Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Archives for December 2007

Climbing the expertise ladder

by 4 Comments

Tony Karrer picked up on the Knowledge Planet + Shared Insights = Mzinga (means ‘beehive’ in Swahili) merger, and said “points to another direction – combination of LMS capability + community / social networking. I’m not sure I quite get what that means yet”. He got an explanation he liked from Dave Wilkins (KP, now Mzinga), but I have what I think is a somewhat different one.

To me, courses are at the bottom of Tony O’Driscoll’s map of the transition from novice to expertise. Communities are at the top. What I haven’t previously seen is an elegant transition between the two. I’ve argued that you really should wrap community around the courses at the bottom to support the transition from learner to participant/practitioner to expert/innovator. There are nuances about how it should be done, of course, like so much of what we do. Whether that’s in Mzinga’s direction is an open question.

Tony mentions Q2 Learning as someone else working in the space of learning and community, though while their one product meets the need of learning wrapped with community it’s not clear how that segues from there to their community product. And he cites Wilkin’s pointer to Gartner’s guess that “Enterprise social software will be the biggest new workplace technology success story of this decade.” Which resonates with my previous post about knowledge management.

I really believe that eCommunity and eLearning need to be integrated (it’s part of my eLearning strategy, after all), and I’m pleased to see some initial steps in this space, but as usual I have some specific ideas about how that should happen and I’ll be on the fence until it looks like someone’s really ‘getting’ it. Same with elearning and performance support & portals. LearningGuide seems to be doing it, but is it enough?   Eventually, you want courses, performance support, and community working together, and any two is only a partial step.

The opportunity to elegantly integrate the necessary components is sweet, but maybe loosely coupled components through web services (ala Jay Cross) will ultimately make more sense than a monolithic system. More flexibility, the ability to elegantly do each component rather than try to have a Swiss Army knife…

Knowledge marketing

by Leave a Comment

Brent Schenkler points out this connection: using web 2.0 tracking software to find out who’s commenting to whom. It’s about a company with a technology that lets you track who’s talking about what and identify the top talkers (for marketing purposes; presumably to know who to seed with information/product). Brent’s interesting point is that such technology could be used internally to track who’s talking about what within the company, and it’s a great idea. He’s talking about measuring learning outcomes but I see it more as a knowledge management tool to see who knows what.

The problem I see is that the technology first requires you to identify a topic that you want to track. Of course, you could put in a series of words or phrases of interest to the company, but how do you find what’s emergent and new in the conversations? There are KM tools that check your email to see what you know (and with ways to avoid the obvious concern about having your email checked), but your blog posts and comments, wiki edits, etc are another way to look at what you talk about (and, presumably, know).

So, a very interesting and eye-opening perspective on how we might look for who really knows what.

What did I learn about learning in 2007?

by Leave a Comment

This is the Learning Circuit‘s Blog Big Question of the Month. It caused me to go back and look at what I blogged about this past year. I talked a lot about mobile (rightly so), and of course about games, but what struck me as I read was the regular occurrence of talking about models. When I got near the beginning of the year, I found that I’d suggested that it should be the Year of the Model, so that’s it, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The point is that we don’t use conceptual/mental models enough in our learning and training (as I was just complaining in a project on training call answering). And we can. Increasingly, the power of visualization is being understood and taken advantage of. But that’s only part of the benefit. The notion of thinking in terms of systems and causal relationships is at core. I knew it before, but it’s been something I’ve been thinking about more, and wishing I had a way to work on more.

The potential benefits are big: while we might need to spend a bit more time to ensure we get the models, and communicate them, what we stand to gain are reduced time in training (fewer examples and practice needed), and what should be big wins in terms of retention and transfer, as well as flexibility to deal with situations that we didn’t anticipate.

As Karyn Romeis points out, it’s not like it’s a big new thing I learned, it’s just an increasing awareness that it’s a big untapped opportunity.

On the radio

by Leave a Comment

On Sunday I drove down to the San Francisco studios of KALW 91.7 FM here in the Bay Area to talk with Marty Nemko about simulations and games. He runs a show about workplace issues (and anything else he wants to talk about), has years of experience, and turns out is quite well known. He’d gotten interested in simulations and games, and asked me to appear to talk about the issues for the first half hour of his show. (The second half hour he answers callers and gives 3 minute ‘career makeovers’; I stuck around to listen and it’s very interesting.)

Now, I’ve been on the radio before, interviewed over the phone from Tasmania when I was living in Australia. And I’d been in a TV studio before (for reasons I can no longer recall!), and was interviewed for TV in a makeshift studio while in Colombia. But this was my first visit to a working radio studio with a live broadcast. Two guys were holding a philosophy talk show before Marty’s show, while we talked and then taped Marty’s intro for the next week.

We’d intended to have him go through simulations during the session, with him verbalizing the experience, but it didn’t work out well, so we ended up just talking about simulations. We talked through lots of issues in the half hour. You can actually listen to it as they record it and Marty makes it available (NB: it requires Real Player). It’s always strange to hear one’s voice played back.

He welcomed me to ask questions, and my main one was “what do you to keep from getting too nervous”. It’s funny, I speak alot and am usually not nervous, but for some reason the novelty of the format caused a few butterflies. His answer was insightful, about how in the end it really won’t matter. You always make mistakes and wish you said things differently but it won’t really make a difference in the bigger picture. Quite right.   I started a bit tentatively, but got going.   Also forgot it was being broadcast (and recorded) and talked with less diplomacy than would’ve been ideal.   C’est la vie.

Overall, it was quite the learning experience. It’s part of my learning strategy to push myself into new situations, and this certainly qualified! Interestingly, too often we forget our old technologies in the excitement of new ones (people seem to forget about discussion boards, but they’re great for certain types of eCommunity, as is happening with ITFORUM). Radio’s a case in point, as we know from podcasts sometimes audio is a great channel.

more mobile moves

by Leave a Comment

And the news just keeps on coming. Of the “well yeah” variety, ATT has announced that the next generation 3G-capable iPhone (which currently runs on the not-latest/fastest approach, EDGE) will come in ’08. Steve Jobs, Apple’s head honcho, promised late ’08, but the ATT announcement was without that qualifier (hope someone didn’t get in trouble for that :). Sooner is better here, with everyone making technology leaps every few months.

The more interesting news is that Verizon has announced that their next generation technology will be LTE (Long Term Evolution, a 4th generation of mobile phone technology). The reason this is interesting is that LTE is GSM, not CDMA. In case this is acronym soup to you, let me explain it practically. Currently in the US, there are two competing standards, CDMA (Sprint and Verizon to date) and GSM (ATT and T-Mobile). This is unlike most of the world, which runs on GSM. If Verizon moves to GSM, that will leave Sprint alone, which probably won’t be a good place to be.

They also used to not play well together, even on the same technology. With Verizon’s other recent announcement of opening their standards to allow phones they don’t control to play on their network, and Google’s announcement of their Open Handset Alliance and the Android standard, we’re really changing the market for mobile.

Despite the disadvantages that the US mobile market has had between the proprietary approaches, we’ve had cheap data. If we also get broad coverage, high speed networks, and an open playing field to supplement that opportunity, mobile could really take a quantum leap in capability and consequently in opportunity.

The US has a real chance here to become a mobile trend-setter instead of a laggard over the course of a few years, and the pressure will be on other countries to start freeing up data bandwidth as well. The winner should be the consumer. Of course, it will still take time to play out, and who knows what sorts of other barriers they’ll try to put in, but there’s reason for optimism, and for innovative ideas to have a better chance to come to fruition. Fingers crossed….