Friday, August 20, 2010
That's a wrap...
With that, I'm out. Time to drive 4 hours back to the Keystone State. If you're a new reader/visitor to my blog, and you subscribe to T+D, be sure to check out my article in the June issue!
Repurposing and Rethinking Social Networking in the Learning Environment (Millard/Sullivan)
Couple of librarians presenting on social media...could be interesting.
They present their Systems Analysis 101 course (H - Web Publishing, I - Using the Internet, R - Information Retrieval). This course became the background for a course in the Interactive Media Studies program. One course in 1996, 30 in 2010, so it certainly grew (due in part to $1mil seed money from Procter/Gamble). Faculty from every department and the library have a hand in this.
IMS 201 - Information Studies in the Digital Age, the core course itself, centers around how to become better information consumers and to be technologically literate.
An investigation into the course participants was conducted in 2009/10. All sections, currently, used ning.com and other social media sites to varying degrees, and were happy with some aspects, not with others. Challenge was to make a closed social network for purposes of this class, specifically. Infrastructure of the school and the online learning situation is covered (changing from Blackboard09 to Sakai).
All instructors set up a ning site (which is now a pay service). Good thing is that, for students, it aligns itself more with Facebook than any other social media. Blogs from within Ning are used heavily and in a different fashion. Some chose to use it as a way to enrich the discussion of the day, others posted selected readings in their blogs. Others still made blogging a course requirement, as well as commenting on others' blogs. Discussion boards are covered next, but we all get them.
(This is getting to be a commercial for Ning, as opposed to anything new, let alone repurposing/rethinking anything...)
The whole concept of replacing the textbook is covered. What don't people get about this? Yes, I udnerstand - Students can go out to the internet, find answers to questions, facts, figures, etc. BUT...this affords -0- consistency. You can guide them all you want, but the answers, the facts, the knowledge will be from different sources, appear differently, and thereby be inconsistent with one another. This is a HUGE issue from an assessment standpoint (how do you assess knowledge if the knowledge isn't standardized (<-- see: by a textbook)). Twitter use and misuse in the course is discussed. Always run the risk of potential anonymity, and even students creating alternate accounts for alternate purposes.
The pros of using all of this social technology includes Felxibility & Customization, Appropriate For Course Content, and Tools Available Post Graduation (Post Employment?). The Cons include Retention of Student Projects, Bueinss Model Stability (Ning is pay now), Less Control/No IT Support, Students More Familiar with Centrally Supported Platform, and Technology for Technology's sake?
Student Survey
So, what did the students think of all this? Survey submitted in addition to Course Evaluations, optional participation, and focused on the Ning backdrop. Received a 65% response rate, with varied responses across courses. Ranged from "Liked it" to "Sucked" (<-- and I quote). All in all, varied responses best describes what they got back across the board.
Conclusions arrived at:
- Students are goal oriented - need a gradebook.
- Social Media sites work better for courses covering Social Media (Think a Journalism class required to read the daily NYT)
- Social Media facilitates new models of classroom communication - Less push/more pull.
- LMS Vendors need to make their offerings more social (Discussion boards aren't enough)
All in all, a good case study for these folks. Would have liked to have seen more rethinking/repurposing with innovation, as opposed to existing/commonplace technology. Presenters carried their case well, though.
They present their Systems Analysis 101 course (H - Web Publishing, I - Using the Internet, R - Information Retrieval). This course became the background for a course in the Interactive Media Studies program. One course in 1996, 30 in 2010, so it certainly grew (due in part to $1mil seed money from Procter/Gamble). Faculty from every department and the library have a hand in this.
IMS 201 - Information Studies in the Digital Age, the core course itself, centers around how to become better information consumers and to be technologically literate.
An investigation into the course participants was conducted in 2009/10. All sections, currently, used ning.com and other social media sites to varying degrees, and were happy with some aspects, not with others. Challenge was to make a closed social network for purposes of this class, specifically. Infrastructure of the school and the online learning situation is covered (changing from Blackboard09 to Sakai).
All instructors set up a ning site (which is now a pay service). Good thing is that, for students, it aligns itself more with Facebook than any other social media. Blogs from within Ning are used heavily and in a different fashion. Some chose to use it as a way to enrich the discussion of the day, others posted selected readings in their blogs. Others still made blogging a course requirement, as well as commenting on others' blogs. Discussion boards are covered next, but we all get them.
(This is getting to be a commercial for Ning, as opposed to anything new, let alone repurposing/rethinking anything...)
The whole concept of replacing the textbook is covered. What don't people get about this? Yes, I udnerstand - Students can go out to the internet, find answers to questions, facts, figures, etc. BUT...this affords -0- consistency. You can guide them all you want, but the answers, the facts, the knowledge will be from different sources, appear differently, and thereby be inconsistent with one another. This is a HUGE issue from an assessment standpoint (how do you assess knowledge if the knowledge isn't standardized (<-- see: by a textbook)). Twitter use and misuse in the course is discussed. Always run the risk of potential anonymity, and even students creating alternate accounts for alternate purposes.
The pros of using all of this social technology includes Felxibility & Customization, Appropriate For Course Content, and Tools Available Post Graduation (Post Employment?). The Cons include Retention of Student Projects, Bueinss Model Stability (Ning is pay now), Less Control/No IT Support, Students More Familiar with Centrally Supported Platform, and Technology for Technology's sake?
Student Survey
So, what did the students think of all this? Survey submitted in addition to Course Evaluations, optional participation, and focused on the Ning backdrop. Received a 65% response rate, with varied responses across courses. Ranged from "Liked it" to "Sucked" (<-- and I quote). All in all, varied responses best describes what they got back across the board.
Conclusions arrived at:
- Students are goal oriented - need a gradebook.
- Social Media sites work better for courses covering Social Media (Think a Journalism class required to read the daily NYT)
- Social Media facilitates new models of classroom communication - Less push/more pull.
- LMS Vendors need to make their offerings more social (Discussion boards aren't enough)
All in all, a good case study for these folks. Would have liked to have seen more rethinking/repurposing with innovation, as opposed to existing/commonplace technology. Presenters carried their case well, though.
App This, Tweet That: Teaching in the 21st Century and Beyond (Rami Maysami)
"To teach them, reach them. To reach them, speak their tongue." Awesome quote...speaks to learning relevance. Make the content relevant, make the context familiar, and the content will stick that much more.
Using Music to Teach Economics
Sugarlans song (groan) is used to illustrate several economic principles (The cost-of-living in urban areas is higher than living in the country vs. "Please send me money, I'm so broke it ain't funny"). Good way to get their attention, then to tie in to the subject area (Pink Floyd sings about it, Barenaked Ladies sing about it).
Not just music - Poker, for example, is shown via YouTube. A video produced by students, but still - Poker is used to explain econ. Just goes to reinforce the fact of context, context, context. "Economics is a study of how people make choices, and poker is a game of choices." Good stuff.
Research At Your Fingertips
Card catalogs? What are those? If it's not at their fingertips, it's not worth the search/effort. I follow, but, again, I think it comes down to instrinsic motivation as a behavior driver. If they're motivated, they'll find ye olde card catalog...
(Technology is having a field day with the speaker...)
iPad, iPhones, and Interoperability
Apps are now becoming more intertwined than ever before. Practical apps, like Dragon, are now interfacing with Facebook, Twitter, and the like. So, what does this mean? Even the most practical of apps are now giving credence to social media as a credible field. SpeakIt is one I haven't heard of...find text, copy it, paste it, and it reads it. Okay...doesn't Windows screen reader do this? I mean, it's mobile...I get it...but this isn't new technology at all.
But Why Not Challenge Them To Do More?
NPR App is shown next. Touted as unique, you can click on a story, click the Twitter icon and it auto tweets the story for you, along with your comments. As a prof, teacher, or the like, this is useful as a knowledge transmission tool. Mark Frydenberg, seated behind me/speaker on social media, brings up an awesome question: Why not just email it to him?
Is this getting into Technology for the sake of Technology? It's cool, I get it, but is it necessary and is it the best means by which to transmit the knowledge? It comes down to yesterdays FGDLA presentation: Technology is the truck, not the groceries it's carrying. We can't eat the truck...
There's some mention of video, recording it, and making it available online for student download. Isn't this what PodCasts are for?
I get what they're doing here, and I'm glad to see a higher acceptance rate for social media being used for serious purposes. That said, not a whole lot new here, but still well presented (depsite the gods of technology giving the speaker a hard time).
Using Music to Teach Economics
Sugarlans song (groan) is used to illustrate several economic principles (The cost-of-living in urban areas is higher than living in the country vs. "Please send me money, I'm so broke it ain't funny"). Good way to get their attention, then to tie in to the subject area (Pink Floyd sings about it, Barenaked Ladies sing about it).
Not just music - Poker, for example, is shown via YouTube. A video produced by students, but still - Poker is used to explain econ. Just goes to reinforce the fact of context, context, context. "Economics is a study of how people make choices, and poker is a game of choices." Good stuff.
Research At Your Fingertips
Card catalogs? What are those? If it's not at their fingertips, it's not worth the search/effort. I follow, but, again, I think it comes down to instrinsic motivation as a behavior driver. If they're motivated, they'll find ye olde card catalog...
(Technology is having a field day with the speaker...)
iPad, iPhones, and Interoperability
Apps are now becoming more intertwined than ever before. Practical apps, like Dragon, are now interfacing with Facebook, Twitter, and the like. So, what does this mean? Even the most practical of apps are now giving credence to social media as a credible field. SpeakIt is one I haven't heard of...find text, copy it, paste it, and it reads it. Okay...doesn't Windows screen reader do this? I mean, it's mobile...I get it...but this isn't new technology at all.
But Why Not Challenge Them To Do More?
NPR App is shown next. Touted as unique, you can click on a story, click the Twitter icon and it auto tweets the story for you, along with your comments. As a prof, teacher, or the like, this is useful as a knowledge transmission tool. Mark Frydenberg, seated behind me/speaker on social media, brings up an awesome question: Why not just email it to him?
Is this getting into Technology for the sake of Technology? It's cool, I get it, but is it necessary and is it the best means by which to transmit the knowledge? It comes down to yesterdays FGDLA presentation: Technology is the truck, not the groceries it's carrying. We can't eat the truck...
There's some mention of video, recording it, and making it available online for student download. Isn't this what PodCasts are for?
I get what they're doing here, and I'm glad to see a higher acceptance rate for social media being used for serious purposes. That said, not a whole lot new here, but still well presented (depsite the gods of technology giving the speaker a hard time).
How to Make Your Learning Stick - A Blueprint for Learning Reinforcement (Chris Ayers)
50% of the value of training comes in the 'back half'. Good stat - We're training for a positive effect on the organization, not necessarily for the individual themselves. Perhaps we tend to blur the line a bit about the 'why' are we training. It's important to consider the individual, but in the end...it's about the company. What's in it for (company name here)?
What Learners Need
- Acquire knowledge and skills
- Practice using knowledge and skills
- Coaching and feedback
Learning Reinforcement
Acquisition + Application - A good formula, but it's missing a piece...
Acquisition + Reinforcement + Application - The complete formula. Without reinforcement, the learner's motivation starts to wane and, as discussed yesterday, intrinsic motivation is key in adult learning. Moving from Acquisition to Application without Reinforcement is difficult, at best. Without it, you're putting all of the learning task on the learner themselves.
Finish this sentence: All I ever needed to know, I learned in ______________ .
Most people respond with Kindergarten. And what did we use nonstop back then, maybe thereafter for a little bit? Flash Cards.
Why do they work? Mobile, short, simple, inexpensive, customizable, immediate feedback, fun...a lot more. And the fun is optional, for sure. But it must be noted that the proper methodology...the proper knowledge (phonics, math, etc.) needs to be instructed FIRST. The Flash Cards do not work for primary instruction, but certainly do an amazing job of reinforcing existing knowledge sets. Or, if it is a new concept, it must be related to something previously known.
Push vs Pull Methods
Pull method is one where the learner has to go somewhere and find it for themselves. Push is when we, the trainers, push the materials to the trainees. Pull is more common and a lot easier to build, but...what's going to be better for the learner? Push is more controlled, more guided. Both of these methods can be "Just In Time". A mix, in the speaker's opinion (and mine), is the best recipe.
Speaker mentions that on some 90 day follow up calls with clients, it was like they were never there. Scary stuff...fortunately, in my field, the user gets thrown right into usage. But in the cases where usage is sparse/staggered, more push methodology for reinforcement is better than a good idea...it's a great idea.
Measurement
Reaction --> Learning --> Behavior --> Results
Speaker has a product, Cameo, which is a web based tool that delivers scenario-based learning reinforcement via email. Learners receive scenarios via email, learners receive feedback based on their response to the scenario, then Cameo aggregates the data of the learner responses. Kinda like an LMS in that regard...color me interested, though.
Good session on reinforcement and its finer points.
What Learners Need
- Acquire knowledge and skills
- Practice using knowledge and skills
- Coaching and feedback
Learning Reinforcement
Acquisition + Application - A good formula, but it's missing a piece...
Acquisition + Reinforcement + Application - The complete formula. Without reinforcement, the learner's motivation starts to wane and, as discussed yesterday, intrinsic motivation is key in adult learning. Moving from Acquisition to Application without Reinforcement is difficult, at best. Without it, you're putting all of the learning task on the learner themselves.
Finish this sentence: All I ever needed to know, I learned in ______________ .
Most people respond with Kindergarten. And what did we use nonstop back then, maybe thereafter for a little bit? Flash Cards.
Why do they work? Mobile, short, simple, inexpensive, customizable, immediate feedback, fun...a lot more. And the fun is optional, for sure. But it must be noted that the proper methodology...the proper knowledge (phonics, math, etc.) needs to be instructed FIRST. The Flash Cards do not work for primary instruction, but certainly do an amazing job of reinforcing existing knowledge sets. Or, if it is a new concept, it must be related to something previously known.
Push vs Pull Methods
Pull method is one where the learner has to go somewhere and find it for themselves. Push is when we, the trainers, push the materials to the trainees. Pull is more common and a lot easier to build, but...what's going to be better for the learner? Push is more controlled, more guided. Both of these methods can be "Just In Time". A mix, in the speaker's opinion (and mine), is the best recipe.
Speaker mentions that on some 90 day follow up calls with clients, it was like they were never there. Scary stuff...fortunately, in my field, the user gets thrown right into usage. But in the cases where usage is sparse/staggered, more push methodology for reinforcement is better than a good idea...it's a great idea.
Measurement
Reaction --> Learning --> Behavior --> Results
Speaker has a product, Cameo, which is a web based tool that delivers scenario-based learning reinforcement via email. Learners receive scenarios via email, learners receive feedback based on their response to the scenario, then Cameo aggregates the data of the learner responses. Kinda like an LMS in that regard...color me interested, though.
Good session on reinforcement and its finer points.
Social Media Present Trends/Future Possibilities (Mark Frydenberg)
Intro to the ills of social media misuse by the gentleman from Microsoft Compliance...nothing we all haven't heard before. I'm amazed that people still think they're any kind of invisible when utilizing Twitter, Facebook, or the like...
First social network? "Reply All" (Hmm, I agree to an extent, but don't bulletin boards predate email?) Frydenberg has a textbook published on Web 2.0 Real World Applications.
Facebook is up under the hammer first. Discussed the social aspect of 'friending' - Who do you friend? Why do you do it? Teachers - Do you friend your students? It blurs the line between personal and professional lives. Most students don't realize that you can alter your settings (see: Friends list accessiblity, etc.)
Google Wave is trashed next. I take great pleasure in this.
Three trends in social networking up and coming:
- Location based networking
- Mobile networking
- Single sign on (Think Trillian for Social Networking)
Live Twitter demo/dicussion...this is fun. I'm surprised at the number of people who don't, by default, 'get' the educational value (potential as it may be) behind this. Brightkite and Foursquare are the future, at least with regards to location-based social networking.
Build-Your-Own social networks are available, but maybe not as much the trend as others. Ning, which used to be free, is an example of this. Others include Elgg, BuddyPress, and SocialGo. "The Long Tail of Social Networking" - Targets a specific group of people.
Spokeo - Goes out and aggregates all searchable/findable data. Scary...
Wow...this one sucked me in completely. Awesome, awesome stuff.
First social network? "Reply All" (Hmm, I agree to an extent, but don't bulletin boards predate email?) Frydenberg has a textbook published on Web 2.0 Real World Applications.
Facebook is up under the hammer first. Discussed the social aspect of 'friending' - Who do you friend? Why do you do it? Teachers - Do you friend your students? It blurs the line between personal and professional lives. Most students don't realize that you can alter your settings (see: Friends list accessiblity, etc.)
Google Wave is trashed next. I take great pleasure in this.
Three trends in social networking up and coming:
- Location based networking
- Mobile networking
- Single sign on (Think Trillian for Social Networking)
Live Twitter demo/dicussion...this is fun. I'm surprised at the number of people who don't, by default, 'get' the educational value (potential as it may be) behind this. Brightkite and Foursquare are the future, at least with regards to location-based social networking.
Build-Your-Own social networks are available, but maybe not as much the trend as others. Ning, which used to be free, is an example of this. Others include Elgg, BuddyPress, and SocialGo. "The Long Tail of Social Networking" - Targets a specific group of people.
Spokeo - Goes out and aggregates all searchable/findable data. Scary...
Wow...this one sucked me in completely. Awesome, awesome stuff.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Learning Styles and Generational Differences: Do They Matter? (Jolly Holden/Phillip Westfall)
"Some educational psychologists say learning styles don't exist."
Wow - I'm in. We think that we learn differently...but we don't. And research supports it. Learning style is NOT a predictor of learning outcomes.
Meaning out of Meaninglessness
Research was done on the SATs last year. 100,000 students, outcome was a .8 correlation (HUGE) to the fact that success on SAT = success in college. Learning style tests, however, do not predict any form of success whatsoever. Neuroscience has proved that 90% of what you attain/process is VISUAL. Therefore, you can SAY you're BK, you can SAY you're audial...not true. We learn not by modality, but by the context we put it in. And how do we set that context? Visual cues, memories, etc...We attach meaning to EVERYTHING, but if we accepted we're VISUAL, we'd be a lot happier and accepting of strictly VISUAL training.
(Holy stuff...this seriously has me on the edge of my seat. THIS is the revolutionary thought I was hoping to find here. Note to self - Review THIS presentation as soon as you get home (to review generational distinctions, as well).)
Narration in training is brought up next and it is shot down so hard...I love it. Basically, for all of the clamoring that people do to get Narration plugged into training (on top of on screen text), it is pointless. POINTLESS. If it compliments the text (i.e. - not verbatim), great. But if you read the screen text, the narration actually SLOWS LEARNING DOWN. Brilliant.
Learning Styles
As of right here, right now, 71 different learning styles have been identified with 4 in the wings, waiting for acceptance. 75 learning styles. With no relationship to predicting outcomes, though, the speaker poses an awesome question: "Why waste your time?" He asked a colleague what he thought of this research...that there were 75 different learning styles...to which the colleague replied:
It's a convenient scapegoat for poor instruction. Spend your time instead on good instructional design.
Intrinsic motivation and prior knowledge are the ONLY items PROVEN by RESEARCH to have any predictability of student success. Everything else - learning style, teaching style, etc. - is just noise. WOW...genius...this is blowing my mind.
The example he gives: What does Orion (the constellation) look like? As soon as the question leaves his mouth, those of us who know, IMMEDIATELY visualize it...but in stages. He shows three images, increasing in complexity. I, admittedly, imagined the stars in the sky. Simple enough. But he progressed through images to an old drawing of the warrior Orion...now, whenever I think of it, I will think of the drawing, due simply to context.
Another context example: "What was the headline in yesterday's newspaper?" "What was the headline three months ago in the gulf?" Which one do you remember more quickly? The one with the context...two words increases your memory by three months.
So, what are we saying here? It doesn't matter what style we design the training for? No more narration? Visual only? Well, yes and no. But I'll say this - my view of BAK, Modalities, etc. are forever changed because of this session. Amazing, insipiring stuff...awesome job. I don't even care that we left out the generational stuff...this was perfect.
"Throwing technology at a problem has not improved learning."
Wow - I'm in. We think that we learn differently...but we don't. And research supports it. Learning style is NOT a predictor of learning outcomes.
Meaning out of Meaninglessness
Research was done on the SATs last year. 100,000 students, outcome was a .8 correlation (HUGE) to the fact that success on SAT = success in college. Learning style tests, however, do not predict any form of success whatsoever. Neuroscience has proved that 90% of what you attain/process is VISUAL. Therefore, you can SAY you're BK, you can SAY you're audial...not true. We learn not by modality, but by the context we put it in. And how do we set that context? Visual cues, memories, etc...We attach meaning to EVERYTHING, but if we accepted we're VISUAL, we'd be a lot happier and accepting of strictly VISUAL training.
(Holy stuff...this seriously has me on the edge of my seat. THIS is the revolutionary thought I was hoping to find here. Note to self - Review THIS presentation as soon as you get home (to review generational distinctions, as well).)
Narration in training is brought up next and it is shot down so hard...I love it. Basically, for all of the clamoring that people do to get Narration plugged into training (on top of on screen text), it is pointless. POINTLESS. If it compliments the text (i.e. - not verbatim), great. But if you read the screen text, the narration actually SLOWS LEARNING DOWN. Brilliant.
Learning Styles
As of right here, right now, 71 different learning styles have been identified with 4 in the wings, waiting for acceptance. 75 learning styles. With no relationship to predicting outcomes, though, the speaker poses an awesome question: "Why waste your time?" He asked a colleague what he thought of this research...that there were 75 different learning styles...to which the colleague replied:
It's a convenient scapegoat for poor instruction. Spend your time instead on good instructional design.
Intrinsic motivation and prior knowledge are the ONLY items PROVEN by RESEARCH to have any predictability of student success. Everything else - learning style, teaching style, etc. - is just noise. WOW...genius...this is blowing my mind.
The example he gives: What does Orion (the constellation) look like? As soon as the question leaves his mouth, those of us who know, IMMEDIATELY visualize it...but in stages. He shows three images, increasing in complexity. I, admittedly, imagined the stars in the sky. Simple enough. But he progressed through images to an old drawing of the warrior Orion...now, whenever I think of it, I will think of the drawing, due simply to context.
Another context example: "What was the headline in yesterday's newspaper?" "What was the headline three months ago in the gulf?" Which one do you remember more quickly? The one with the context...two words increases your memory by three months.
So, what are we saying here? It doesn't matter what style we design the training for? No more narration? Visual only? Well, yes and no. But I'll say this - my view of BAK, Modalities, etc. are forever changed because of this session. Amazing, insipiring stuff...awesome job. I don't even care that we left out the generational stuff...this was perfect.
"Throwing technology at a problem has not improved learning."
Informal Learning and Technologies to Make it Happen (Ghenno Senbetta)
Starts wide open with "What is your interest?" (specifically, re: informal learning)
Learning Dimensions
Online (Different Place) (NORTH)
Formal (Off the job) (WEST)
Informal (On the job)(EAST)
Face to face (Same Place) (SOUTH)
Learning to Learn
Core Competencies:
- Computing/Digital Skills
- Finding/Searching
- Sharing/Organizing
- Collaborating/Networking
Take Away/Give Away activity is distributed/discussed. Synchronous/Asynchronous Learning software is discussed/shared with one another. First topic centered around Meeting Technology and, what's funny is that more and more previously 'frivolous' social applications are now serious meeting pieces. Everything from Twitter to AIM (God help me, someone even brought up Trillian)...these now allow us to meet virtually. Great stuff.
Asynchronous is up next...everything from Google Groups, Ning, Sharepoint, and Yammer. These are a bit more straight forward as far as being what they are. Someone brought up LinkedIn...I suppose that fits the bill, too. Softutor, Ging, and Collab are also mentioned in the discussion. Pretty lengthy list, to be sure.
I really liked this session - It was very collaborative, very informal, and the most participation I've seen thus far at this conference. Great vibe all around and a well put together session. Once again, you can tell the sessions I'm really sold on by the short posts!
Learning Dimensions
Online (Different Place) (NORTH)
Formal (Off the job) (WEST)
Informal (On the job)(EAST)
Face to face (Same Place) (SOUTH)
Learning to Learn
Core Competencies:
- Computing/Digital Skills
- Finding/Searching
- Sharing/Organizing
- Collaborating/Networking
Take Away/Give Away activity is distributed/discussed. Synchronous/Asynchronous Learning software is discussed/shared with one another. First topic centered around Meeting Technology and, what's funny is that more and more previously 'frivolous' social applications are now serious meeting pieces. Everything from Twitter to AIM (God help me, someone even brought up Trillian)...these now allow us to meet virtually. Great stuff.
Asynchronous is up next...everything from Google Groups, Ning, Sharepoint, and Yammer. These are a bit more straight forward as far as being what they are. Someone brought up LinkedIn...I suppose that fits the bill, too. Softutor, Ging, and Collab are also mentioned in the discussion. Pretty lengthy list, to be sure.
I really liked this session - It was very collaborative, very informal, and the most participation I've seen thus far at this conference. Great vibe all around and a well put together session. Once again, you can tell the sessions I'm really sold on by the short posts!
Information Sharing, Knowledge Management, and the Federal Challenge (Peter Goodstein)
"Organizations collect a vast amount of information from many sources. Much of this information stays within the "collection stovepipes" because discovery and dissemination are tightly controlled by the collectors"
Wow...that's a solid quote to walk in to. This plays very heavily into my job, as we're beginning to try to 'de-silo' the sub departments within departments, so that knowledge and information flows readily and ably.
Security and Privacy (inhibitor) - Potential inhibitor to open/free knowledge sharing. The Need-To-Know information culture has lef to inhibiting practices. Information should stay in the collection stovepipes because discovery and dissemination are tightly controlled by the collectors.
Attribute Based Access (enabler) - A user's credentials are presented at log on. Permitted information is accessed based on the person's profile. This is contrasted with a network based access, which basically means if you can get on the network, you can see anything. (Att Based Access is just like Epic).
Overall Enablers to Information Sharing - Need to move to a more collaborative information sharing environment. provide a "sanitized" product of a restricted information. Enable free flow of information by employing Attribute-Based Access, Automated Consumer Authorization, Transparent Audit Trails, and Data Security. Finally, reward collectors and consumers for removing barriers to information sharing.
Data Stewardship - Ensures that data assets are understandable, trusted, accessible, and interoperable. Data stewards promote information sharing by reducing disincentives like excessive classification and unnecessary security stumbling blocks.
"Information only becomes knowledge in the hands of someone who know that to do with it." (Peter Drucker)
All in all, I'm glad I ducked out of the session I was going to attend and jumped into this one. Very interesting, speaks to many facets of what I deal with on a daily basis. While we didn't necessarily arrive at an overall solution, this definitely got me thinking, and that's good.
Wow...that's a solid quote to walk in to. This plays very heavily into my job, as we're beginning to try to 'de-silo' the sub departments within departments, so that knowledge and information flows readily and ably.
Security and Privacy (inhibitor) - Potential inhibitor to open/free knowledge sharing. The Need-To-Know information culture has lef to inhibiting practices. Information should stay in the collection stovepipes because discovery and dissemination are tightly controlled by the collectors.
Attribute Based Access (enabler) - A user's credentials are presented at log on. Permitted information is accessed based on the person's profile. This is contrasted with a network based access, which basically means if you can get on the network, you can see anything. (Att Based Access is just like Epic).
Overall Enablers to Information Sharing - Need to move to a more collaborative information sharing environment. provide a "sanitized" product of a restricted information. Enable free flow of information by employing Attribute-Based Access, Automated Consumer Authorization, Transparent Audit Trails, and Data Security. Finally, reward collectors and consumers for removing barriers to information sharing.
Data Stewardship - Ensures that data assets are understandable, trusted, accessible, and interoperable. Data stewards promote information sharing by reducing disincentives like excessive classification and unnecessary security stumbling blocks.
"Information only becomes knowledge in the hands of someone who know that to do with it." (Peter Drucker)
All in all, I'm glad I ducked out of the session I was going to attend and jumped into this one. Very interesting, speaks to many facets of what I deal with on a daily basis. While we didn't necessarily arrive at an overall solution, this definitely got me thinking, and that's good.
Efficiency in Distance Learning at VA Department of Health (Robert Bradley, Va Dept of Health)
Case study style presentation...first case study I've seen here, actually.
Started out by stating "Not everything can be done via online courses" and defined distance learning. Good start - We don't realize, sometimes, how multifaceted that term can be. for the 20-30 people in this room, there's probably 20-30 different definitions.
"Distance learning is a form of instruction that focuses on technology and instructional systems design that aims to deliver education to students who are not physically on site"
Multiple facets of distance learning:
Video/Web Conferencing - Whereas was previously used for solely social purposes, now it's coming into business and education with a vengeance. WebEx cited specifically. While this is positive usage, one thing needs to be kept in mind when utilizing video remotely - bandwidth, bandwidth, bandwidth.
Websites (Internal/External) - Sites can be literal warehouses of information when you set up references at the end of a course. Pretty cut/dry.
Web 2.0 Applications - Biggest advantage of using 2.0 technologies in education = THEY'RE FREE. Speaker cites that for the VA State Govt to accept 2.0 technologies, there must be something to them. I think, overall, 2.0 gets a very 'toy-like' rap - that they're all built for play. You need an informed ambassador to address the powers that make the decisions...and push them in the right direction (see: adopting 2.0).
Mobile Platforms - VA Govt is looking toward the two major hitters: Blackberry and iPhone. Mentions that providers carry around their phones all day long, so they needed to give them a way to access educational pieces, etc. on the fly. Speaker also mentions that their online content for mobile purposes is available via Podcast or Vidcasts.
So, why did they make such a move?
- Budget Reductions
- Recognized need for verification process and policy (amen)
- Recognized need for training
- Recognized need for up to date training methods
How did they make the move?
- Va DoH set up a Distance Learning Committee (Open to all divisions of VaDoH)
- Centralized training policy developed (amen, amen)
- Policy for Web 2.0 application usage (good idea...'play nice' policy)
- Learning management system superusers (Hmm...could be useful)
Good overall case study - informative and entertaining.
Started out by stating "Not everything can be done via online courses" and defined distance learning. Good start - We don't realize, sometimes, how multifaceted that term can be. for the 20-30 people in this room, there's probably 20-30 different definitions.
"Distance learning is a form of instruction that focuses on technology and instructional systems design that aims to deliver education to students who are not physically on site"
Multiple facets of distance learning:
Video/Web Conferencing - Whereas was previously used for solely social purposes, now it's coming into business and education with a vengeance. WebEx cited specifically. While this is positive usage, one thing needs to be kept in mind when utilizing video remotely - bandwidth, bandwidth, bandwidth.
Websites (Internal/External) - Sites can be literal warehouses of information when you set up references at the end of a course. Pretty cut/dry.
Web 2.0 Applications - Biggest advantage of using 2.0 technologies in education = THEY'RE FREE. Speaker cites that for the VA State Govt to accept 2.0 technologies, there must be something to them. I think, overall, 2.0 gets a very 'toy-like' rap - that they're all built for play. You need an informed ambassador to address the powers that make the decisions...and push them in the right direction (see: adopting 2.0).
Mobile Platforms - VA Govt is looking toward the two major hitters: Blackberry and iPhone. Mentions that providers carry around their phones all day long, so they needed to give them a way to access educational pieces, etc. on the fly. Speaker also mentions that their online content for mobile purposes is available via Podcast or Vidcasts.
So, why did they make such a move?
- Budget Reductions
- Recognized need for verification process and policy (amen)
- Recognized need for training
- Recognized need for up to date training methods
How did they make the move?
- Va DoH set up a Distance Learning Committee (Open to all divisions of VaDoH)
- Centralized training policy developed (amen, amen)
- Policy for Web 2.0 application usage (good idea...'play nice' policy)
- Learning management system superusers (Hmm...could be useful)
Good overall case study - informative and entertaining.
mLearning at the Bottom of the Pyramid (James BonTempo)
Presentation will center around opportunities in which we could potentially use mLearning.
Speaker's presentation looks good from the get-go. Presents the following stats:
5,000,000,000 subscriptions
4,100,000,000 mobile phones
3,600,000,000 subscribers (unique) (<-- Just over 1/2 the people in the world)
Greatest growth in mobile? Not here...it's 7 times as high in emerging markets in the last 8 years (India, China, Middle East, etc.). The bottom 75% in Kenya, Tanzania, and Ethiopia spent 20% of their income on mobile services alone. Holy wow...the cost of hardware has continued to drop, but the functionality available has stagnated. (shows some dinosaurs and what they cost today)
What can we do with these phones?
- Basic numeracy skills - The calculator on these basic phones can be used to teach basic arithmetic. Allows people who may have never had access to education the ability to not get ripped off at market, etc.
- Users can also learn to speak English (refer to links). Program in Bangladesh allows users to call and listen to ~3 minute podcasts (Basic, Intermediate, Advanced).
- Adopt healthy behavior - Users can sign up to receive SMS to help reinforce smoking cessation, etc.
- Get tutoring and learning reinforcement - Follow up SMS can reinforce items received in the classroom.
- Create communities of learners - Forget your higher up Social Networking...a phonecall/SMS is the original 'mobile community'.
- Report grades, attendance, and other data. It's like an LMS...sorta.
This is awesome, as by looking at the basics of mLearning with the most basic technology, it's quite revealing as to the true, inherent benefits of mLearning. I can tell I was really into it, based on the brevity of this post. What an intuitive, creative presentation on what runs the risk of being a very dry, stodgy topic. Amazingly well done.
Speaker's presentation looks good from the get-go. Presents the following stats:
5,000,000,000 subscriptions
4,100,000,000 mobile phones
3,600,000,000 subscribers (unique) (<-- Just over 1/2 the people in the world)
Greatest growth in mobile? Not here...it's 7 times as high in emerging markets in the last 8 years (India, China, Middle East, etc.). The bottom 75% in Kenya, Tanzania, and Ethiopia spent 20% of their income on mobile services alone. Holy wow...the cost of hardware has continued to drop, but the functionality available has stagnated. (shows some dinosaurs and what they cost today)
What can we do with these phones?
- Basic numeracy skills - The calculator on these basic phones can be used to teach basic arithmetic. Allows people who may have never had access to education the ability to not get ripped off at market, etc.
- Users can also learn to speak English (refer to links). Program in Bangladesh allows users to call and listen to ~3 minute podcasts (Basic, Intermediate, Advanced).
- Adopt healthy behavior - Users can sign up to receive SMS to help reinforce smoking cessation, etc.
- Get tutoring and learning reinforcement - Follow up SMS can reinforce items received in the classroom.
- Create communities of learners - Forget your higher up Social Networking...a phonecall/SMS is the original 'mobile community'.
- Report grades, attendance, and other data. It's like an LMS...sorta.
This is awesome, as by looking at the basics of mLearning with the most basic technology, it's quite revealing as to the true, inherent benefits of mLearning. I can tell I was really into it, based on the brevity of this post. What an intuitive, creative presentation on what runs the risk of being a very dry, stodgy topic. Amazingly well done.
A Virtual World Training Application For Medical Personnel Education and Training (Parker/Parker/Stone)
"There is no going back..." Any environment, regardless of age, will have technology move forward...never backward. With that in mind, our training should do the same. Good opening statement to set the mood...
Demonstration will be shown on the Droid, but, according to the speaker, the iPhone and iPod can support their software, as well. Next speaker indicates that Virtual Worlds will be 'the way of the future'...hmm...maybe to an extent, but never completely (in my opinion, of course). Covers the definition of virtual world, and presents their Virtual World training model:
Plan --> Prepare --> Execute --> Review
How is this any different from any other training approach? I don't know that I'm following what makes this unique to Virtual Worlds. Introduction to Virtual Worlds continues...and continues...and continues. Not sure if this was supposed to center around a medical training app or serve as an intro to virtual worlds...
Third speaker transitions into their application...now I'm into it. Covers the four steps of their VW development cycle. Top 10 Virtual World Medical Communities are reviewed...part of the handout to review later. Community guidelines are reviewed, as well, although these are somewhat common sensical, I guess if you were using a VW, this would be significant to review with your users. Heart murmur simulation is part of their VW. Click here to check out the simulation itself.
In summary, speaker mentions that "Medical staff will need to learn to negotitate and use a Virtual Environment with a mobile app". Here's the thing I don't get...and, again, this may be my hang up and nothing more. If the simulation is housed within this virtual world, what's stopping us, as trainers, from cheapening the bill significantly and not even worrying about the VW? Am I the only one here who finds the VW unnecessary and de-focusing, if you will? Like parsley on the plate, are Virtual Worlds there to just make the actual instructional content look good...nothing more?
Good presentation, well put together...don't get me wrong. But maybe I'm too much the purist, as this one missed me.
Demonstration will be shown on the Droid, but, according to the speaker, the iPhone and iPod can support their software, as well. Next speaker indicates that Virtual Worlds will be 'the way of the future'...hmm...maybe to an extent, but never completely (in my opinion, of course). Covers the definition of virtual world, and presents their Virtual World training model:
Plan --> Prepare --> Execute --> Review
How is this any different from any other training approach? I don't know that I'm following what makes this unique to Virtual Worlds. Introduction to Virtual Worlds continues...and continues...and continues. Not sure if this was supposed to center around a medical training app or serve as an intro to virtual worlds...
Third speaker transitions into their application...now I'm into it. Covers the four steps of their VW development cycle. Top 10 Virtual World Medical Communities are reviewed...part of the handout to review later. Community guidelines are reviewed, as well, although these are somewhat common sensical, I guess if you were using a VW, this would be significant to review with your users. Heart murmur simulation is part of their VW. Click here to check out the simulation itself.
In summary, speaker mentions that "Medical staff will need to learn to negotitate and use a Virtual Environment with a mobile app". Here's the thing I don't get...and, again, this may be my hang up and nothing more. If the simulation is housed within this virtual world, what's stopping us, as trainers, from cheapening the bill significantly and not even worrying about the VW? Am I the only one here who finds the VW unnecessary and de-focusing, if you will? Like parsley on the plate, are Virtual Worlds there to just make the actual instructional content look good...nothing more?
Good presentation, well put together...don't get me wrong. But maybe I'm too much the purist, as this one missed me.
Knowledge Management Meets Collaboration and Social Media (Sveta Liebman/Alex Heiphetz)
Admits right off the bat that this might not be the ideal solution for everybody everytime...good caveat. Begins by defining Knowledge Management and Social Media...I'll spare you that here.
Referenced Brian Shaler's graph pertaining to the Number of Twitter Friends vs Productivity. There's a happy medium...too many = well, you know... "We need to make sure people are using social media, but that we're using them for a good reason." - I like this quote...centers around the "WHY" of training, etc., not just the other questions we ask all too often. If we were a bit more WHY centric, we'd be a heck of a lot better off as a profession.
"When a document was on a server, I knew where it was. When it's in the Cloud, I don't know where it is." Like I mentioned yesterday, this whole 'Cloud' storage trips me out a little bit, and it's for just this reason the presenter mentioned. We locate it digitally and physically when it resided on a server, making it more secure...whether we could see the server or it was in our organziation. You can tell me all you want that Cloud docs are secure, but without 'seeing it' I'm not 'believing it'. Maybe that's me being old school, but so be it...
(Gentleman in the audience mentions the iPad, at which point I showed the iPed to my neighbor in the audience. So, I might have missed one or two things....)
Presenter proceeds to bring up recipes from his Droid on the big screen. Prior to, he mentioned that it's much more productive to have your knowledge on your hip instead of on your desk. Agreed...extremely useful...but I still shy away from the Cloud. Presentation, overall, centers around Google docs/apps...started out centering around social media and virtual worlds. Gentleman in the audience brings him back to the virtual world, which shifts back to collaborative media. I'm getting dizzy...
I got the collaboration piece, and I got the social media piece (albeit a very small one), but I didn't follow how these fit together or how we got onto virtual worlds (aside from the knowledge collaboration side). Head is currently being scratched vigorously...
Referenced Brian Shaler's graph pertaining to the Number of Twitter Friends vs Productivity. There's a happy medium...too many = well, you know... "We need to make sure people are using social media, but that we're using them for a good reason." - I like this quote...centers around the "WHY" of training, etc., not just the other questions we ask all too often. If we were a bit more WHY centric, we'd be a heck of a lot better off as a profession.
"When a document was on a server, I knew where it was. When it's in the Cloud, I don't know where it is." Like I mentioned yesterday, this whole 'Cloud' storage trips me out a little bit, and it's for just this reason the presenter mentioned. We locate it digitally and physically when it resided on a server, making it more secure...whether we could see the server or it was in our organziation. You can tell me all you want that Cloud docs are secure, but without 'seeing it' I'm not 'believing it'. Maybe that's me being old school, but so be it...
(Gentleman in the audience mentions the iPad, at which point I showed the iPed to my neighbor in the audience. So, I might have missed one or two things....)
Presenter proceeds to bring up recipes from his Droid on the big screen. Prior to, he mentioned that it's much more productive to have your knowledge on your hip instead of on your desk. Agreed...extremely useful...but I still shy away from the Cloud. Presentation, overall, centers around Google docs/apps...started out centering around social media and virtual worlds. Gentleman in the audience brings him back to the virtual world, which shifts back to collaborative media. I'm getting dizzy...
I got the collaboration piece, and I got the social media piece (albeit a very small one), but I didn't follow how these fit together or how we got onto virtual worlds (aside from the knowledge collaboration side). Head is currently being scratched vigorously...
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Blended Learning - The Quiet Revolution (Marie-Pierre Huguet, Renssalaer Polytechnic Institute)
Marie is a course developer that works with professors. She is an instructional designer, but a teacher at heart. Was doing this, as she puts it, before it had a name... (it = blended learning).
A World of Blends
Blended vs Hybrid - Which is which? The convergence of traditional face to face with virtual learning. Marie, however, says she has her own definition:
There are 5 levels:
Level 0 - Face to face
Level 1 - No course content, just administrative information
Level 2 - Some course content, available materials as an additional point of reference.
Level 3 - Majority of course content is available. Students cannot be productive unless they access said materials. Use of asynchronous tools.
Level 4 - Blended/hybrid course. retains traditional classroom meeting but makes steady use of the web course site. Use of synchronous and asynchronous tools. (IDEAL)
Level 5 - Distance education or distributed courses. Completely online.
Web and face-to-face should be half and half. If you have a class on Mondays and Thursdays, you don't have to be in class on Monday. Items are made available and items must be completed in that timeframe and will be taken down thereafter. It functions as a classroom class would, while giving freedom/flexibility. Then the actual face-to-face class on Thursday re-roots them.
Then there's the bookends approach: The very first class is in person, and the very last (final) class is in person. Between that, all online. Finally, the Gazebo blend is somewhere between half and half and Bookends. In the end, the preference and the method you go with depends on your students, your management, and your outcomes.
Marie proceeded to go through a number of real world examples of these different models. Great presentation, very relevant, and very well put together.
A World of Blends
Blended vs Hybrid - Which is which? The convergence of traditional face to face with virtual learning. Marie, however, says she has her own definition:
There are 5 levels:
Level 0 - Face to face
Level 1 - No course content, just administrative information
Level 2 - Some course content, available materials as an additional point of reference.
Level 3 - Majority of course content is available. Students cannot be productive unless they access said materials. Use of asynchronous tools.
Level 4 - Blended/hybrid course. retains traditional classroom meeting but makes steady use of the web course site. Use of synchronous and asynchronous tools. (IDEAL)
Level 5 - Distance education or distributed courses. Completely online.
Web and face-to-face should be half and half. If you have a class on Mondays and Thursdays, you don't have to be in class on Monday. Items are made available and items must be completed in that timeframe and will be taken down thereafter. It functions as a classroom class would, while giving freedom/flexibility. Then the actual face-to-face class on Thursday re-roots them.
Then there's the bookends approach: The very first class is in person, and the very last (final) class is in person. Between that, all online. Finally, the Gazebo blend is somewhere between half and half and Bookends. In the end, the preference and the method you go with depends on your students, your management, and your outcomes.
Marie proceeded to go through a number of real world examples of these different models. Great presentation, very relevant, and very well put together.
A Serious Approach to Serious Game Development (R Punako/J Pachucki, Concurrent Technologies Corporation)
It's important not to jump into a project just in the interest of time...when developing a serious game, the proper processes must be adhered to and addressed.
Put the proper processes into place...you can't just focus on core functionality and 'bolting on' additional. That additional needs to be part of the whole, not just as an add-on. This is a solid concept...don't think it's always fiscally/time-wise feasible, but a good principle for sure. By keeping the proper resources and processe in place, you will stand to have greater success in your serious game venture.
Taxonomy of Serious Games
Serious games is what this group does...a la the MMORPG genre, but tuned way up on the serious dial. The intro vid that they showed was a module designed to address prison rape. Very serious, heavy stuff and it carried its weight appropriately. Without much time to develop these, it's important to have multifaceted developers - vid engineers who are sound engineers, graphics people who do video, etc.
Concurrent's games are:
-web based
- developed with custom development tools
- now has extensions to commercial game engines (see: PS3, XBOX)
- costs between 400k to 1 mil
- takes .5 to 1 year to develop
- handled by a small 6-10 person team
- serves government and military clients
Concurrent's System Development Life Cycle
Analysis - Project Planning/Initial Client Meetings, Instructional Intent (Assess Needs, Determine Solution), Client Requirements, Tech Specs
Design - Concept Paper Development, Simulation Course Online, Screenplay Development, Initial Product Asset Development, Technical System Design
Development - Text Simulation Development, Asset Development, Product Development (resulting in an Alpha product for client review)
Implementation - Verification testing (does the product meet the requirements they were provided with), Validation testing (onsite testing, certification/accreditation criteria, etc.)
Evaluation - Evaluation tasks directly planned in support of individual efforts, if applicable, would apply to each part of the process.
Overall, more a primer on design/development cycle as opposed to a presentation about games, game theory, or serious games. Would have liked to have learned more about the practicality/usability of serious games. Well presented/prepared, however.
Put the proper processes into place...you can't just focus on core functionality and 'bolting on' additional. That additional needs to be part of the whole, not just as an add-on. This is a solid concept...don't think it's always fiscally/time-wise feasible, but a good principle for sure. By keeping the proper resources and processe in place, you will stand to have greater success in your serious game venture.
Taxonomy of Serious Games
Serious games is what this group does...a la the MMORPG genre, but tuned way up on the serious dial. The intro vid that they showed was a module designed to address prison rape. Very serious, heavy stuff and it carried its weight appropriately. Without much time to develop these, it's important to have multifaceted developers - vid engineers who are sound engineers, graphics people who do video, etc.
Concurrent's games are:
-web based
- developed with custom development tools
- now has extensions to commercial game engines (see: PS3, XBOX)
- costs between 400k to 1 mil
- takes .5 to 1 year to develop
- handled by a small 6-10 person team
- serves government and military clients
Concurrent's System Development Life Cycle
Analysis - Project Planning/Initial Client Meetings, Instructional Intent (Assess Needs, Determine Solution), Client Requirements, Tech Specs
Design - Concept Paper Development, Simulation Course Online, Screenplay Development, Initial Product Asset Development, Technical System Design
Development - Text Simulation Development, Asset Development, Product Development (resulting in an Alpha product for client review)
Implementation - Verification testing (does the product meet the requirements they were provided with), Validation testing (onsite testing, certification/accreditation criteria, etc.)
Evaluation - Evaluation tasks directly planned in support of individual efforts, if applicable, would apply to each part of the process.
Overall, more a primer on design/development cycle as opposed to a presentation about games, game theory, or serious games. Would have liked to have learned more about the practicality/usability of serious games. Well presented/prepared, however.
How Do You Keep Track of All This Stuff? (Mark Frydenberg, Bentley University)
Opened with a review of the White House's website from 10 years ago, then today. The contrast is frightening...brings us nicely, though, into thinking about why we're resistant to change today and the potential nature of these changes. Great way to open...definitely roped me in.
Discussed the advent and evolution of Web 2.0. Refer to the conference CD for the "Web As A Platform" diagram...great piece. Basically diagrams what falls under Internet Applications, the World Wide Web, then Web 2.0.
Contrasted Office live Workspace versus Google Docs. Tout it as you may, I still think with the majority of the populous using MS Office, Google Docs has a long way to go. Google Docs is the Mac of 6 or 7 years ago. More people might buy into it, but it will still be the unwanted option in comparison to Microsoft (just stating the facts...I'm not pumping one more than the other).
Social Bookmark managers are discussed...man, do I not get the need for this. I mean, I get that you're farming out the top terms being searched for...but, still - If I want to search for something, I search for it. Maybe I'm missing something?
Cloud storage...online storage...insecure, at that. Useful, I'd say, for non-sensitive documents, etc., but any use above and beyond that is pointless. Corporate-wise, what's the difference between Cloud computing and a networked drive (assuming you can connect to your intranet remotely). Again, maybe something I don't get...open to explanation. Someone just brought up that for free online storage, "THEY" own your content. Strike two...
Finally, Web 3.0...Google Squared (www.google.com/squared) creates a different way to do search, based on trying to understand what you're really looking for. Instead of giving you a list of links, it gives you information straight away. Rather than a site, you're given a fact. This is good...cuts out some of the searching...but then, how are sites impacted that are supported on a click by click basis? I think this is a really cool thing, but there may be impact felt where they might not have thought there would be.
Mark was great, content was interesting...a lot to try and tackle in 45 minutes. Could have stayed here for another hour or two.
Discussed the advent and evolution of Web 2.0. Refer to the conference CD for the "Web As A Platform" diagram...great piece. Basically diagrams what falls under Internet Applications, the World Wide Web, then Web 2.0.
Contrasted Office live Workspace versus Google Docs. Tout it as you may, I still think with the majority of the populous using MS Office, Google Docs has a long way to go. Google Docs is the Mac of 6 or 7 years ago. More people might buy into it, but it will still be the unwanted option in comparison to Microsoft (just stating the facts...I'm not pumping one more than the other).
Social Bookmark managers are discussed...man, do I not get the need for this. I mean, I get that you're farming out the top terms being searched for...but, still - If I want to search for something, I search for it. Maybe I'm missing something?
Cloud storage...online storage...insecure, at that. Useful, I'd say, for non-sensitive documents, etc., but any use above and beyond that is pointless. Corporate-wise, what's the difference between Cloud computing and a networked drive (assuming you can connect to your intranet remotely). Again, maybe something I don't get...open to explanation. Someone just brought up that for free online storage, "THEY" own your content. Strike two...
Finally, Web 3.0...Google Squared (www.google.com/squared) creates a different way to do search, based on trying to understand what you're really looking for. Instead of giving you a list of links, it gives you information straight away. Rather than a site, you're given a fact. This is good...cuts out some of the searching...but then, how are sites impacted that are supported on a click by click basis? I think this is a really cool thing, but there may be impact felt where they might not have thought there would be.
Mark was great, content was interesting...a lot to try and tackle in 45 minutes. Could have stayed here for another hour or two.
Training and Human Performance Support for Compliance (Jerry Cronin, L3 Training Systems Group)
Introduction
n/a
Source of Compliance Requirements
"Those requirements for which an individual has a binding obligation"
"Can come from external or interal sources"
"Requirements can be direct (specified) or indirect (second order or fuzzy)"
"If it is a fuzzy, it is not a trainable requirement. There needs to be some measurable way to determine if non-complinace has occurred"
Resolve the fuzziness, or it doesn't get trained - I like this alot. Clarify your request, oh client...not just a request for the user to be 'good' at a certain thing. What is good? What actions constitute good? "Do Good, Avoid Evil is not a training strategy", specifically mentioned in regards to HIPAA regulations...well said. One person's invasion is another person's welcome intrusion...we need concrete/solid examples to avoid ambiguity in compliance. Organizational compliance is just as significant as direct Government compliance.
Corporate Policies specify how employees will adhere to direct regulations, how the company interprets and will adhere to indirect requirements, and internal requirements. Notice that Corporate Policies envelop Federal/Governmental policies.
Identifying Objects
"Compliance is about completeness." (Nice...)
Start with source regulations or company policies.
Then, parse out the requirements (in three areas): (1) Cognitive "I know this behavior and can do it" (2) Affective "I choose to do the behavior" (3) Psychomotor "Physical 'can-do'"
"Organizations don't care about training folks. They don't care if their people get what they need from 40 hours in a classroom or 25 hours in front of a computer. They care if their people can do what they need to do without fail." While I agree with this, and from a compliance standpoint this makes absolute sense, I don't know how financially reasonable this statement is. I think they care, but assuming it can be done cheaper and faster with the same result, I know what way my management is leaning.
Importance of Integrated Solution Approach
Three Issues:
1.)Organization fos not have clearly defined policy on particular compliance requirement.
2.)Organization has more roles than it thought...
3.)No definable criteria for compliance
Perspectives on the Future
There's still fuzziness in regulations (ex: when new laws come out - OSHA, etc.). Is it made that way, however, so that specificity is not wanted so that special cases (both good and bad) can exist. This fuzziness, however, does not help those of us to train. We need specificity, we need granularity, we need clarity.
Tools for enforcement are getting better, and they're allowing us to enforce by proxy more and more. Used to be we'd see ISO violations in the EHR...now, we have more 'backend flags' that fire off.
An increase in the amount of compliance requirements will call for an integrated approach across sets of regulations as time pressure on employees/learners increases. There will be a marked increase in non-governmental compliance requirements. (see: being green...cool/hip thing now, eventually...)
Bottom line - It's not about training, it's about empowering employees to perform appropriately. We get there by training, but it's about compliance. Great, thought-provoking session.
n/a
Source of Compliance Requirements
"Those requirements for which an individual has a binding obligation"
"Can come from external or interal sources"
"Requirements can be direct (specified) or indirect (second order or fuzzy)"
"If it is a fuzzy, it is not a trainable requirement. There needs to be some measurable way to determine if non-complinace has occurred"
Resolve the fuzziness, or it doesn't get trained - I like this alot. Clarify your request, oh client...not just a request for the user to be 'good' at a certain thing. What is good? What actions constitute good? "Do Good, Avoid Evil is not a training strategy", specifically mentioned in regards to HIPAA regulations...well said. One person's invasion is another person's welcome intrusion...we need concrete/solid examples to avoid ambiguity in compliance. Organizational compliance is just as significant as direct Government compliance.
Corporate Policies specify how employees will adhere to direct regulations, how the company interprets and will adhere to indirect requirements, and internal requirements. Notice that Corporate Policies envelop Federal/Governmental policies.
Identifying Objects
"Compliance is about completeness." (Nice...)
Start with source regulations or company policies.
Then, parse out the requirements (in three areas): (1) Cognitive "I know this behavior and can do it" (2) Affective "I choose to do the behavior" (3) Psychomotor "Physical 'can-do'"
"Organizations don't care about training folks. They don't care if their people get what they need from 40 hours in a classroom or 25 hours in front of a computer. They care if their people can do what they need to do without fail." While I agree with this, and from a compliance standpoint this makes absolute sense, I don't know how financially reasonable this statement is. I think they care, but assuming it can be done cheaper and faster with the same result, I know what way my management is leaning.
Importance of Integrated Solution Approach
Three Issues:
1.)Organization fos not have clearly defined policy on particular compliance requirement.
2.)Organization has more roles than it thought...
3.)No definable criteria for compliance
Perspectives on the Future
There's still fuzziness in regulations (ex: when new laws come out - OSHA, etc.). Is it made that way, however, so that specificity is not wanted so that special cases (both good and bad) can exist. This fuzziness, however, does not help those of us to train. We need specificity, we need granularity, we need clarity.
Tools for enforcement are getting better, and they're allowing us to enforce by proxy more and more. Used to be we'd see ISO violations in the EHR...now, we have more 'backend flags' that fire off.
An increase in the amount of compliance requirements will call for an integrated approach across sets of regulations as time pressure on employees/learners increases. There will be a marked increase in non-governmental compliance requirements. (see: being green...cool/hip thing now, eventually...)
Bottom line - It's not about training, it's about empowering employees to perform appropriately. We get there by training, but it's about compliance. Great, thought-provoking session.
High End Adobe Captivate Tips & Tricks (Joseph Ganci)
Presenter doesn't work for Adobe, uses it rather than sells it...good to know.
Starts by touting the Mac version of Captivate. Not a good way to win my favor, but I'll let it slide. Brings up the topic of reassigning keys in Preferences (see: Mayo Clinic needed to use prntScrn as part of the module). Good idea, but I'm not necessarily following why the manual screen capture would obstruct the actual end-user module. Was he talking about the fact that the users had to use the PrntScrn button in the module, but it did something different on their system? Unclear...
Modifying the language files (in 4 & 5) is an effective way to have the auto captions that appear say a little more like what you'd want it to. For example, if you want "Select" i/o "Click", it can be set up this way. Useful, but I still think the auto captions are pretty much...well...worthless (again, at least for what I do).
Ganci proceeded to cover motion capture in Captivate, as far as capturing action in between 'clicks' (which, for those of you who are unaware, is the driving force behind Cap's capturing). Very entry level in nature, or maybe I've been capturing motion in an EHR for far too long and am conditioned to it. Not sure...
Goes from the basics of motion capture, to the actual 'event coding' in the background of the software. I think there's a middle ground here that should have been covered, but that could just be me. Informative, but definitely leaves some rungs of the ladder out.
Full motion capture and its downfalls...which are plenty...are presented. Ganci entered into Preferences and showed how to switch it up just a bit to make it a little more effective.
All in all, didn't really get a lot from this. Might have been more geared for entry level...would have been nice to know.
Starts by touting the Mac version of Captivate. Not a good way to win my favor, but I'll let it slide. Brings up the topic of reassigning keys in Preferences (see: Mayo Clinic needed to use prntScrn as part of the module). Good idea, but I'm not necessarily following why the manual screen capture would obstruct the actual end-user module. Was he talking about the fact that the users had to use the PrntScrn button in the module, but it did something different on their system? Unclear...
Modifying the language files (in 4 & 5) is an effective way to have the auto captions that appear say a little more like what you'd want it to. For example, if you want "Select" i/o "Click", it can be set up this way. Useful, but I still think the auto captions are pretty much...well...worthless (again, at least for what I do).
Ganci proceeded to cover motion capture in Captivate, as far as capturing action in between 'clicks' (which, for those of you who are unaware, is the driving force behind Cap's capturing). Very entry level in nature, or maybe I've been capturing motion in an EHR for far too long and am conditioned to it. Not sure...
Goes from the basics of motion capture, to the actual 'event coding' in the background of the software. I think there's a middle ground here that should have been covered, but that could just be me. Informative, but definitely leaves some rungs of the ladder out.
Full motion capture and its downfalls...which are plenty...are presented. Ganci entered into Preferences and showed how to switch it up just a bit to make it a little more effective.
All in all, didn't really get a lot from this. Might have been more geared for entry level...would have been nice to know.
Training for Compliance (Michael Jerrigan, Microsoft)
Compliance Training Manager for Microsoft, he opened up the session by asking if there were any attorneys in the room. Stated that working with attorneys in the compliance world has its own set of unique restrictions. This should be good...
What does compliance mean? We've got software, financial, trustowrthy computing requirements...it's very all over the place. If Michael ran a report on Compliance in personnel's title, the hits would total well over 20,000. If you ask an attorney, they would respond with, "Well, it depends...it depends on kind, requirements, your world, etc." Michael's world is legla compliance.
"Compliance should be slightly if not at all different from training other areas, but the consequences of getting it wrong are much more severe." (well said)
Why bother with compliance training? To keep your corporation out of the headlines... (again, well said)
Brought up the concept of archived training, and the ability to recall what was trained 5 years ago...10 years ago. This is definitely significant in the case of what I do, as well as (apparently) many others in this room. Compliance does not just include the here and now, but then 'then and there'. Trackability, locatability, archivability...all significant when it comes to creating a compliant body of training.
Not a lot of specific data here, per se...not a lot that I can take away and employ. But it definitely made me reflect on compliance and its significance in the EHR Training Industry. Great presentation.
What does compliance mean? We've got software, financial, trustowrthy computing requirements...it's very all over the place. If Michael ran a report on Compliance in personnel's title, the hits would total well over 20,000. If you ask an attorney, they would respond with, "Well, it depends...it depends on kind, requirements, your world, etc." Michael's world is legla compliance.
"Compliance should be slightly if not at all different from training other areas, but the consequences of getting it wrong are much more severe." (well said)
Why bother with compliance training? To keep your corporation out of the headlines... (again, well said)
Brought up the concept of archived training, and the ability to recall what was trained 5 years ago...10 years ago. This is definitely significant in the case of what I do, as well as (apparently) many others in this room. Compliance does not just include the here and now, but then 'then and there'. Trackability, locatability, archivability...all significant when it comes to creating a compliant body of training.
Not a lot of specific data here, per se...not a lot that I can take away and employ. But it definitely made me reflect on compliance and its significance in the EHR Training Industry. Great presentation.
He's baaaaack
I've been a horrendous blogger...seem I only use it when I'm attending a conference. With that said...
...I'm attending a conference.
Society for Applied Learning Technology's 2010 conference, to be exact. Check them out here.
I'm attending as an alternate presenter. God forbid they should need me, but if they do, here's what they'll get.
First session's beginning, so here we go...stay tuned.
...I'm attending a conference.
Society for Applied Learning Technology's 2010 conference, to be exact. Check them out here.
I'm attending as an alternate presenter. God forbid they should need me, but if they do, here's what they'll get.
First session's beginning, so here we go...stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
