working on fit in?

ASTD‘s Learning Circuits Blog has a monthly ‘Big Question.” This month it’s:

I’m interested in [the field of] eLearning. What should I do first?

I’m responding to this question from the perspective of a person looking to get a job in the field of e-learning vs. a person who knows little about the term.

I think one place to start is to look at the competencies and skills needed for various “e-learning” jobs. E-learning, of course, encompasses many areas – courseware designer, curriculum development, online trainer, blended learning specialist, Flash programmer, game designer, research, etc. Here’s a brief listing of some of the competencies I think newbies to e-learning should focus on:

• history, trends, and direction (history, evolution, impact of technology, etc.) Here is a presentation on learning and technology (historical) done by my colleague, Gary Woodill, some time ago for Operitel and a presentation on learning technology (LMS/LCMS/Talent Management that we, Brandon Hall Research, deliver in a “101″ webinar with Learn.com which should provide an overview. I also wrote  elearning 101 which provides an overview of e-learning
• adult learning and the foundation of human learning (theory, practice) If you like print books, one good one is Human Learning by Jeanne Ellis Ormrod.
• knowledge of evaluation
• Need identification, analysis, recommendation, solution
• Knowledge of instructional strategies (application of theories)
• Tools of e-learning – authoring tools, systems (LMS, LCMS, Live Online Learning, social media)
• Methods, processes, delivery channels for e-learning – synchronous, asynchronous, blended, distributed, performance support tools, etc.
• Course authoring – knowledge of software (simulation, game, rapid design tools, multimedia, etc.).
• Web interface design – my favorite books are The Non-Designers Web Book by Williams & Tollett and Don’t Make Me Think by Steve Krug.
• Online facilitation skills – Jennifer Hoffman has a great program with certification @ insynctraining
• Project management skills – there are books, programs, and experts specializing in project management. Here’s one by a colleague

So, here’s what I suggest:

• Find e-learning experts and follow their work
• Attend webinars
• Attend conferences
• Subscribe to blogs & start your own
• Read – trade journals, periodicals, books, presentations, white papers, research, etc.
• Join e-learning associations (local, national, global)
• Take a course, enroll in a degree program (ID, facilitation of online learning, curriculum development, project management, etc.)
• Attend conferences (online and face-to-face)
• Learn to use authoring and other software and platforms; HTML & other coding (w3schools is good)
• Visit the Learning Circuits blog and find others’ suggestions on this question.

As an aside, here’s my own e-learning journey so far:

• got a job in e-learning! Said ‘holy shit, what do I do?’
• joined ASTD, ISPI, e-Learning Guild, went to Masie lab. Said ‘holy shit, how do I do this?’
• started to read everything I could find on the topic – print, web. Annoyed the heck out of my co-workers and vendors with a sea of questions.
• tried everything
• subscribed to periodicals, email lists, listserv, read blogs. Had several aha moments.
• learned how to use authoring tools, created some asynch courses, developed curriculum, blended learning solutions for tech training. Felt like crying frequently due to some steep learning curves.
• learned how to train online by using an online learning platform (WebEx) by screwing up multiple times and attending a lot of other peoples training (started a best practice log)
• became a project manager for an LMS/LCMS/Talent Management implementation; learned about systems through Brandon Hall KnowledgeBase (this big implementation was the point in time where I knew I would stay in this field)
• joined social networks
• enrolled in a Master’s program at Capella University (Education – Instructional Design for Online Learning); learned theory, application, some tools, web design, project management, how to “do” research
• started working part time doing e-learning research for Brandon Hall even though I had zero time. Said, ‘WTF was I thinking? (Did I mention I had zero time)’
• left training job and joined Brandon Hall Research full-time. A huge step for me – working at home, etc.
• started a personal e-learning blog, joined the edublog community. Realized I was learning as much as I did in my Master’s program.
• joined online social networks, started using all the newest tools and technologies. Tweet!
• enrolled in Ph.D. program at Syracuse University (Education – Instructional Design, Development, and Evaluation) for a still unknown reason…perhaps status, earning right to be an expert, feeling that the future of education is online and that there will be a need for instructors with terminal degrees, unresolved middle child thing.
• Wrote this blog post and wondered if it contained too much info. Pushed “Publish” anyway.

Al Moser trashes voice over PowerPoint in this blog post about using multimedia in eLearning. He feels audio is a weak solution because it reduces knowledge retention, reduces productivity, reduces accessibility, and removes searchability. He concludes by saying recorded VIDEO sucks. (I think he means boring videos suck not all videos).  I believe Al is making this about the tool (PowerPoint + audio) when he should be talking about the method and the quality of instruction. The simplest tools, in the hands of an artisan, can make a masterpiece.

On issue one: does audio in e-learning reduce knowledge retention? I turn to Ruth Colvin Clark and Richard Mayer’s book “eLearning and the Science of Instruction.”

Clark and Mayer found that “people learn more deeply from multimedia lessons when words explaining concurrent animations or graphics are presented as speech rather than onscreen text.” They call this the modality effect. The study is not one of reading text from PowerPoint slides but the study included (among several comparisons) an iteration where narration and onscreen text were identical. In short, the researchers recommended the use of spoken rather than printed words in multimedia messages containing graphics with related descriptive words. The animation and narration groups generated between 41 – 114% more solutions than the animation and onscreen text group, evn though both groups received identical animation and words.

On issue two: does audio with eLearning reduce productivity? Al compares the time to read vs. the time to listen. I have to wonder if he’s just measuring ‘seat time’ vs. value. It’s like saying I should only communicate via text message vs. phone call because it’s faster.  I’m baffled by this reasoning.

On issue three: does audio reduce accessibility? The point being made here is that a course that is linear in nature does not give the learner opportunities to explore other areas. I think a case can be made for both the value of a linear path and the value of a more learner-controlled environment. If I’m step-by-step fixing the gazillion dollar Hubble telescope, I want a step-by-step tutorial damnit. A job aid. An expert on the other end of the phone. Video. Better. A simulator. I digress.

On issue four: audio removes searchability. I think Al is saying here that ppt to flash courses may not be searchable due to the limitations of the software.

On issue five: Putting boring video on-line doesn’t make it any less boring, it just makes it easier to turn off. I agree!

Perhaps I’m just a match waiting to get lit today but this just doesn’t hit the mark on the use of multimedia in e-learning.

My own experience – once you have been exposed to proper use of multimedia in a course, you want it always and once you design it that way, they’ll always want it.Hats off to the crafters and artisans.