I’m in Medellin for Sena’s eLearning 07 conference.   I got in late last nite, and have had half a day here so far.   Great wireless at the conference center.   Slower at the hotel.   The people are friendly and handsome, and they’re taking good care of us.   Lance Dublin started us off this morning, and his previous 2 times talking have clearly paid off as he knew how to cope with simultaneous translation and with making jokes work across cultures.   Hope my session goes half so well tomorrow.

The place reminds me a bit of Taipei, what with green hills, and lots of motorcycles. Not as hot, since it’s quite high, though I expect near the coast here it could be a wee bit like a sauna.   Not as much smoking, but you notice it since it’s not confined.

I’ve already had a local dish for breakfast, Catal-something, which was beans, rice, and some meat and supposedly egg.   Yummy.   A snack for mid-morning (elevenses) was a roll filled with ham in a sauce.   Lunch soon.   Can you tell I’m a bit of a foodie?

Sena, the sponsoring government agency is doing many cool things both with and without technology.   The obvious include English language classes online, and   with internet being distributed out to the far reaches of the country with busses.   Other projects include   police not only being sent around to be police, but also doing service projects, and other things essentially technology independent but making great strides in further the agenda of the country.

I hope to have more, hopefully when I’ve had more rest!

It’s been a mad week (not going to change for a couple of weeks, yikes), what with presentations and breakfast bytes and events and…   It was a great conference (people are even raving about the food)!   Some quick thoughts while I spend time with family before my upcoming 1.5 weeks away:

There was a consistent theme in the keynotes, ones I naturally resonate with: creativity, change, and innovation.   Sir Ken Robinson opened with a witty conversation on creativity and how we all need to cultivate it.   It’s one of the elements in my notion of what a future curriculum needs to include. Paul Saffo talked about the changes that are occurring (and really suggested elearning is poised to be a real factor).   Finally,   Frans Johannsen talked about generating innovation from diversity.

Mobile is where games were 2 years ago, just at the top of the hill and gaining momentum for that downhill roll.   The pre-conference symposium was great fun, listening to David Metcalf, Judy Brown, and Ellen Wagner showing great examples, talking about great principles, etc (and Steve Wexler and Brent Schenkler in there for the research).   The audience really pitched in asking tough questions, coming up with great ideas, and really getting into it.   While I underestimated the timing on my mobile design exercise, it’s one I think I can refine and have great fun with in the future.

Games are really steaming along.   People are getting that learning has to have engagement, contextualization, be focused on meaningful change, etc.   My session on the emotional side of elearning went well, the Immersive Learning Simulation challenge organized by Mark Oehlert was a hoot, with great stuff by Brent Smith and Anne Derryberry.   The goal was to design a game to help convicts survive on the streets and not return to prison.   It was really interesting to see how what we presented all mutually reinforced.   It’d be a great team!   More will be happening on this, such as Clive Shepherd taking a shot at it on Monday supposedly.   When I get a moment, I’ll post my thoughts and approach.   We’re hoping others will take a shot and start a discussion. Not necessarily on the particular topic, but using that as a way to catalyze discussion about how to design and implement serious games, er, ILS.

My session on elearning tools went really well, I thought, generating discussion about what purposes the tools serve.   This despite the fact that the handouts were missing some graphics (grr), which I didn’t know about ’til afterward.   People were so into it that they asked if there were a way to continue.   I”ll be talking to the Guild about doing that.

There was a blogger’s bash Wed night, and Jay Cross invited some Knowledge Management bloggers from the KM World conference going on down the block.   Had a very interesting conversation with Dave Snowden who has some rather revolutionary ideas that resonate, but I’ve got to digest them a bit more.   Short version: all our categorization is useless, live in the moment ad hoc.

There may be more, but I’ve off to kid’s soccer tournaments, etc.

The eLearning Guild has just announced some changes to their benefits. If you’re not a member, it’s definitely time to consider it. Associate membership is free, and now you get access to all the articles they’ve written in their Learning Solutions journal. Regular membership and above costs, but has additional benefits.

The one I’m most thrilled with is that with any level of paid membership, you will have access to the research reports! They’ve been very good at getting top people (excluding yours truly, which must be an accident :) to write articles on the topics of the research report, and now they’ll be available to all members. I have to say that what I’ve read in the two reports I’ve been part of, Mobile Learning and Immersive Learning Simulations, from people like Jeff Johannigman, Clark Aldrich, David Metcalf, and Judy Brown, is top stuff.

They argue that they’re getting this good stuff out to thousands instead of just hundreds, and I certainly can be happy about that. If it leads to better elearning, we all win. They run great conferences (I’m at DevLearn as I write), have great benefits, and are a good group of people. Check it out!

When living ‘down under’, I became an Aussie citizen (as well as keeping my US citizenship) at least partly so I could vote; I feel you can’t complain if you haven’t been part of the process (and being a member of the board of the Center for Civic Education has only reinforced my civic responsibility). There are several aspects of their system that are superior to the US system, I feel, and given that Australia has just called an election, it was worth reflecting on.

First of all, the Australian election will be held on 24 November, but this date wasn’t announced until 14 October. That means only 6 weeks of campaigning! (Aside from the ever-present party combat.) Compare that to the campaigning the US has already put up with for months, and that will still go another year. Australia has to call an election within 3 years of the previous one, roughly, but then it’s only 6 weeks until the election is held. There are undoubtedly advantages to the fixed terms of the US elections, but prolonged campaigning isn’t one of them.

Second, Australia has a true popular vote. The US Electoral College approach has not reflected the popular vote in several notorious instances. While the College may have been necessary at the time the country was established, it’s no longer relevant. I realize how difficult it is to change, as those states who benefit have little interest in losing it, but it undermines the true democracy of the US system. And attacking it piece-meal, as they’re proposing here in California, is only a political ploy, not a true reform, in my opinion.

The real brilliance in the Australian system, however, is “preferential voting“. In this system, you rank each candidate in order of preference. If your first choice is eliminated, your second choice then receives your vote. This continues, taking candidates off the bottom, until one candidate receives a majority. There are two benefits to this: one is that you never need a runoff, and the other is that you can’t ‘throw your vote away’.

Of course, in one election I recall there were around 80 candidates, which is time-consuming to rank (I, of course, did it, just to learn). However, there is a workaround. Each candidate will have an associated list of preferences, so if you only want to indicate your first choice, you can go with their recommendations if they should fall off the list. I figure at least 80% of the people probably do this.

Overall, there are some clear wins. The time (and money) spent on campaigning is reduced, there’s a true popular vote, no run-offs are needed, and you can truly vote your conscience. As a side effect, this has led to a viable multi-party system. Which would be nice, given that I reckon I’m further from either of the US parties than they are from each other ;).

So, how about some electoral reform?

I recently mentioned my rather hectic upcoming schedule, including the fact that I’ll be speaking in Colombia at the eLearning 07 event (note: the site’s in Spanish, and I can’t read it). I’m in good company, with other speakers including Lance Dublin, Eric Parks, and Ray Jimenez, all of whom I know and respect.

There’ll apparently be simultaneous translation (a good thing, I can’t speak Spanish either). If you’re interested in eLearning, speak Spanish, and can get to Colombia Nov 13-14, I recommend it. Ray and Lance have done it before and say very nice things about the conference and organizers. I’ll be running my mobile and game design workshops as well (don’t know if they’ll be translated or they’ll suffer my English), if that’s of interest.

If you get there, say hello (or hola)!

Mark Oehlert reminds me that Philip Dodds passed on, and it’s a loss to the elearning community. I didn’t know him like Mark did, but I did meet him through the learning object work I was involved in for a couple of years. Very gracious, genuinely smart and working hard on infrastructure issues and standards that help liberate us from proprietary approaches.

(What with the recent passing of Claude Ostyn, I’m almost tempted to believe that learning object work is truly dangerous, but it’s probably too flippant.)

It’s worth reflecting that there has been a lot of work through the years that has been largely unheralded that has set the foundation for our industry. Yes, there are the stars who’s work has been recognized, but many others for whom too little is known. Here’s a tribute to one.

… for this important commercial announcement:

In addition to consulting, I do a lot of things like speaking and running workshops. My game design workshop, for instance, has been regularly run at various events like Guild , Training, & ASTD events. While I’ll be speaking at DevLearn, (San Jose CA in November), and participating in the Immersive Learning Simulations Management Symposium (as well as the mobile one), the game design workshop won’t be on. The last opportunity for the workshop was last spring in Taiwan, and the next one will be in Colombia (!) or not ’til February at TechKnowledge.

However, there’s a new option. I continually experiment with different things (e.g. the video conference with ITESM last month; it’s a meta-learning way I challenge myself to learn more), and Training Magazine’s Learning Online program has convinced me to offer the Game Design Workshop as an Online Certificate. It’ll be 2 hours on each of five separate days spread over 3 weeks in December. It’s a new experiment for me, but they’ve run them before, and I’ve run the workshop before, and they’re supporting me, and I’ve taught online before, so we’ve a high likelihood for a good experience.

What’s more, they’ve let me offer this at $100 off their regular price. Just register with Discount Code tme28g They offer group rates as well.

Of course, if you’ve any interest in me speaking, or running one of my workshops (I do mobile, and can do advanced ID, emotional elearning, or eLearning Strategy) for your organization, let me know.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled blog…

I’m not the least interested in fishing (traumatic childhood experience :), but my wife and kids are. Both kids have tried, but to no avail. Yesterday, our local community was hosting a festival, however, including a fishing clinic. So we signed the kids up. The clinic was arranged with quite a bit to ensure success.

First, they stocked the ‘lake’ (hardly more than a pond). Second, they conducted a class before going out to the water. Then, they provided scaffolded practice in a protected environment. And they ensured a parent attended as well as the kids.

The class was a little late starting, and rambled a bit, but had a very good approach. The presenter was relaxed, and included some chatter, but basically led the learners through the crucial steps to be ready to fish. He talked about tying on a hook, He used a big prop hook and rope to show the principles of tying the hook onto the line. He also talked about principles of things like weights and bobbers, while showing the basics.   And had the kids answer questions along the way, to force them to think.   There wasn’t divergence into other forms of fishing (e.g. flies), but just a focus on what you need to go. Then they enabled those who didn’t have their own equipment, ensured everyone was ready, and moved out of the room and into the practice environment.

The practice environment was a roped off section of the shoreline, and a net-enclosed section of the lake. There were worms, and cleaning and packing if you caught anything and wanted to keep it. A big deal was made of a big catfish caught earlier in the day. The team of instructors cruised around answering questions and advising if useful.

Our session was in the evening, and things eventually got hot, with two big bass being caught at our end, and something big at the other. Our boy caught a small sunfish (his first fish ever, he was thrilled), and later had a big one that got away. My daughter had one nibble which was lost to an equipment problem. But it couldn’t have been set up much better to optimize the chance to succeed. And we found out it’s stocked year-round, so they can go back and try some more.

It’s a great model to think about for novices who need motivation as well as some key skills. How can you better ensure success and consequent motivation as well as the ability to execute again?

The Learning Circuits Blog big question of the month for September is “Where to work?” (PS I don’t know why I can’t get a straight URL just to the question.) It’s kind of a tough question, really. For whom? When?

When I look at the broad categories of who works in eLearning, first there’s a breakdown between ‘education’ and ‘the real world’, the latter of which roughly breaks down into corporate, government, and not-for-profit. The reason I separate out education is that there elearning is much more about education, not training. The others reverse. My definition of the distinction is a continuum from performance in very specific contexts (training) to broad applicability (education). Increasingly, we’re seeing pushes down on education, and up on training, however.

And we need to recognize that in many instances, we’re talking about a broader picture, where the a second dimension is performance support versus full instruction.

To be honest, though, it doesn’t so much matter where you work as what you do, who you work with, etc. The main thing is to align your job description with what you want to do: if you want to tinker with code and systems, be a develop, not a designer. If you want to figure out who should learn what, do curriculum development, if you want to create content, be a designer, etc. If you want to do a bit of each, work in a small organization.

Then choose based upon manager, company culture, location, and all the rest. Realize that you’ll never get the perfect fit, it’s all about tradeoffs. So know what’s important to you, and maximize your priorities. But that’s basic job counseling.

Of course, you have to be realistic with your strengths and styles too. Interestingly, a friend who has been doing counseling was interested in something new that involved teamwork and computers but not really software engineering. I thought elearning was a viable suggestion (though I did caveat with my ‘bias’). I do believe that understanding people, technology, and business (whether from interface design, learning design, or business intelligence perspective) is a valuable skill set going forward!