In 1990 I was a noob gardener. I had a new house that lacked flowers and vegetables. So I bought an assortment of books on gardening. I designed a flower garden, put in basic landscaping, and made a vegetable garden. My expert advice at that time came from a local farmer, Archie, who loved to come and visit.

I moved from that house in 1999 and outsourced the gardening for the next 9 years. This was do the fact that I had had three kids between 1994 and 1999 so my leisure time was spent collapsing in a chair. These days, my kids seem to only need me on allowance day or when they need a ride.

This year I moved into a house with very mature gardens and I’ve rediscovered my love of gardening. I am continually amazed at what’s popping up and blooming. I dusted off my old books to see if I could identify what to leave and what to pull. Weed or perennial? Gee, I wish Archie was here.

Wait! I’ve got 100 Archie’s because, in addition to books, I joined an online social network for gardener’s and subscribed to a bunch of gardening blogs. I am amazed at how rich the experience is. I am learning more now than I did then (but I do miss Archie horribly).

Rather than looking at pictures to try to determine if something is a weed, I can just upload a picture and ask. And, I’ll never get a yes/no. I’ll get stuff about pruning, bugs to watch for, whether to mulch, etc.

I can now imagine what it must feel like to be a new learning professional, reentering the field after a long hiatus, transitioning from an environment that was mostly traditional ILT, or bringing work in-house that was formerly outsourced.

This feeling is nothing new though. Everyone reading this probably has a similar story. Some people might even think the original Noob + Archie was the best model.

For me, this was just a moment of reflection at 5 AM (the time I weed, before anyone needs money or a ride) and a reminder to be patient with those that are just now getting up-to-speed on the state of learning today. I think each of us has a responsibility to provide noobs with a safe way to ask a simple question and get up to speed.

As a kid I could’ve listened to him all day. As an adult, I laughed at spoofs of him on Saturday Night Live. But as I look back, it occurs to me now that Mr. Fred Rogers was really innovative for his time. He saw TV as a medium to educate. In case you don’t know who Mr. Rogers is, he was an American educator and hosted a TV show for kids called Mr. Rogers Neighborhood. I liked the way he taught. He was very calming.

I also found this excerpt on Wikipedia from Esquire Magazine’s coverage of the 1997 Emmys, written by Tom Junod and remember it well:

Mister Rogers went onstage to accept the award and there, in front of all the soap opera stars and talk show sinceratrons, in front of all the jutting man-tanned jaws and jutting saltwater bosoms, he made his small bow and said into the microphone, “All of us have special ones who have loved us into being. Would you just take, along with me, ten seconds to think of the people who have helped you become who you are. Ten seconds of silence.”

And then he lifted his wrist, looked at the audience, looked at his watch, and said, ‘I’ll watch the time.” There was, at first, a small whoop from the crowd, a giddy, strangled hiccup of laughter, as people realized that he wasn’t kidding, that Mister Rogers was not some convenient eunuch, but rather a man, an authority figure who actually expected them to do what he asked. And so they did. One second, two seconds, seven seconds and now the jaws clenched, and the bosoms heaved, and the mascara ran, and the tears fell upon the beglittered gathering like rain leaking down a crystal chandelier. And Mister Rogers finally looked up from his watch and said softly, “May God be with you,” to all his vanquished children.

In honor of a great children’s educator and visionary, can you take 10 seconds here on Valentine’s Day to think of the people who have helped you become who you are?

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

Warning: this post is full of digressions, contradictions, and tangents. (I’m just saying…)

I read an older Pew Publication recently on the behavior and traits of 18-25-year-old U.S. Americans (born 1981 and 1988) for some research I’m currenly doing on “generational learning styles” (don’t get me going on that – I’m a mess about it!). Although the report is a year old, I don’t think much has changed in the past year as far as this study goes.

Interesting when I look at these findings based on my own experiences as an 18-25 year old American in 1982-1987 (although some of what I remember is probably blocked out, lost due to blacking out, or forgotten entirely). To give you context, I was born on the same day and year as Kirk Hammett, from Metallica. I’m part of the Generation Jones – between the X’s and the boomers or, as I like to call it, the Marcia, Marcia, Marcia generation.

Here’s Generation Next, the subject of the study:

• Half send or receive text message over the phone daily (double 26-40-year olds). [My text messages were written on paper and roughly said, "I'll be home at dark" (for my parents) or (for my friends/enemies) were passed in class or left in lockers. I frequently used emoticons on my actual face - the one-eyebrow-up was my hallmark. I would say half of my generation used 'text messaging' with the technology known as a pen.]
• Four-in-ten have created personal profiles on social networking sites. [My social network site was the bottom of the driveway where I hung out with neighborhood friends. Nobody's parents would take us anywhere and they didn't want us in the house either. The information I shared with my friends then was similar to the open-book information I now display for the world. So only 8-10 people listened to my inane crap then and now slightly more. Suckas.]
• Eight-in-ten say new technology makes people lazier. I had to hide to be lazy. If I was caught lazing around, I was given a job to do. Technology was a clothespin out on the clothesline. I’m reminded of a recent conversation with my 20 year-old nephew and his suggestion that he thought technology would take us to the point where we did not need arms or legs. Not that he didn’t want arms and legs, but that he wanted to live in a world where he didn’t have to use them if he didn’t want to. I have agreed that the new technology of my generation – the dryer – made people lazier.]
• Half say immigrants to the U.S. strengthen the country. [I am a first generation Scottish-American. My parents are immigrants so I can''t really comment on this other than to say I believe it is true - then and now. Plus then, I would've gotten smacked on the side of the head if I didn't think it was true. My own kids today get a lot more information on diversity in general.]
• Are generally less critical (and less cynical) of government regulation and business. [I speak cynicism fluently as do many friends my age and many of my kids friends. Workin' for the man. Workin' for the man. 18 or 40 we're all workin' for the man. Only the super-cyncial admit to being cynical in a survey.]
• Are in close contact with their parents. [See first bullet point “ I'll be home at dark." This is an interesting dynamic. We've probably all read stories about the helicopter parent who called their kid's boss at work to question a poor performance review. I'm not sure what, if any, impact this has on workplace learning but I think it may. My feeling is that there is a need for greater performance support.]
• Half have gotten a tattoo, dyed their hair an untraditional color, or have body piercing on body parts other than the ear (1/3rd have tattoos). Tattoos in the 70s-80s were primarily found on the skin of those in the military, bikers (Harley style), rock stars, and those in prison. [Brian Jackson lists five reasons people get tattoos today - loved ones, religious, military service, mistake, just for fun. I'd add anger, celebration of an event, love of pain, and love of art. But this is generation "me" or generation "look at me" we're talking about so permanent markings doesn't surprise me. Does anyone else see a demand here for more laser surgeons in the future? The looming talent shortage (if you buy it) along with this trait are why conservative HR depts. scramble to update policies about appearance. No tattoos is replaced with 'only tasteful tattoos.' I'd like to be on that committee...]
• 1/3rd follow what’s going on in the government and public affairs. [I have to admit, they do a better job at this than I did. Government was a parent thing. Now kids have to get community hours to fulfill graduation requirements for high school. We only did community service if we got caught doing something illegal.]
• Twice as likely (than older generations) to name a family member, teacher, or mentor as hero. [I would've named someone famous I think. Probably some rock star. Perhaps I would've named a family member if I had been more close. The Jones Generation are a bunch of basement kids.]
• More comfortable with globalization and new ways of doing work. [I think so. I still thought then that it was good to have one, stable job. How long have you been in your current job? I don't even know what my job will look like 5 years from now.]
• Top goals: fortune and fame. [I'm reminded of a cartoon: how to be a famous blogger (1) become famous, (2) become a blogger, (3) become a famous blogger. (And, accept advertising for the fortune part.)]
• Feel that educational and job opportunities are better for them today than for the previous generations but are concerned with getting into and graduating from college. [It's not hard to get into an online college. But it often is hard to get into many f2f colleges. However, there are more and more online education opportunities every year. They are not restricted by space. I think this creates opportunities. I don't think I dared to flunk out of college because I would've gotten smacked on the side of the head again. And, lost my funding. I think my generation felt the same way - that I had better opportunities then the previous generation.]
• 86% use the Internet at least occasionally (nearly all college grads do while 77% of non-college graduates do). (Gen X=91%, Baby Boomers=73%, Seniors 46%) [I do wonder though about losing the ability to think deeply. When everything is at your fingertips, why remember? What does it mean not to have to try to remember who played Jed Clampett on the Beverly Hillbillies? Or what the heck the lyrics to Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song were? What does that do to your brain?]

(BTW that’s Buddy Ebsen and “on we sweep with threshing oar,
Our only goal will be the western shore! Ah, ah!)

Regarding generational differences and learning, I’m really not convinced that we need to create different instructional strategies any more than we need to create different instructional strategies to address learning styles. To me, it’s an issue of individual experiences, context, and preferences.

Most people, regardless of age, want to chit chat with their friends, get a little rebellious, and share their background & interests with others. And, I think they understand that most technology might make them lazier.

While I recognize different characters and traits of a group bound by a time period in a particular part of the world, I’m not convinced generational differences mean that much when designing instruction. The fact that the net gen texts all the time so therefore needs immediate feedback doesn’t change the non-texters also might need immediate feedback. Yes, we may need to address abilities (for all learners) but I think it’s more about the need to focus on how to teach and learn. If technologies are used to make that easier and better, then we do it. In short, I’m not seeing a lot of research in this area that doesn’t suggest the entire issue of generational learning styles is hype.

I know only fellow 40+ers have hung in to the end of this post. There weren’t enough pictures for the 18 year olds ; )

You know how they are…

One of the people in the group of nine I was supervising had an unhealthy (my opinion) obsession with perfection. She just oozed stress when faced with something new. I don’t know if she had lost a job in the past due to a mistake or something but she just seemed to always be on the edge. However, by company standards, she was a great employee – efficient, fast, reliable, and accurate.

Her desire was to earn more money and move into a more senior position. As her supervisor, I wanted to help make that happen and to help her to feel good about learning new things. I also wanted her to relax a bit (in retrospect, that was probably more for me).
One day she gave me some work to look at and I told her it was great. I returned the work with a little post-it that said “remember, it’s ok to make a mistake.” Much to my surprise she attached that post-it to the side of her cubicle.

I felt we had gotten to the point where she was okay with my expectations – that I expected her to make some mistakes when doing something new because it is how she would learn. Making lots of mistakes (practicing) in a small area is how one becomes an expert in that area, right?

So here was a noob being told it’s okay to make some mistakes while doing something new and across from her a veteran employee making more mistakes than her. He’d been there longer than most in the department – me included. Somehow he had slipped through the cracks. He had become a problem. How did this happen? At some point he had crossed some line where mistakes were not expected – at least not with any level of frequency.

I’m reminded of this situtation because last week I sat in a parent/teacher conference to address my son’s poor performance in a <irony>research</irony> class. I sat and thought (as I have many times before) about this ok-to-fail, not-ok-to-fail quagmire. I simply cannot consistently spoon-feed a teenager throughout high school and hope that he’ll do okay in college and at work right? At some point I have to let him make mistakes and take the conseqences. He knows that he is expected to make mistakes and he knows what is expected of him at school. But for this particular subject, he has crossed the ‘noob’ line. His mistakes should happen less frequently. I guess he needs a post-it note too. I just can’t think right now what that should say.

I posted a comment (see below) on Elliot Masie’s temporary blog Classroom of the Future. Elliot’s question: “If you were to design a brand new type of classroom for your organization, what would it contain?”

What is the bedroom of the future? What is the bathroom of the future? Each has “stuff” in it designed for a specific purpose. The bed of straw becomes a bed that forms to your body and is fully adjustable the stuff in the room becomes smarter. The outhouse becomes high-tech and is equipped with a combination portable music player and toilet paper dispenser and has heated seats. But none of this stuff changes the purpose of the room.

Historically, the room in which classes are held has been a room with more and better stuff in it. We started with chairs, desks, and a chalkboard and now see smartboards, videoconferencing, interactive devices, LCDs, etc. But it doesn’t change the purpose of the room – to provide a physical space where learning can take place.

Perhaps the toilet of the future is not a toilet at all. Perhaps the green movement will lead to innovations that make the toilet obsolete. Will we say, “remember when we needed all that plumbing?” And maybe the classroom of the future is not a room at all. Will we say, “remember when we all went to a room to be trained?”

It seems to me we are returning to the way we used to learn – out in the open world but with more, and different stuff.

My question: Do we need to provide a physical space where learning can take place?

I’ve been working on pulling stuff together for an instructional design workshop. It’s not e-learning 2.0 at all. And, it’s not 1.0 (which says “old, out-of-date” to me). It’s not “101″ or “boot camp” either – not introductory. I’ve decided it’s classic. Interesting word classic is.

When something is really funny or stupid and memorable, we call it classic.

That was classic!

If it’s particularly funny (or even disturbing), we might intensify it and emphasize the classic:

That was freakin CLASSIC! or That was CLASSIC, dude.

When someone is a classic we’re generally poking fun at him or her:

That Nancy, she’s a classic.

Or poking fun and laughing:

Did you see that? That was classic Ron!

When something is truly classic, we hold it up in admiration.

That dress is a classic.
The architecture is classic.
This is classic jazz.

We like to reminisce about classic moments:

Remember that…it was a classic. (usually includes an audible sigh)

Sometimes classic is used to berate:

This is yet again another classic example of you not getting things done on time!

What about the instant classic? You know it when you see it.

That movie is an instant classic.

In technology, classic points to simpler times:

That toaster is a classic… (because it still has mechanical knobs)

What’s classic in our industry? What do you reminisce about, what do you laugh about, what do you want to remember, and what/whom do you admire? What’s the last instant classic you remember? What do you berate?

I think sometimes we dismiss the classic. Our conversations focus on what is emerging, what is new. If I were to hyperlink to something as ‘ancient’ as 1999 what would you think? I think it’s as important to study where our industry has been as it is to understand what’s emerging. Do we understand why structuring or scaffolding is important in creating social networks?

My classic “learning” moments…

Funny & memorable…

Self-paced e-learning done in a group, in a room, at the same time. (Let’s all read together!)

Particularly funny & memorable…

Synchronous training bloopers…mute means you’re muted not me.

Classic someone…

When the training room was prepared more than 24-hours ahead of time I knew who the trainer was…and, the binders were a giveaway too.

Classics I hold up in admiration…

Vygotsky and his zone of proximal development

Classics I reminisce about …

Cigarettes & ashtrays in the training room

That time I tripped down the stairs leaving a hotel when my flipchart easel caught some wind. (No, really I’m ok. That’s not blood I’m wiping off my knee, it’s pride.) Or, that time we…

Classics I berate…

Bad, boring e-learning created today

.

Instant classic…

iPod

What is classic instructional design?

I have this horrible tendency to close the door on what was old and move on. School, jobs, neighbors, etc. And I feel real bad about it.

At a workshop in North Carolina last month one attendee I was having breakfast with told me it was a trait of Scorpios (which I am). I looked it up.

“Part of the negative side of the Scorpio nature is a tendency to discard friends once they cease to be useful, but the decent native is aware of, and fights this tendency.”

Geesh. Cease to be useful? Sounds like an old shoe.. I guess if I ever gave up this platform (blogging) for communicating, you’d all be old shoes. Old Manolo Blahniks of course because you are all so very classy : )

Social Networks are Scorpio-friendly. They foster relationships and help you make and keep connections.

One example of this was an interview I conducted for the Qualitative Research class I took this past semester. I interviewed someone who attended our IiL07 conference in an effort to explore her experiences with the online community portion of the event. (We used Leverage Software and a Facebook group to support the conference).

She explained how at past face-to-face (f2f) events she ended up with a stack of business cards that went nowhere after she got home because she got busy with work. However, with online social networking she is staying in touch and feels this online element increases the likelihood of staying in touch with the people she met. The ‘tendency to discard’ is less likely. The effort it less.

Connections are a beautiful thing to support lifelong learning – a trait we hope our learners develop. What better way to continue the conversation- to continue learning – than to stay connected.

You may want to consider how social networks can work for those one-time events you coordinate at your organization – especially those that include people outside of your organization. Shortsighted maybe, but I never used them in conjunction with a one-time face-to-face event made up of people who seemed not to be otherwise connected. I imagined social networks being used in organizations more for established work groups (everybody in this department), for projects involving people across work groups (for those working on this new implementation), for those with shared roles (leadership), and for those working through a specific curriculum (bootcamp for newbies).

For example, I once coordinated a group event (that included some training) for a group of claims adjusters who were periodically called into service for a catastrophe – hurricanes, etc. This was a group from various companies, geographic locations, and levels of experience. I guess looking back my shortsightedness came from working in a closed environment. Outsiders (those that didn’t work for the company) were connected to the organization by email cc’s and that’s about it. Think how much employees would have learned from experts in the area of handling catastrophes had there been a community. And, it would have been therapeutic for working under those high stress conditions.

The increased sense of connectedness that has been suggested by the research around blended learning provides some credibility. Although my qualitative research project was not full-scale and by no means can be considered definitive, it does provide some interesting avenues for further research.

Perhaps this is all no-brainer stuff but with 1/3 of corporations blocking social networking sites like Facebook, bringing online social networking in-house is probably one of those battles you want to pursue even if you have to look for a behind-the-firewall solution.

I ran across I’m just saying.. on the Pain in the English blog as I was searching for the origin of another phrase. The comments about the origin of “I’m just saying…” which follow the post are interesting to read. My favorite comment is, “‘All I’m saying’ is a tool of the shit stirrer.” And all I’m saying is we’ve got a lot of those in this industry. We kick around, make up, and debate (perhaps not vehemently enough) phrases in the edusphere all the time. Some just stir but we’re all the better for it I guess (whatever that means).

What’s in a word or phrase? For me the answer to that was my greatest takeaway from a course I took last semester on learning theory. How careless I’ve been with words – philosophy vs. theory, learning theory vs. instructional theory vs. instructional strategy, and the word “outcome” which, I may not use again.

What is learning? What is Web 2.0? What words do we use to define each? What does it matter if we’re careless?

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