Search Results for: top 10

2015 top 10 tools for learning

7 July 2015 by Clark 4 Comments

Jane Hart has been widely and wisely known for her top 100 Tools for Learning (you too can register your vote). As a public service announcement, I list my top 10 tools for learning as well:

Google search: I regularly look up things I hear of and don’t know. It often leads me to Wikipedia (my preferred source, teachers take note), but regularly (e.g. 99.99% of the time) provides me with links that give me the answer i need.
Twitter: I am pointed to many amazing and interesting things via Twitter.
Skype: the Internet Time Alliance maintains a Skype channel where we regularly discuss issues, and ask and answer each other’s questions.
Facebook: there’s another group that I use like the Skype channel, and of course just what comes in from friends postings is a great source of lateral input.
WordPress: my blogging tool, that provides regular reflection opportunities for me in generating them, and from the feedback others provide via comments.
Microsoft Word: My writing tool for longer posts, articles, and of course books, and writing is a powerful force for organizing my thoughts, and a great way to share them and get feedback.
Omnigraffle: the diagramming tool I use, and diagramming is a great way for me to make sense of things.
Keynote: creating presentations is another way to think through things, and of course a way to share my thoughts and get feedback.
LinkedIn: I share thoughts there and track a few of the groups (not as thoroughly as I wish, of course).
Mail: Apple’s email program, and email is another way I can ask questions or get help.

Not making the top 10 but useful tools include Google Maps for directions, Yelp for eating, Good Reader as a way to read and annotate PDFs, and Safari, where I’ve bookmarked a number of sites I read every day like news (ABC and Google News), information on technology, and more.

So that’s my list, what’s yours? I note, after the fact, that many are social media. Which isn’t a surprise, but reinforces just how social learning is!

Share with Jane in one of the methods she provides, and it’s always interesting to see what emerges.

Top 10 Tools for Learning

22 July 2014 by Clark 2 Comments

Jane Hart compiles, every year, a list of the top 10 tools for learning. And, of course, it’s that time again, so here we go. I like what Harold Jarche did about tagging his list with the steps of his Seek-Sense-Share model for Personal Knowledge Mastery, so I’m adding that as well. In no particular order:

1. Word: I write most of my articles and books in Word. The outline feature is critical for me (and the main reason I haven’t switched to Pages, it’s just not industrial strength) in structuring my thoughts, and writing is one of the ways I think out loud. Sense & Share.

2. WordPress: the other way I write out loud is on my blog (like this), and my blog is powered by WordPress. Share.

3. OmniGraffle: diagramming is the other way I think out loud, and I’m regularly getting my mind around things by diagramming. Sense.

4. Google: the core tool in my searching for answers for things. Seek.

5. Twitter: a major source of input, pointing to things of interest. Seek.

6. Facebook: also a source of insight. Seek.

7. Skype: continues to be the way I stay in touch with my ITA colleagues (Seek, Sense, & Share)

8. Mail: email is still a major tool for getting pointers, staying in touch, asking questions, etc. (Seek, Share)

9. Keynote: creating presentations is another way I organize my thoughts to share. Sense & Share.

10. OmniOutliner: another way of organizing my thoughts. A different tool for the same purpose. Sense.

What tools do you use?

My Top 10 Learning Tools

3 August 2010 by Clark Leave a Comment

My ITA colleague Jane Hart regularly collects the top 100 learning tools via contributions from lots of folks. It’s a fascinating list, worth looking at. I couldn’t use her submission sheet (some sort of system bug), so I thought I’d make an annotated post.

There are several categories of tools here. Harold Jarche talks about our personal knowledge management task, and in that, there are the tools I use to capture and share my own thinking (like this), and tools I use to go out and find or follow information.

In the capture and share category, major tools include:

WordPress – I blog as a way to reflect and get feedback on my developing thoughts
OmniGraffle – I diagram as another way to capture my thinking, trying to map conceptual relationships onto spatial ones

Then, of course, there are the more standard thought capture and share tools:

Word – while I like Pages, it’s outlining just does not meet my needs, as I outline as part of my writing process
Keynote – while I often have to transfer to PowerPoint, here the Apple product is superior

On the information finding/sharing path, some tools I use include:

Google – like everyone else, I’m all over searching
Twitter – this has been quite the revelation, seeing pointers and getting support, and of course #lrnchat
Feedblitz – this is how I aggregate blogs I track and have them come via email (where I’ll see them)
Skype – chats and calls and videochats with folks

Then I use several tools to keep track of information:

Evernote – is a place to keep information across my devices (though I use Notes too, when I want it backed up and private)
Google Docs – where I collaborate with colleagues on thoughts

The list changes; it’s different than what I put in the last two years, I’m sure, and may be more representative of today versus tomorrow or yesterday. And it doesn’t really include my mobile tools, where Google’s Maps app becomes quite the help, and Photos to share diagrams, and…. Also, email’s still big, and is not represented Still, it’s a reasonably representative list.

So, what am I missing?

Top 10 Tools

20 August 2008 by Clark Leave a Comment

Jane Hart’s Top Tools list is a great resource, and she reminded me that my list might need updating. Fortunately, Jay blogged about his list, which reminded me (some mail didn’t make the transition to the new environment, hence the need for a new list, as well as updating). My list has some changes:

3. Firefox – my Web tool for searching, browsing, surfing: with the new engine, it’s fast, and has great plugins
4. Twitter – I’m using TwitterFox on Firefox, and Twittelator on my iPhone. A whole new world…
5. Google – their search engine, their maps, their website tracking,…
7. iTunes – how I connect my iPhone to my Mac, download mobile apps, and more.
8. Mail – part of my move to centralize on Mac apps (iCal, Address Book) to accommodate iPhone; I use email a lot (e.g. RSS feeds from Feedblitz), but Mail’s missing some things I liked in Entourage

You’ll see a few changes precipitated by the iPhone (and some ways of rearranging). Interestingly my top 10 mobile tools list was just pointed to, and I realize it’s out of date too! I’m still playing with the iPhone, but the tools I use are:

Mail – email on the go

Twittelator – twittering about

Google Maps – location, location, location

Safari – mobile web browsing at it’s best (which still is only so-so :)

Contacts – who’s who?

Photos – easily loaded all my diagrams and portfolio pictures

I’m anticipating using Flashlight (literally), EccoNote (voice memo), AIM (one IM tool, maybe to get around SMS charges), UrbanSpoon (fun way to find restaurants, tho’ not yet here in WC/East Bay SF), Yelp (reviewed places), SplashID (all those passwords, protected), and FaceBook.

I’m cheap, so I’m mostly downloading free apps. Recommendations?

Revisiting 70:20:10

7 November 2017 by Clark 14 Comments

Last week, the Debunker Club (led by Will Thalheimer) held a twitter debate on 70:20:10 (the tweet stream can be downloaded if you’re curious). In ‘attendance’ were two of the major proponents of 70:20:10, Charles Jennings and Jos Arets. I joined Will as a moderator, but he did the heavy lifting of organizing the event and queueing up questions. And there were some insights from the conversations and my own reflections.

To start, 70:20:10 is a framework, it’s not a specific ratio but a guide to thinking about the whole picture of developing organizational solutions to performance problems. In the book by Jos & Charles, along with their colleague Vivian Heijnen, on the topic, there’s a whole methodology that encompasses 5 roles and 28 steps. The approach goes from a problem to a solution that incorporates tools, formal learning, coaching, and more.

The numbers come from a study on leaders, who felt that 10% of what they learned to do their jobs came from formal learning, 20% came from working with others and coaching, and 70% they learned from trying and reflecting on the outcomes. The framework’s role is to help people recognize this, and not leave the 70 and 20 to chance. The goal is to help people along the learning curve, not just leave them to chance after the ‘event’.

First, my impression was that a lot of people like that the 70:20:10 framework provides a push beyond the event model of ‘the course’. Also, a number struggle with the numbers as a brand, because they feel that the numbers are misleading. And some folks clearly believe that good instructional design should include the social and the activity, so the framework is a distraction. A colleague felt that there were also some who feel that formal learning is a waste of time, but I don’t think that many truly ignore the 10, they just want it in the proper perspective (and I could be wrong).

Now, there are times when the ratio changes. In roles where the consequences of failure are drastic (read: aerospace, medical, military), you tend to have a lot more formal. It can go quite a ways up the learning curve. Ideally, we’d do this for every situation, but in real life we have to strike a balance. If we can do the job right in the 10, and then similarly ensure good practices around the 20 and the 70, we’ll get people up the curve.

Another issue, for me, is that 70:20:10 not only provides a push towards thinking of the whole picture, but like Kirkpatrick (and perhaps better) it serves as a design tool. You should start from what the situation looks like at the end and figure out what can be in the world and what has to be in the head, and then go backwards. You then design your tools, and then your training, and 70:20:10 suggests including coaching, etc. But starting with the 70 is one of the messages.

So, I like the realization of 70:20:10 (except typing all those redundant zeros and colons, I often refer to it as 721 ;): the focus on designing the full solution, including tools and coaching and more. I don’t see 70:20:10 being the full solution, as the element of continual innovation and a learning culture are separate, but it’s a good solution for the performance part of the picture, and the specific parts of the development.

10 years!?!?

14 January 2016 by Clark 3 Comments

A comment on my earliest blog post (thanks, Henrik), made me realize that this post will mark 10 years of blogging. Yes, my first post came out on January 14th, 2006. This will be my 1,200th post (I forced one in yesterday to be the 1199th so I could say that ;), yow! That’s 120 a year, or just under every 3rd day. And, I am happy to add, 2,542 comments (just more than 2 per post), so thanks to you for weighing in.

It’s funny, when I started I can’t really say it was more than an experiment. I had no idea where it would lead, or how. It’s had some challenges, to continue to find topics, but it’s been helpful. It’s forced me to deliberately consider things I otherwise might not have, just to try to keep up the momentum.

I confess I originally had a goal of 5 a week (one per business day), but even then I was happy if I got 2-3. I’m gobsmacked at my colleague Harold who seems to put out a post every day. I can’t quite do that. My goal has moderated to be 2 a week (very occasionally I live with 1 per week, but other weeks like when I’m at conferences I might have 3 if there are lots of keynotes to mind map). Typically it’s Tuesday and Wednesday, for no good reason.

I also try to have something new to say every time. It’s hard, but forcing myself to find something to talk about has led to me thinking about lots of things and therefore ready to bring them to bear on behalf of clients. I think out loud relatively freely (particularly with the popularity of Work and Learn Out Loud and Show Your Work). And it’s a way to share my diagrams, another way to ‘think out loud’. And I admit that I don’t share some things that are either proprietary (until I can anonymize them) or something I’m planning on doing something with.

And I’ve also resisted commercializing this. Obviously I’ve avoided the offers to exchange links or blog posts that include links for SEO stuff, but I’ve even, rightly or wrongly, not allowed ads. While it is the official Quinnovation blog, it’s been my belief that sharing my thinking is the best way to help me get interest in what I have to offer (extensive experience mapping a wide variety of concepts onto specific client contexts to yield innovative yet practical and successful solutions). I haven’t (yet) followed a formula to drive business traffic, and only occasionally mention my upcoming events (though hopefully that’s a public service :). There’re other places to track that.

I’m also pretty lax about looking at the metrics. I do weekly pop by Google Analytics to see what sort of traffic I get (pretty steady), but I haven’t tried to see what might improve it. This is, largely, for me. And for you if your interests run this way. So welcome, and here’s to another 10 years! Who knows what there will be to talk about then…or even next week!

70:20:10 and the Learning Curve

27 January 2015 by Clark 4 Comments

My colleague Charles Jennings recently posted on the value of autonomous learning (worth reading!), sparked by a diagram provided by another ITA colleague, Jane Hart (that I also thought was insightful). In Charles’ post he also included an IBM diagram that triggered some associations.

So, in IBM’s diagram, they talked about: the access phase where learning is separate, the integration where learning is ‘enabled’ by work, and the on-demand phase where learning is ’embedded’. They talked about ‘point solutions’ (read: courses) for access, then blended models for integration, and dynamic models for on demand. The point was that the closer to the work that learning is, the more value.

However, I was reminded of Fits & Posner’s model of skill acquisition, which has 3 phases of cognitive, associative, and autonomous learning. The first, cognitive, is when you benefit from formal instruction: giving you models and practice opportunities to map actions to an explicit framework. (Note that this assumes a good formal learning design, not rote information and knowledge test!) Then there’s an associative stage where that explicit framework is supported in being contextualized and compiled away. Finally, the learner continues to improve through continual practice.

I was initially reminded of Norman & Rumelhart’s accretion, restructuring, and tuning learning mechanisms, but it’s not quite right. Still, you could think of accreting the cognitive and explicitly semantic knowledge, then restructuring that into coarse skills that don’t require as much conscious effort, until it becomes a matter of tuning a finely automated skill.

This, to me, maps more closely to 70:20:10, because you can see the formal (10) playing a role to kick off the semantic part of the learning, then coaching and mentoring (the 20) support the integration or association of the skills, and then the 70 (practice, reflection, and personal knowledge mastery including informal social learning) takes over, and I mapped it against a hypothetical improvement curve.

Of course, it’s not quite this clean. While the formal often does kick off the learning, the role of coaching/mentoring and the personal learning are typically intermingled (though the role shifts from mentor to mentee ;). And, of course, the ratios in 70:20:10 are only a framework for rethinking investment, not a prescription about how you apply the numbers. And I may well have the curve wrong (this is too flat for the normal power law of learning), but I wanted to emphasize that the 10 only has a small role to play in moving performance from zero to some minimal level, that mentoring and coaching really help improve performance, and that ongoing development requires a supportive environment.

I think it’s important to understand how we learn, so we can align our uses of technology to support them in productive ways. As this suggests, if you care about organizational performance, you are going to want to support more than the course, as well as doing the course right. (Hence the revolution. :)

#itashare

Stop training! Or, how to get there from here

14 August 2013 by Clark Leave a Comment

One of the things I’m wrestling with right now is the transition from where we’re at to where we should be. I’ve already said we have to change, the question is how. A number of us have talked about what the future could and should look like (including but not limited to my ITA colleagues), but how do you get there from here? Whether it’s 70:20:10 or some other model, there simply has to be a better way.

Right now, many organizations have training operations going on: people traveling to a location to sit down and have knowledge dumped on them, perhaps including a knowledge check: show up and throw up. With smile sheets to evaluate the outcome. And/or we have elearning: knowledge dump and test, or virtual classrooms where we do the same spray and pray. And it doesn’t work; it can’t. Well, it certainly is not going to lead to any meaningful outcome.

Granted, this is a gross stereotype, and in particular situations the training is hands on, there’s lots of practice, and maybe blended so the knowledge necessary is learned beforehand. Yes, this can lead to some real skill acquisition.

And don’t even bring up ‘compliance’. Sure, I know you have to do it, and until we get government to stop thinking seat time and content presentation is the same as behavior change, and lawyers to only care about CYA, we’ll be stuck with it. That, apparently, is just the cost of doing business. I’m talking about the things that matter to your company. Your skills, your ability to do.

And we need to stop it. I think the first step is to kill all training. When you raise your head up and start talking about “but how are we going to meet this need”, then you start thinking anew: how can we go ‘world first‘, performance support 2nd, and meaningful practice last? Once you find you’ve exhausted all other options, then you might realize that formal training is needed, but it could and should be focused on doing, not telling.

This is only part of the picture, and perhaps I’m being deliberately controversial (who, me?), but it’s one way to be forced to think anew about what we’re doing and how we can help. We have to change, and we need to start figuring out how to get there. I’m open to ideas. I’ve heard some others, but that’s another post. What are your ideas?

Christopher Pirie #mlearncon Keynote Mindmap

18 June 2013 by Clark 1 Comment

Christopher Pirie opened the eLearning Guild’s mLearnCon mobile learning conference with a fair overview of technology for learning. He talked about the usual trends, and pointed to some interesting game apps for learning. Kodu, in particular, is an interesting advancement on things like Scratch and StageCast’s Creator.

I was somewhat surprised by his pointer to Bloom as the turning point to modern learning design, as I’d be inclined to point more to Collins & Brown’s Cognitive Apprenticeship. I also think he should take a look at Donald Clark’s criticisms of Mitra’s Hole in the Wall. Finally, the characterization between the overhead projector as characteristic of 1991 and the Kinect for 2012 is a bit spurious: in 1991 we also had HyperCard, and in 2012 I don’t see the Kinect in many classrooms yet, but his point is apt about the potential for change we have at our fingertips.

Overall, a nice kickoff for the conference.

« Previous Page