Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Blog stats 2007

by 3 Comments

Tony Karrer’s called me (and others) out about our blog stats for 2007. Hey, I’m always up for an experiment, even at my own risk…:) I didn’t have my site registered with Google until April, I guess, so you’ll see an initial gap (and, presumably, somewhat reduced overall statistics):

blogstats2007.jpg

I couldn’t get it to appear the same as Tony’s (don’t know why I can’t get my Site Usage to appear as a single column, grumble, mumble). I wonder what FeedBlitz as a email version does to the stats? I read blogs in email, and make it easy to do so with mine as well. Probably counts as a search engine!

You’ll see I don’t compare to his usage, despite the lack of inclusion of 1/4 of my data; I’m jealous of his overall growing trend. Hopefully better this year!

My Top Ten (Mobile) Learning Tools

by Leave a Comment

Jane Hart runs a great list of Top Learning Tools compiled from top learning professionals, and is updating the list for 2008. She includes performance support as part of her requirements. I had a list last year, but fortunately this year she’s given more structure and I like my new list better. Rather than repeat it, you can find both here.

However, I struggled to figure out how to put my mobile tools in (I cheated and lumped them under PalmOS), so I decided to do that here. Note that I’m still on my old Treo (I won’t go on yet again about how the iPhone isn’t yet ready for primetime :), and hope to switch this year to a new/faster one, or an iPhone, or an Android phone, or… Palm OS, while creaky (a new OS is in the works, but won’t appear ’til ’09), has heaps of apps that let you do most anything. So here’re the ones I find that I use a lot to make me more productive or to learn:

  1. The basic PIM functions: ToDo, Contacts, Calendar, Memos (since it’s my list, I can cheat and cram several under one item :). Makes me way more productive (if I make a promise and it doesn’t get in here, we never had the conversation)
  2. VersaMail: the included email application. It’s not great, but it’s good enough to preclude me spending my money on another one. I’ve got to be in touch. I probably use my phone more for email than to talk! (I’m not a great phone person)
  3. Opera Mini: the built-in browser, Blazer, pales compared to Opera, though Opera’s not as well integrated. Being able to search the web while in conversations or meetings is really useful!
  4. SplashPhoto: I put not only pictures of my family, but also my diagrams, and a portfolio of applications I’ve developed. I can talk about applications, but also talk to the diagrams in problem-solving
  5. SplashID: I need all those passwords, card numbers, logins, etc, with me when I’m on the road (rather than carry the cards or attempt to memorize them), but after almost losing my phone I realized that they’ve got to be secure
  6. Missing Sync: the better synching solution that keeps my desktop and mobile in line, and keeps me together
  7. Google Maps: I use this all the time for directions and to find nearby locations I want to visit
  8. Adobe Reader: I can bring documents along to read or for reference
  9. Documents to Go: I can bring Powerpoints along to practice my talks
  10. Clicker: this application turns my phone into a bluetooth presentation controller, so I can stroll around the room and not have to be tethered to my laptop

I’m not mentioning more personal things like the Bart schedule application that I use to know when to go catch a train. I’ve also just downloaded a Flight Status application that will let me check on flights, so it’s too early to say, but it seems like a potential win. So, what do you use to make yourself a better learner or more productive?

Interactive Information Design

by 1 Comment

I was reading my usual news, and saw an announcement for a new widget for my laptop. This one happens to be a tool for Bart schedules (we’re near a Bart station, and it makes it handy to go into San Francisco or to the airport), so I wanted to check it out. There was a link to the author’s philosophy of software design (really, interface design), and I’ve just spent too much time reading it, but it’s worth it.

He makes a reasonably plausible distinction between manipulation software, communication software, and information software (including learning), and focuses on the latter. The article then goes on to say that navigation to find what you want is the key, and minimizing it is critical (“interactivity is harmful”). He argues that the interaction design field has erred too much on interaction, not on meeting needs (though I’d argue that’s implementation, not the theory).

I am a sucker for articles talking about good design, particularly ones that use examples to make the point clear (he redesigns Amazon and Southwest Airlines, among others, with subtle wit), and can articulate the underlying principles (e.g. context sensitivity, one I argue is underused in mobile, but he has more general principles).

Ok, it’s long, and it does go off into some unnecessary side tracks from a ‘take home’ perspective, but there are some real gems. One I like is his contention that in general, you should present the user with a default answer that’s close to what the user would expect, and then make it intuitive to ‘critique’/modify the representation to get what you want, using the representational formalisms that have been created for this application.

IF you are responsible for designing the end-user experience, be it instructional, informational, or mobile implementations, it’s probably worth at least looking at the examples, and better yet skimming through.

Being more productive

by Leave a Comment

Clive Shepherd seconds Donald Clark’s call for Get Things Done. What struck me is this quote, so near and dear to my heart:

You may think lists are only for nerds, and maybe they are, but if you want a happier life, please do just this one thing: keep some recording device (paper and pen, flip chart, whiteboard, voice recorder, PDA, computer) with you at all times. When you have an idea or remember something you have to do, record it. Then relax and move on.

This is why I carry my Treo with me at all times, and why the iPhone still is not ready for primetime (though I expect it to change soon; the OS is ready, it just needs the firmware upgraded with the right capability). I used to carry the little black book that my uni gave me as a yearly calendar. However, I didn’t remember to check it. When I finally got a Palm Pilot, it changed my life, because it was there in my face, reminding me. I could set calendar events, but more importantly I could take and refer to notes, and I could set myself ToDos. These are keys to my productivity.

I have a saying that if I promise to do something, and it doesn’t get into my device, we never had the conversation. But when I do put it in there, it will happen. I’m much more effective with what I call my ‘external memory‘, leaving the device to remember arbitrary details and saving my brain for useful pattern matching, which is the right balance of tasks given the architecture of our brains and the capabilities of these devices.

This is the big argument, to me, for the benefits of mobile performance (including learning, but more focused on performance support and communication), a useful adjunct to our capabilities. As I’ve said elsewhere, it’s not about learning, it’s about doing, and from the problem’s point of view, the solver is more capable if it’s an augmented person, whether by technology or collaborator(s).

So, any device not only has to have the four elements Jeff Hawkins first identified: memos/notes, todos/tasks, contacts/address book, and calendar, but it has to sync it with my computer. Then it needs to have other things: phone, camera, email, web-browser. It makes me more effective, essentially smarter. Heck, sometimes it even makes me wiser! Are you using your devices optimally? Personally and professionally? Is your organization?

2008 Predictions for Learning

by 1 Comment

The Learning Circuit’s blog Big Question of the month is “What are your Predictions for Learning in 2008“. I note it doesn’t say eLearning. So, my predictions for Learning in 2008 are that we will continue to learn, despite the obstacles :).

Ok, enough being flip. Looking back over last year’s predictions, I thought mobile would cross the chasm. Um, er, I’m an optimist, can’t really say it’s happened yet, but I did see a lot more interest. I think it will this year for sure.

I also saw interest in looking at eLearning more strategically, and I predict this will continue to increase. Organizations are increasingly realizing that they need to move beyond courses, and even beyond content, and start looking at solutions.

Obviously, we’ll continue to sort out the new web 2.0 applications, and it’s clear there’ll be heaps more coming to be evaluated for learning opportunities. And I hope we’ll be more proactive about sorting through the hype to find the real learning affordances.

Now all this isn’t too interesting, but as I said in my reflection on last year much is incremental. My wishes for next year are that we’ll start digging a little deeper into good design, into measurement (as Will Thalheimer’s been talking about), about learning to learn, and thinking broader about our role. That’s different than my predictions, so I suppose I should go out on a limb for what will be revolutionary this year. Hmm.

Well, it’s maybe wishful thinking, but I’m predicting that we’re going to see more people taking a bigger, longer term, dare I say ‘wiser‘ approach to elearning this coming year. There’ll be a bit of a backlash against 2.0 and virtual worlds, even podcasting, and people will start getting back to “what am I trying to accomplish?” From there, enthusiasm will again run to Web 2.0, to mobile, and more, but tempered by a recognition of the real opportunities. See a theme here? Please make it so!

2007 Reflections

by Leave a Comment

It was an interesting year, starting with some sojourns in Taiwan and Norway, and ending with some time in Colombia and Denmark. That has been my most international year yet with Quinnovation, and I hope it’s a sign that a deeper approach to elearning is being recognized everywhere as the way to go.

I hoped that this past year would be the year of the model, and did my best to make it happen. Interestingly, I had lunch today with a guy who has had great success training programming and has made some initial moves to eLearning. It sounded very much like he was proving my proposed approach (providing the model, some examples, and then picking a series of disparate problems to practice that drill applying the model in different practices). This means you don’t have to train all the possible situations, just a representative-enough selection to facilitate abstraction and transfer. There’re details of course, such as ensuring that the alternatives to the right answer address the reliable misconceptions, having the feedback explicitly refer to the model, etc, but it should be a most effective way to train.

I also felt that, this year, (serious) games, aka ILS, moved firmly into the mainstream. Similarly, it’s becoming clear that mobile is how where games were a year or two ago, poised for a push into the spotlight, to be followed by mainstream in the near future. I’m hoping that a few other clear opportunities also will soon see attention, such as effective portals, structured content and single-sourcing, etc. It’s time to fully populate the performance ecosystem.

Which, of course, requires thinking broader than just training, and really just learning. It’s not about learning, after all, it’s about doing. Of course, making that transition on thinking requires some transitions in other organizational mindsets and cultures. I did see more of it this year, and really felt like the whole notion of strategic elearning was beginning to be heard. I do recommend, BTW, Marc Rosenberg’s Beyond eLearning, which does a nice job of setting up that way of thinking.

Overall, I had great conversations with my colleagues, and many of you, over Immersive Learning Simulations, Mobile Learning, and more. I also had the chance to work on some very interesting projects, continuing to push the envelope over how we use technology to support people achieving their goals. I hope that the next year continues to provide deep learning, wise use of technology, and meaningful outcomes for us all, and may it be our best year yet. Happy New Year!

Virtual World affordances?

by Leave a Comment

I’ve never yet had that conversation with Tony O’Driscoll about virtual worlds, though I caught up again with my colleague Claudia L’Amoreaux (Second Life), and I’m hoping to have that conversation with her. Tony just pinged several of us bloggers to mention his forthcoming workshop on virtual worlds (I’d never have thought to ask, myself), and I was going to chide him for never having that call with me (this serves, eh?), but I did find his 10 minute video on learning in virtual worlds with his list of seven sensibilities:

  1. The Sense of Self
  2. The Death of Distance
  3. The Power of Presence
  4. The Sense of Space
  5. The Capability to Co-Create
  6. The Pervasiveness of Practice
  7. The Enrichment of Experience

That’s the list I’d been hoping for, talking about the unique affordances of virtual worlds. Though, of course, now that I see it, I have to quibble.

You may recall that I’d previously suggested that the unique affordance was the collaborative co-creation, his number 5. When you need to collaboratively create in 3D, it’s a great potential. If only in 2D, it might be better with a collaborative drawing tool with VoIP. Not that I know any, off hand. Still, the overhead is daunting.

Let’s go through the rest of the list, however. First, I’ve already blogged about self. There may be something there, but I’d argue that’s only true for the long term, not short-term learning situations.

The 2nd one, distance, isn’t unique to virtual worlds, but is true for many forms of distance learning.

The 3rd one, presence, I’m not sure I really get. Sure, you’re co-located, but how is that uniquely different than with a webinar? Unless it’s the virtual world, but that seems to be what the next one is about…

4 is about space, about having a 3D world. Which is cool, but what’s unique about it? It’s only valuable, I’d suggest, if your learning objectives involve 3D (which can be true, and then virtual worlds are very powerful, as had been demonstrated).

6 talks about practice, and Tony cites the fact that folks are regularly asking each other “how do you do x?” However, I wonder if that isn’t an artifact of the difficulty of figuring out how to do 3D building (which is mostly what you do, at least in Second Life). You do have to be a learner, but much of it is how to use the world, rather than specific learning objectives! Granted, it’s immersive practice, but you can get that from (serious) games.

7 talks about the enrichment of experience, but it seems to tap into two of the previous points, the self and the 3D. The example is people being able to dance together from a distance, but I don’t see this as a unique element.

So, the 3 main things I see are 3D, self, and co-creation. Which can be quite powerful, but not generically, again it’s instead for objectives that have spatial components. At a cost of substantial overhead in getting setup and capable.

I can’t be at the workshop since I’m not attending Training 2008, so what have I missed, Tony?

Paging web 2.0 one pagers

by 3 Comments

Brent Schenkler points us to these great one page introductions to Web 2.0 stuff by Tim Davies. The idea is very reminiscent of John Carroll’s minimalist instruction approach: a brief concept about and why, steps to get started, and some tips. With good visual support. I’ve seen worse professional job aids!

The point is to give people the minimum guidance needed to get going. Carroll found that focusing on people’s goals, on the minimal instruction, and clear presentation trumped formal instructional design. I think too often we don’t give enough credit to our learners. These are good models for other new tools you’re introducing to folks too.

Brent says he guesses it didn’t take any ISD knowledge, but I’d say it took either a good knowledge of information mapping, ISD, applied cognitive science, or some way of matching how our brains work to the task at hand. It may be implicit, but there’s a repeated template that suggests some forethought. Check ’em out!

Blended Doing

by Leave a Comment

I was reading last week’s issue of the Economist (I don’t always agree with them, but their analysis is quite enlightening) including their technology quarterly, and a really interesting thought struck me. The issue was rife with fascinating advances, but an overarching pattern emerged.

Let me set some context: in elearning we talk about blended learning, and I regularly say it’s not about learning, it’s about doing. Really, the view of elearning I’m trying to propagate is more like blended doing, where technology partners with us to make a more effective problem solver. This comes from Don Norman‘s point that from the problem’s point of view, a human augmented by technology is a more fearsome force than just the human alone.

Look, our brains are good at pattern matching (see above) and big picture, but bad at remembering rote things and details. Technology is just the opposite! That’s what performance support is all about. Of course, sometimes our brains need major skill shift changes, and there’s a role for courses, but some times we need information, and sometimes we need people, and sometimes we need support for massive computation.

Jim Schuyler has a mechanism he uses to authenticate comments on his blog. With Captcha, it’s the familiar challenge/response where you type in the familiar image of letters, with a twist. There’re two words, and while the first is known to the system, the second comes from some OCR text with a word it’s not sure of. So not only are you showing you’re human, you’re assisting the digital archiving of some important text.

The Economist mentioned this type of blending that gets people to do a difficult task for computers in what otherwise is a computing intensive task. They mentioned the ESP game where people playing also get some work done, in this case tagging images on the web.

They also talked about evolutionary algorithms (I first learned about them through John Holland’s work on genetic algorithms at UMichigan) to design things. You match a design problem to a set of parameters that then try to evolve to solve the problem, using mutation and selection to populate the solution space. Holland et al were looking to match how the brain works (getting solutions similar to those with neural nets, but with a less directly mappable approach), but others are just attacking design challenges.

Where a human would get massively bored searching through every permutation, this approach turns it into a computation problem and the computer merrily works away. There’s no guarantee of solution, but it really gets into situations where brute force can work and elegance might not. They mention some great outcomes, including better wireless antennas, optic cable designs, and more.

The point being to consider a different point of view, not of the performer, but of the task, and what’s the best solution to achieving the goal? A clue: if it requires rote-memorization on the part of the human, particularly of a set procedure, it probably should be automated. Let computers do what they do well, and let us do what we do well!

So, think of the tasks your performers need to accomplish, and don’t be afraid to think out of the box when you look for solutions. I’ll suggest that what will make a difference going forward isn’t focused on knowledge, but on problem-solving and innovation.

Another way to get listed in a blog

by Leave a Comment

You know, it’s pretty simple, so I can’t understand why some people can’t seem to get it. For example, it’s probably no secret that I’m fond of my Treo, and try to protect it. I previously wrote about my dissatisfaction with Seidio. Well, I subsequently purchased a Speck Products holster for my skinned Treo. It too finally snapped at the latch (honest, it’s not me; and it’d lasted a good long time). When I called, wanting to purchase a replacement, they offered to send a new one. Since I was going right by (they just happen to be here in the Bay Area), I offered to stop in and pick it up, saving the cost of shipping. I went there and they promptly gave me two new ones, in case one broke again! Now THAT is customer service!

Guess what; I’ll start with them next time I’m looking for a solution. I still give Seidio bad comments on product design and customer service every time I see anyone reviewing one of their holsters, and I used to mention Speck’s alternate solution. Now I’ll also mention their great customer service. You gotta reckon that’d be worth a lot more than it would’ve taken to at least respond to my request. It’s not like this is rocket science! I suppose I ought to offer the opportunity to help Seidio with their customer service processes…they sure seem like they could use it.