There’s some interesting lists going around about what you should learn. Stephen Downes has created a list (in reply to Guy Kawasaki’s list), and not surprisingly it’s really good. I was interested in how it compared to the list I created for my ‘learning wisdom‘ talk back in November. Stephen’s is more personal (ie what a learner should take ownership of), where mine was more curricular, but there are enough similarities to see why I resonated with it.

Here then, are his 10 items and their relation to the list I created:

1. How to predict consequences – this is my ‘systems thinking’, the ability to use models to make predictions and explanations. I add in the ability to build models (even if just qualitatively), as I think it’s an important skill going forward.
2. How to read – I didn’t have this explicitly, but he means it as more than literacy, and I lump it under ‘critical thinking’.
3. How to distinguish between truth and fiction – this, too, fits under ‘critical thinking’ in my list.
4. How to empathize – this would fit under my category of ‘stewardship’, a feeling of responsibility for others, but also the other denizens of our planet and the planet itself.
5. How to be creative – I have this under ‘design’.
6. How to communicate clearly – and I have this under communication.
7. How to learn – I have ‘meta-learning’.
8. How to stay healthy – this is one place where we begin to differ, I didn’t have this explicitly, and it’s a good element.
9. How to value yourself – I think this is a good one as well. I don’t have it.
10. How to live meaningfully – Again, one I didn’t have explicitly, I’d argue (not strongly, however) that it could fall out my element of ethics.

So, my list had 5 major categories with two elements each: I had problem-solving including research and design, systems-thinking with model-based reasoning and modeling, working with others covering leadership as well as communication, learning as an umbrella for critical thinking and meta-learning, and values covering both ethics and stewardship.

I could quibble about leadership, research, and ethics, and Stephen could quibble about health, valuing yourself, and living meaningfully, but I think both lists provide some good ideas sorely missing from our current schooling. Like David Jonassen says, the problems our kids learn to solve in schools have essentially no relation to what they have to solve in life.

A few thoughts on the first day of school…

My daughter, 6, told me on Saturday that she didn’t want to start school. Having to get up and get dressed on time, and back to homework, etc. Yesterday, she told me she was excited about starting school again. The difference? She found out that she has the same teacher her brother had two years ago, a young, enthusiastic, nice teacher. Here’s to all those who teach with passion and skill!

I was talking with my students, and one opined that there were a lot of “junk teachers”. I don’t really believe that; while there probably are a few who are just looking for a sinecure (I’ve known some :), I think that there are a number of other explanations why all our teachers aren’t passionate and skilled. It’s not a highly valued profession, despite the fact that I can think of few others who have a greater influence on our future. The government puts them under ridiculous pressure to have students pass tests, despite the evidence that that doesn’t lead to useful skills. There aren’t enough of them with skills (I’ve met so many ex-teachers), their administrative support is idiosyncratic at best, they’re under-resourced, the list goes on.

And there’s a societal component as well. Sayings like “those who can, do, those who can’t, teach”, and our unfortunate tendency to belittle smarts (and lionize those who succeed financially, despite potentially suspect methods), both are at odds with teachers being successful. I’d like to suggest that any society that values lawyers more than teachers has it’s priorities wrong. Not that I have anything against lawyers (despite jokes to the contrary), but I think the eastern veneration of scholars and teachers has much to be commended. The reason I’m in learning is I think it’s the most likely way to address societal ills.

I remember a post-doc who’s wife was doing a sociology PhD. It turns out that doctors re-engineered their status in society around the 1920s, creating their medical school process (still used, with many negatives in terms of learning outcomes) and changing their public perception from ‘sawbones’ and ‘quacks’ to their almost un-questioned authority through most of the subsequent years. Her thesis was that teachers should do something similar. I’m all for it, frankly, or any other way we can get societal support back behind effective teaching and learning, not as advanced baby-sitting and rote learning. Ideas?

I received an email from someone I don’t know this morning who said “I am a fellow blogger in the training and e-learning industry. I thought you would be interested in sharing with your readers…” and proceeded to tell me about a new intiative. The concept wasn’t bad, albeit old, but she somehow forgot to mention that she was married to the co-founder of the thing. In essence it’s a listserv that they have the cheek to want to charge for membership. Heck, you can do the same thing for free in Yahoo groups or any number of places! For example, ITFORUM has been happily running very good listserve on instructional technology for years, and it’s free.

I can’t imagine how this person thought this was a viable approach, essentially insulting the intelligence of the intended audience. The point of the Cluetrain Manifesto was that with the internet, information could be shared more quickly, and credibility would be everything because you’d be found out too quickly otherwise. Well, this person, and this initiative, violate that constraint.

I get grumpy at anyone who sends me those junk letters about so-and-so’s dying wish and hasn’t bothered to check it out with Snopes (the urban legend site) first. Guess this person figured I wouldn’t bother connecting the dots. However, when you’ve been on the internet as long as I have (I did my first elearning project in 1979, back when it was ARPANET), you get skeptical.   My advice, be skeptical, check things out, and beware hype. And if you’re looking for publicity, add value, don’t blow smoke.   Caveat emptor!

Well, it’s been a while, but I was completely off the grid week before last (last week was catching up) as I went with four buddies into the wilds of Yosemite with our lives on our backs. Tents, stoves, clothes, food, even water filters, about 50 pounds to be totally independent for 7 days.

It’s a time to reflect on what’s important, to get back in tune with nature’s rhythms, and time to talk. One of the most interesting learnings is something that I recall from past trips. One of the guys had a business goal he was trying to achieve, and the quality of the discussion while you’re hiking from a meadow up to a high Sierra pass is truly impressive. We covered many options, alternatives, brought up barriers and opportunities, and helped him refine his thinking.

The trip has always been organized by one guy (this was the 20th anniversary trip, though it was only my fourth year), who invites his board member and holds his board meeting during the hike!

I think that when there’s a passion to get something done, setting the circumstances up to take the time to workshop the idea is one of the best steps you can do. And being out in nature is one of the best stimulators of appropriate mind-sets.

Which is, in some sense, obvious, yet too often we don’t allow brainstorming, working together, and making the environment safe and comfortable enough to allow thoughts to pop up even if they’re bad. We know this is good for innovation, yet we too often create an environment with too much pressure, too much competitiveness. This was one of the topics that came out in the Creating A Learning Culture conference, and is reflected in the book. It’s also part of what Creative Mastery does with their clients.

Make sure you apply an atmosphere and context that matches your goals. And get out in nature, both for the pragmatic boon and the spiritual restorative. Remember, we need wildness on our planet!

I had a great conversation with my brother-in-law on Sunday. He’s in charge of the training for a division of a sector of a major organization. He took over a group that was stuck in analysis paralysis, and has started executing against their concepts.

What he’s doing is mostly face-to-face stuff, and it’s very broad and general. He doesn’t call it training, he calls it learning (hear, hear). His attitude is very much about winning back trust in the group first, and is happily doing lots of different wild, fun things, and then learning from the outcomes of those experiments. He’s fortunate in that he’s got a supportive leadership (now), a relatively hands-off management, and a budget.

He’s not doing a lot of ROI analysis at this point, but he did a lot of consultation beforehand about what the big pains were, and I have to say that I laud his approach; it’s pragmatic and it seems to be working. Find the big issues, and address them in an open and engaging way to rebuild trust. The rest can follow.

What I forgot to ask was what he intended to do once he had those wins on the board!

We’re in a rush. A rush to get content to learners (rapid learning), to get the minimum to them to get them over the hump (performance support), to not waste their time. All valuable, all I’ve lauded. But…

The UK eLearning visit that I co-chaired mentioned the Slow Food movement, and the thought’s stuck with me that there’s a flip-side we’re forgetting. It’s about having a long-term relationship with the learner, where we care about them, and are interested in developing them as people, not just as cogs.

So I’m hereby initiating the Slow Learning movement. It’s a move where we care about our learners as learners, helping them with their suite of learning and problem-solving skills as well as their job-related skills. There’s an ROI here, as Jay Cross and I have argued for (warning: PDF file). It’s a move where we care about learners as individuals, not just helping them be better, but wiser as well. It’s about using technology to use drip-irrigation over time as well as the firehose for the moment.

I think there’s a concrete value here that we’re missing, an opportunity, maybe even money we’re leaving on the table. It’s about improving our workforce from within. It could be about helping them better understand their organization’s mission, about helping them be better innovators, and even just making them feel valued and decreasing turnover.

Won’t you join the Slow Learning movement?