The new age of exploration

The rise of instruction

From the earliest days of computer-assisted learning, way back in the mid 1970s, the dominant teaching strategy has been instruction. So dominant in fact, that those tasked with devising and assembling technology-based learning solutions have been called instructional designers ever since. As a result, it is easy to believe that there is only one valid approach to teaching on a computer and instruction is it.

First of all, let�s just clarify what we mean by this term. Instruction is a structured teaching process that begins with behavioural learning objectives (that�s the sort that describes what you, as a learner, will be able to do at the end of the instructional process, in specific, measurable and observable terms) and ends with some form of assessment against these objectives. Along the route, the learner will be presented with facts, concepts, rules and procedures and asked to put these into practice in some way. They will receive ample demonstrations and examples. They will be provided with specific and timely feedback. Sounds like a watertight approach that is likely to lead to consistent and reliable outcomes. And sometimes this is what it delivers.

The shortcomings of exposition

It�s important to contrast instruction with what, previously, had been the dominant approach, at least in formal learning settings, and that was exposition. With this strategy, a subject expert presents information to the � largely passive � learner. There are many forms that exposition could take, from lectures and presentations to textbooks and videos, but the idea is essentially the same. With the expositional strategy, the subject expert determines what you, as a learner, receive. If you�re a confident learner, already grounded in the subject in question, you may well be quite happy with this approach. You concentrate hard and hope that some of what you read or hear will stick. When it comes to the inevitable exam, you will cram as much information as you can into some sort of temporary memory space to help you overcome this hurdle. Chances are that, a few days after the exam, you�ll have forgotten almost all of it.

Exposition is not a predictably successful strategy, even though it still dominates in many educational and training environments (including many of the latest MOOCs). It works very well for people who already have expertise in the subject, because they know what they don�t know, and can easily focus in on information that is relevant to them. On the other hand, novices are likely to be completely overwhelmed. You can understand why the emphasis shifted from exposition to instruction as it became necessary to provide millions of new entrants to the workforce with essential knowledge and practical skills. It was not good enough for soldiers, factory workers, insurance clerks and electricians to have been exposed to lots of information and to have passed exams; they needed to be competent.

When instruction doesn�t work

Competence takes many forms. When the tasks that people are asked to perform are routine and predictable, then it is easy to see how instruction can work � the rules and procedures, and the skills needed to put these into practice, are undisputed and simply need to be understood and rehearsed. However, more and more work, particularly in the developed world, is far from routine and predictable � if it was it would have been computerised or outsourced to countries where labour was less expensive. Employees working in a knowledge economy are required to make judgements in highly unpredictable circumstances. They have to solve problems, weigh up options and make decisions. And, because modern employers have to provide exceptional service in order to compete, while conforming to ever more stringent regulatory requirements, these employees also need to be committed to some important principles of working.

Instruction s capable of providing superficial results when applied to tasks that require judgement and commitment to big ideas, but it�s unlikely to get you far enough. You can be told endless times that it pays to have clear objectives for your meeting, to negotiate win-win solutions or to keep customer data secure, and you can pass tests that prove you understand those ideas, but that doesn�t mean you�ll do anything about it. To influence your behaviour, you need to test out these ideas for yourself, to discover their importance through experience. That�s why we have begun to see a shift away from instructional techniques and the adoption of the very different strategy of guided discovery.

In my early years in workplace learning, I encountered many successful applications of guided discovery, primarily in the context of leadership and management training, whether in the classroom, through adventures in the outdoors or with action learning sets. I saw just how much could be achieved when learners were presented with challenges from which they could discover key principles for themselves, typically with the aid of a facilitator. Now we�re seeing similar approaches adopted on computers, through scenarios, games and simulations. Many of the most successful e-learning programmes of the past five years have been based on realistic scenarios, rather than abstract theory. In fact you can see how guided discovery is transforming the perception that many learners have of e-learning. While they find instructional materials dull and patronising, they commit the same effort to scenario-based challenges that they do to video games.

Learners are doing it for themselves

Exposition, instruction and guided discovery all have their place. While one or other may have been predominant over the years, it would be misleading to regard the shift from one strategy to another as a natural evolution in thinking. In fact all three strategies have been around as long as we have had human beings. Thousands of years ago it would have seemed perfectly normal to present information to a group of eager students (exposition), help someone to acquire a skill (instruction) or suggest a challenge that would provide a learner with fresh insights (guided discovery). Each strategy had its place then as now, often in combination within what we now call a blended solution.

However, all three of these strategies depend on a �teacher� � a subject expert, an instructor or a facilitator � to devise and direct the programme of learning. The teacher �pushes� learning content or learning activities in the direction of the learner. However, learners are not as passive as they used to be. They depend less and less on teachers to determine what they need to know and how they should organise their learning. They have become accustomed, through technology, to seeking out the information and assistance they need on the Internet. By and large they are proving successful in finding the help they need at the time that they need it. Learners of all ages are feeling empowered as never before. Surely this has to be regarded as a good thing, even if it does challenge the important role that teachers have traditionally played in the learning process.

The new age of exploration

Within what seems no more than handful of years, we seem to have entered a new age of exploration. There is that same magical feeling of a world waiting to be discovered and boundless opportunities available to whoever is brave enough to make the voyage. Of course, there are very few geographical regions still to be explored, but there is a whole world of ideas a click or a touch away.

Exploration is emerging as the new strategy of choice for learners. It represents a major shift of emphasis, from push to pull, from courses to resources. It places the learner at the centre of the process of learning, amply supported by communities of peers and huge libraries of freely-available content.

So what role can the teacher play in this new world? Well, first of all, there is an important requirement for curation, perhaps not for experts but certainly for novices. When you�re a complete beginner and you don�t know what you don�t know, it helps to have some pointers � who to speak to first, what site to go to, what videos to watch, what blogs to read. And exploration is not a panacea; there will still be plenty of need for exposition, instruction and guided discovery, not least because organisations depend on the competences of their employees, and cannot rely on these to emerge haphazardly. Employees too are keen to obtain formal accreditation of their skills and knowledge, particularly in those early years when they cannot compete for jobs on the basis of their work experience.

It is no longer appropriate to call those responsible for devising learning experiences instructional designers. The designer of the future has to know when to call upon all four strategies, taking consideration of the desired learning outcomes, the characteristics of the target population and the distance that this population has travelled on its learning journey. This is a new breed of designer, empowered to break free from the confines of instructional systems design. Designers themselves are on a voyage of discovery.

First published in Inside Learning Technologies and Skills, October 2014

TV very much alive for learning professionals

On Wednesday, on his Plan B blog, my old mate Donald Clark told us that TV is dying, and I believe him. But in some ways it is just changing form.

Last night I tuned in to a live stream of the second episode of LearningNow TV, a monthly one-hour news magazine for learning professionals. I turned down the sound on the main TV and watched it on my iPad, expecting it to hold me for 10 minutes or so, but I was glued to it through to the end.

Nigel Paine presents a mix of webcam interviews and professionally-produced pieces. Hats off to the editors because this odd mix hangs together really well. It helps that Nigel is such an enthusiastic and compelling presenter - I know he worked at the BBC, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can present!

More than anything I'm pleased to see something really different for learning professionals who want to keep in touch with what's going on. It's not a conference, not a webinar, not a magazine - it's something new and refreshing.

The shows are free, whether you watch them live or view the recordings later. The venture will work commercially as sponsorship and advertising start to increase. I hope this happens because this is an idea that comes just at the right time and deserves success.

Seven ways that video can transform learning at work

Video is very much the medium of the moment. Not only do we spend many hours each day watching it on our TVs, it has become an integral part of the online experience. An ever-increasing proportion of the population does not only consume video, it creates and shares it with a worldwide Internet audience.

Whereas once video cameras cost many hundreds, if not tens of thousands of pounds, they are now integrated for no additional cost in computers, stills cameras and mobile phones. And where once video editing could only be carried out by skilled engineers in elaborate editing suites, it can now be accomplished, often with equivalent production values, with free or low cost software on PCs and even mobile devices.

In a learning context, video provides a compelling means for conveying content, particularly real-life action and interactions with people. Amazingly, it can also be quicker and easier to produce than slide shows or textual content. Sometimes you just have to point the camera, press record, shoot what you see and then upload to a website. Obviously it won�t always be that easy, and to make the best of the potential that video provides will take skill and experience, but there�s no harm in starting with the assumption that you can do it yourself, until proven otherwise.

Video is so versatile. It plays without difficulty on all sorts of devices, including smart phones and tablets, and adds a great deal to the classroom experience, virtual or physical. So what forms can it take? Here are seven suggestions:

1. Interviews
People love looking at and listening to other people, particularly if they are providing useful information concisely and in a relaxed, informal manner. At its simplest you can just point a camera at an interviewee and do the simplest trimming and titling to finish the job. For a more polished look, with the interviewer in shot, you�ll need to shoot at different distances and angles and cut between them. For a more free-ranging discussion, bring in a small audience to ask their own additional questions.

2. Presentations
If you�re lucky enough to catch an interesting presentation live, then that�s great, but if not, then video is a great secondary option. The simplest method is to have the presenter record a narration to their slides and export that to video, but you can achieve a more engaging result by alternating between the presenter speaking directly to camera and the slides.

3. Drama
Acted sequences are perfect for depicting interactions between people, perhaps to demonstrate an interpersonal skill, to stimulate discussion in the classroom, or as the basis for an interactive scenario. Drama is one form of video where you would be well advised to bring in the professionals, to work both sides of the camera. This will be relatively costly, but there are plenty of situations in which this is money very well spent.

4. Physical demonstrations
A very simple use of video is to have an expert demonstrate a practical skill or the workings of a piece of equipment, particularly when this would not be easy to accomplish in a classroom (you might be talking about a crane or a tank!).

5. Documentaries
A great use of video is to take the viewer to places they could not be expected to visit in person, perhaps to see how work is carried out in different parts of their organisation. Documentaries could provide a record of important projects and initiatives, or tell a powerful story. Like drama, the production of documentary video is not trivial and best left to experts but, again, the expense is often worth it.

6. Screencasts
A screencast is a demonstration of some aspect of a piece of software, usually with a voiceover. These can be extremely simple to produce using software such as Adobe Captivate, Camtasia and any number of low-cost alternatives. Historically, in a corporate context, these have traditionally been regarded as elements in e-learning programmes but, as we have seen on YouTube, they work well as videos.

7. Explainers
An explainer is an animated video that aims to clarify a concept, principle or process. The best early examples came from Common Craft (check them out on YouTube), who used a technique called �papermation� to present explanations of complex technical subjects. Now you can produce similar results using software such as PowToon.

Of course there are more formats and lots of ways of integrating several of these styles in the same programme. But don�t be overwhelmed by the choices available � if you are new to this medium, make a start by picking one of the simpler formats and having a go. Yes, use professional help if you can afford it, but take every opportunity to build your own skills as well. Video production is becoming as core a competency as writing.

Ten ways to use computers in the corporate classroom

Technology is providing many useful alternatives to the corporate classroom, but it also has an increasingly important role to play when we do get together with a facilitator within the confines of good old bricks and mortar. Not only can it do the job of a whole raft of traditional devices � video and audio players, and slide projectors � it can do things that were simply not possible before the advent of computers. Here are ten suggestions for ways to spice up the corporate classroom:

Display slides: OK, I know, typical bullet point PowerPoint slides are not going to spice up anything, but remember that PowerPoint was originally developed to present visual aids (not verbal ones). So, how about a few more photos, diagrams, illustrations and charts?

Show video: Video is very much the learning medium of choice at the moment, particularly if you want to learn how to do something. So, make use of what�s on YouTube, make use of the excellent libraries of video clips from publishers such as Video Arts, or make your own. Just keep them short.

Play music: I haven�t heard much recently from the accelerated learning folk who advocate playing music in the classroom as part of an all-round, multi-sensory approach to learning, but nevertheless, I�m pretty sure that music can be useful, even if just during the breaks or when groups are doing exercises.

Show 3D models: If you�re a technical instructor working in engineering, anatomy, the trades or something similar, then you�ll know how useful 3D models can be to show how things work. Ideally you�ll have working models that you can manipulate rather than just renderings of 3D models on video.

Demonstrations: If you�re an IT trainer, or otherwise need to refer to websites and software applications as part of your sessions, then you�ll know how valuable it can be to project your demos onto a big screen.

Scenarios: OK, so now we�re getting on to the interactive stuff, which starts to make use of the fact that you�re all in one space together. Scenarios are usually aimed at individuals, but why not open them up to the group, making your decisions on the basis of the majority vote? If collective thinking proves to be less than successful, you can re-un the scenario trying some of the minority strategies.

Quizzes: There is a lot of quiz software out there, some of which will work with audience response systems (including those that use the learners� own smartphones and tablets as input devices). But if you don�t have all this stuff, simple PowerPoint slides will do. Quizzes can be fun; they can also reveal misunderstandings, which you can address then and there.

Real-time writing and sketching: Normally you�ll rush to the flip chart or a whiteboard if you want to record discussion points or sketch an impromptu diagram, but use tablet or laptop and you�ll have something you can then save and share electronically. If you have an interactive whiteboard then lucky you, but there are plenty of cheaper options.

Group exercises: Computers provide a great way for groups to work together on practical assignments, with a digital output that can be easily shared when back in the plenary session. They say that �making stuff� is the most enjoyable way to learn and I wouldn�t doubt it.

Empowering the individual learner: I know it can be off-putting when your group is glued to their screens rather than looking at you but we have to get used to it. Smartphones, tablets and laptops allow learners to take notes, conduct background research, converse with their peers and perhaps even study formal course materials. You don�t even have to be there � sometimes the classroom is the only quiet space available.

New employees will enter the workforce expecting all this stuff and they�ll be disappointed if they have to sit quietly and listen to you without access to the tools that they depend on every day and without the ability to interact freely. I�m with them.

None of this stuff is difficult to put in place but I do understand some teachers and trainers are nervous, principally because they know less about technology than their students do. Time to face up to this problem and invest in some in-service training.

Why e-learning should be in perpetual beta

When you run a workshop for the first time it can be a bit nerve-wracking. After all, you�ve never tested your ideas for content and activities against a real audience before. You can only guess at how long any session will actually take to complete. You don�t know for certain whether your design will work in meeting the underlying learning need.

So, you cross your fingers and toes and give your ideas their first airing. Inevitably, some things will have worked well and some less so. You probably got many things right but you had to make all sorts of on-the-fly adjustments to cope with over-runs and mismatches between what the demand was from your audience and what you had chosen to supply.

This is normal and not a cause for alarm. You set about designing version 2. This will work better but still not well enough. You keep on adjusting the design every time until eventually it flows well and achieves consistently good results. Not that you stop there because you will continue to have new ideas for improvements and the goalposts will keep on moving as the needs change. Yes, workshops are in perpetual beta.

Contrast that with typical self-study e-learning. The design and development of this content is seen like the build up to a product launch, not the unveiling of a new service. Project teams are established to get all the work done and a process put in place to �ensure� a right first time approach. Why �right first time�? Because the project team will be disbanded straight after launch and its members will disperse. It simply has to be perfect out of the box.

But it won�t be, for the reasons we established in my workshop example. Even if it is spot on the target at launch, it won�t be soon after as bit by bit the content becomes less relevant for the audience and the need.

I once asked the CEO of a major e-learning company how much of their work was maintenance of existing content, thinking that this would be a substantial revenue earner. I was surprised to find that hardly anyone maintains their content. They just wait four or five years for the content to become obsolete, then they start all over again.

A right first time approach works if you are building skyscrapers or making Hollywood movies. The safety considerations or the cost of re-work simply demand it. And if you are sending out physical product, like printed books, it is clearly uneconomic to keep printing and distributing new versions. But in an era in which software apps and web content are updated almost constantly and usually painlessly, there is simply no argument for treating e-learning content as if we were making $100m movies or printing books.

Agile development of learning content is a process of successive approximation � getting closer and closer to what is right for the user. It means that you launch with content that is technically correct and bug-free but simple and without all the bells and whistles. You then maintain a dialogue with your customers and make little enhancements as and when ideas and suggestions emerge. Perhaps a difficult concept requires further examples. Maybe more opportunities are needed for practising a skill. Could be that an animation would be helpful to illustrate a process. No problem, you can keep on making improvements just as long as the learning remains relevant.

It doesn�t help that most e-learning content is exported from an authoring tool as a zip file and then uploaded to an LMS. This is a clunky way to deliver content. It is how websites used to work 10 years ago, before the advent of content management systems. We really should be assembling and delivering e-learning content on-the-fly, just like modern websites. That way we could build in some intelligence and personalisation � again just like the best apps and websites.

Until the guys who make the tools get their act together, we can still operate a more agile design and development process. Ok, so we do have to do all that exporting and uploading from one tool to another, but that�s worth it if we want content that responds to user demands and continues to be relevant. Perpetual beta does not mean offering a product that is not yet fit for consumption. It means that we are always working to offer the best product we can.

Learning has composition too

I found this fantastic video on the subject of composition through the nofilmschool site, one of the blogs that I subscribe to to satisfy my current obsession with all things video. You'll find it useful for any visual work you do, whether that's graphics, video, presentation slides or e-learning design!

A lot of highly-skilled work has been put into the design of this tutorial. Don't be fooled by the informal tone - this video is highly professional and wasn't produced in a few hours. And I was glued to it - for about 5 minutes. After that it was more of an effort (I was determined to see it through) because what I really wanted to do was try the ideas out.

Which made me think that learning experiences require composition too; in other words, the right balance between contrasting elements. My learning experience, watching this video, included (1) theory, (2) examples and non-examples, and (3) demonstration. What it lacked was (4) practice and (5) reflection/discussion.

And that's why I'd break this video up into smaller chunks and blend them in with all sorts of other elements.

Crystal balling

I haven't been posting much recently, mainly because every moment I'm not working for other people I'm spending on my new book. However, Learnnovators did manage to get me to hold forth on a wide range of different learning technology issues in this post just published.

Thoughts on digital learning design

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development shot this movie at the Learning and Development Show in London in April. It previews a digital learning design workshop that I will be running in October and throughout 2015.

The learner speaks

Towards Maturity are well known for their benchmark studies which allow organisations to compare their experiences in applying learning technologies and to learn from what the best organisations are doing. I have found these studies useful in helping to understand the various challenges that organisations are facing and the choices they are making in terms of their use of technologies. However, the data comes from learning professionals and there was always the suspicion that their perspective on what was going on in their organisations could be quite different from that of their employees.

Now we know. Towards Maturity has just published a new study, The Learner Voice, which summarises the views on learning technologies of 2000 employees in the private sector. You really should take a look at the full report, but a few statistics caught my eye:

How do staff learn what they need for their jobs? Well, 88% agree that they like to learn at their own pace, which accords with the results of previous studies. My own take on this is that people are not saying �I want to learn entirely at my own pace� but that this is a highly desirable characteristic in a blend. I think we can also conclude safely that this implies people do not want to learn 100% in classrooms.

Actually people like to learn in lots of ways: 86% like working in collaboration with other team members; 83% through general conversations and meetings; 70% through search and Internet resources; 70% through the support of their managers; 64% in the classroom; 62% from coaches/buddies; 59% from company documents; 55% from job aids; and 51% from self-paced e-learning (so many more people like self-paced learning than those who would like to accomplish this through e-learning). Above all, this list encourages me towards blended solutions that cross the boundary from formal to informal.

What technology are staff using for learning? It seems that 78% own a smartphone or tablet and that 43% are already finding these devices essential or very useful for learning. Some 26% use their devices to access work resources and another 23% would be happy to if the right resources were available.

When are staff learning? Some 62% agree that their manager makes time for them to learn at work; 54% like to learn while they are on the move.

How confident are staff with social media? A massive 84% are willing to use technology to share knowledge to help others learning, which begs the question why we are not seeing more successful examples of this happening in a work context. Some 65% are motivated by using technologies that allow them to network and learn with others.

Who determines what learning happens? Some good stuff here: 83% know what they need; 82% are responsible for managing their own learning and development; 48% agree that they learn more informally than formally.

What are the problems with online learning? No surprise to find out that 45% say that uninspiring content is a top barrier; 37% have no suitable place to learn; 35% don�t have the right kit; 33% can�t find what they want; and 32% can�t find anything relevant.

There�s an interesting table further on in the report which contrasts the perceptions of learning professionals and learners. It does not surprise me to find that the professionals are out of tune with their audience, dramatically under-estimating their capability and willingness to engage with self-directed learning.

It will take some time to digest this information and see where it takes us. In the meantime, thanks Towards Maturity for taking the initiative in gathering this information and making it so widely available.

Designs on Learning: An interview with Catherine Jones

This video is the fifth and final edition in a series of interviews that I conducted last year with leading e-learning designers in the UK, in conjunction with e.learning age magazine. This one appears in the March 2014 issue.

See previous interviews with Mark Bennett, Stephanie Dedhar, Lisa Minogue-White and Vikesh Taylor.

What does it take to be a good e-learning designer?

With the Serious eLearning Manifesto drawing attention to a current lack of e-learning design skills, as evidenced by more than a little tedious and ineffective content out there, it got me thinking about what it takes to be a good designer. Or rather, it was actually Stephen Walsh at City & Guilds Kineo  who started this train of thought as he sought out my help in tracking down a great Lead Designer.

Stephen felt, as I do, that the best place to start is with someone who already has a strong grounding in one of the component disciplines of e-learning, perhaps a journalist, a web designer or someone similar. Here is what I would look for in someone who would have the potential to be really special and help us to do some 'serious e-learning':

• Someone who is a clear and confident communicator, especially in writing: this skill is particularly important and sadly rare.
• An ability to empathise with their audience: this is a critical 'teaching' quality and sometimes lacking in those who view e-learning as an engineering discipline.
• Someone who is enthusiastic about technology and certainly not afraid of it: this is not the same as being seriously technical.
• They are appreciative of good visual design (you could call this 'good taste'): it's surprising how many people just don't care what anything looks like.
• They are capable of concentrating for prolonged periods when necessary: extroverts who can only function in the company of others will not enjoy sitting down for hours at a time writing a proposal, a design document or a script.
• But not a loner: the e-learning designer is part of a team and must enjoy working with others; they should thrive on making sense of a whole range of contrasting perspectives and opinions.
• They are well organised: working with hundreds of files, multiple formats, languages and versions provides lots of opportunity for error and confusion: anyone who tries to wing it will soon get found out. 

These qualities are more likely to get you there than strong technical IT or graphical skills, although if you're a Leonardo and have these as well then you're flying.

So, is this list realistic or is it pie in the sky. Are there other qualities that matter?

A day is a long time for learners

I know this blog is primarily about learning technologies, but you'd be amazed (or would you?) how often I get called upon to run face-to-face workshops on this subject, whether public courses or on an in-company basis. I must admit I quite enjoy these events and I try my best to justify the fact that we're all together a s group, live and face-to-face.

You definitely would not be surprised to hear that these events are usually measured in whole days, each of which is usually something approximate to normal working hours, say 9 to 5. Now I'm not sure whether these hours are suitable for our everyday work, but that's a convention I'm not going to change. But I would like to challenge whether working hours should be used as the basis for calculating learning hours.

Here are my reasons why classroom courses should have shorter days:

• Regardless of whether you're delivering instructional sessions or genuine workshops, everyone is worn out by mid-afternoon. The only time I've seen learners with lots of energy all day is when they're engaged in an activity that involves 'making stuff'. 
• Too much synchronous dialogue and not enough asynchronous reflection time is unbalanced and unproductive - it's like being at an 8-hour party (OK, perhaps when I was 20, but not now).
• The days when a classroom event was genuinely off-job and learners were protected from interruptions is gone for good. Now they (and I of course) bring their work with them in their pocket. Every single learner will expect to spend at least one or two hours handling emails after the class has ended. Don't make them do that in the evening - finish early enough that they can still get a proper break.

While we're at it, the idea that everyone should be sitting around a table all day is equally unproductive. Why shouldn't people wander around as they please? Why not have couches they can stretch out on? Why not hold discussions in the gardens or while taking a walk? Time for a change I think.

Getting serious about e-learning

Today at 7pm, Michael Allen, Julie Dirksen, Clark Quinn and Will Thalheimer, backed by a raft of other well-respected thinkers and practitioners in the field of workplace learning technologies will be launching the Serious eLearning Manifesto. This campaign is the result of many years of discussions, lamentations and grumblings about the state of e-learning. It's time to do something about the problem before e-learning is discarded as a good idea that, in spite of 30 years of our best efforts, somehow never got to fulfil its potential.

As usual, because this terminology means such different things to different people, I must clarify what sort of e-learning we're talking about here: the problem is with interactive, self-study materials accessed on a computer. We're not talking webinars, virtual classrooms, online video, social learning and all those other good things.

So what is the problem with self-study e-learning? Well, if you go to the awards ceremonies and you read the case studies, you'd think the medium was flourishing. That's because there is some wonderful e-learning being produced which achieves fantastic results, not just in terms of efficiencies but meaningful, engaging learning experiences. From my base here in the UK, I have been especially pleased with what we have been able to produce on this small island, at least now and again.

The problem is that, although there are gems, there is just too much dross. You won't find this out by talking to learning managers or producers, but lower level learning professionals and learners themselves will tell you all too readily. They hate that stuff which makes you feel like you are drinking from a fire hose, with it's endless abstractions, irrelevant graphics and patronisingly simple interactions. And, be honest, you'd think that too, if you had to use it yourself (I bet you don't).

Unfortunately, throwing money at the problem is not enough. You get dross with bling, pigs wearing lipstick. Good e-learning requires great communication skills, empathy with your audience, a really good understanding of how people learn, an appreciation of the opportunities that technology can afford and, above all, an ability to stand up to clients and subject experts who want you to stick with the fire hose.

So, I'm with Michael, Julie, Clark and Will. I share their values:

• Real impact over unexamined effort
• Meaningful learning over knowledge delivery
• Spaced practice over one-time events
• Realistic decisions over knowledge tests
• Emotional engagement over passive content
• Authentic contexts over abstract principles
• Real-world consequences over didactic feedback
• Conceptual models over isolated information
• Learning effectiveness over authoring efficiency
• Individualized challenges over static content

I hope there is a positive reaction to the Serious eLearning Manifesto and that we find ways to cure the malaise. If not, it's only a matter of time before our users will lose patience and look to other media for solutions - and that will be a real opportunity missed. Seriously.

Oppia - just like the good old days

Oppia is an open-source tool from Google which allows anyone to create interactive learning dialogues. Here's Google's explainer:



There's also a useful review at TechCrunch.

I've had a look at several examples of Oppia dialogues and, to be honest, they are still pretty primitive. However, I like the idea.

One reason why I'm so positive is because I'm so old I've seen this all before back in the 1980s. Early authoring tools, such as Plato, Tencore and Microtext, used to specialise in 'answer judging' - parsing students' textual input so that the system could make intelligent responses. It was possible to create convincing, engaging and often highly amusing conversations between the system (actually the teacher who authored the course) and the student.

Modern tools all work on the assumption that students will respond to questions by clicking on an option, which makes the tools easier to develop and the courses easier to design. However, multi-choice questions are a blunt instrument when it comes to interacting with a student and certainly don't give the feel of a tutorial relationship.

I hope developers get behind Oppia and build it into a sophisticated tool for creating learning conversations that can then be embedded just about anywhere like YouTube videos. We then need some great examples to inspire writers and designers to leave behind the multi-choice question and start to really relate to their students.

Learning online learning - what's in a name?

A few weeks back, Nick Shackleton-Jones set out to clarify The Difference between Online learning, E-learning & Blended learning. Actually he did not clarify these terms to my satisfaction, as you will see if you read the comments history. However, he made the distinction between e-learning and blended learning as essentially ways of delivering courses, whereas online learning was more about learners accessing resources in a more informal way. Actually my definition of blended learning freely crosses between formal and informal - in fact that is one of the ways in which it blends - but that is not my point here.

A week or so after Nick�s post I was discussing with my Onlignment colleagues about what we should call the field in which we work and Barry Sampson was quite clear that he didn�t like the term �online learning�. Why not? Because, for him, it implies a course, whereas �learning online� is more about what learners do for themselves. Nick and Barry were both looking to distinguish push from pull, formal from informal, but had very different perceptions about what these terms mean.

So what does that prove? Well, firstly, that terminology is a quagmire. There simply isn�t a term that doesn�t carry some baggage for some people.

It also proves just how strongly people (at least Nick and Barry) feel about the shift in emphasis from courses to resources. Neither wants to be associated with terminology that implies the former. And both are looking for words that describe the latter. I�m not so bothered. I�m quite comfortable about the idea of a course, just not how so many of them turn out in practice. For me it is perfectly legitimate for an organisation to want to set up learning interventions that they feel will improve employee performance. Top-down, yes, but what�s the problem with that? As long as there is a balance. Employees also have the desire to improve their performance through learning and they will seek out resources that help them to do that, more often than not online.

Learning online is not good because online learning is bad. Top-down and bottom-up learning can co-exist quite happily in a way that suits both the organisation and its employees. Helping to achieve that balance is the task of the learning architect.

Fresh thinking in learning and development - for members only

I have been moaning for years about the quality of training for new workplace learning professionals and the over-reliance that is placed on out-dated pop-psychology and pseudo-science - not least learning styles and NLP. Well, the Chartered Institute of Learning and Development (CIPD), which should be taking the lead in developing its 130,000 predominantly UK-based members, has taken on the responsibility for doing something about this and has set about instilling some of what it calls 'fresh thinking in learning and development'. About time.

Dr John McGurk, CIPD's Adviser on Learning and Talent Development, has commissioned three reports from UK academics:

1. Neuroscience and learning - explores how learning can be informed by neuroscience
2. Cognition, decision and expertise - addresses cognition, decision-making and the role of expertise and professional judgement
3. Insight and intuition - addresses intuition and insight, linking them to the behaviours of creativity and innovation

I've only spent any serious time on the first paper on neuroscience. Now I like to think I'm reasonably well informed on this subject, but there was plenty here to keep me interested:

• How sharing ideas can help us be more creative
• The negative effects of caffeine and late-night game-playing on sleep and, indirectly, learning
• How computer-based training programmes can improve the capacity of our working memory
• How off-the-shelf computer games can develop cognitive skills, with evidence from pilots and surgeons

So, perhaps you're interested in reading these reports. Well, you can, but only if you're a CIPD member. Sorry, but CIPD - you cannot be serious!

How online education could mean a very few attain stardom

I was fascinated to read an article in this week's Economist on Massive Open Online Forces, looking at some of the economic effects of the rise of online education. In particular the following caught my eye:

The market for instructors will also be transformed. The best teachers will be fabulously productive, reaching hundreds of thousands of students. There may therefore be far fewer of them, each compensated like superstars in the entertainment industry.

It brought to mind a posting I made back in 2009, called How online media helps to create ever brighter stars. I thought I'd bring it back to life here:

September 22, 2009

Webinars, video recordings and podcasts provide the opportunity for experts to share their thoughts and experiences with a wide audience. Of course they can also do this through face-to-face events such as conferences, but are limited in their reach by geography. The cost of flying an expert over and then putting them up while they recover from the jet lag and do a little sightseeing is usually prohibitive. The result is that the vacuum becomes filled by lots of second division experts (and I don�t mean to be derogatory here � these can be fine people), who live more locally, filling in to deliver similar expertise but at a much lower cost.

Online, of course, the situation is quite different. The limitations on using the first division expert are much reduced. You're paying for a couple of hours at most, rather than a week away and all those expenses. Even if the top expert has an extortionate hourly rate (and if you're one of them then why not?) then their services are likely to become affordable.

So, what was once a very localised business could become centralised and a star system could begin to operate, as in films, TV, books and sports. The top players get most of the business (or at least most of the money) and attract celebrity status. Those in division two pick up the scraps.

Given the choice, here�s what I would select in order of preference:

1. The very best speakers and experts in the world, seen live. Why live? Because you want a piece of that special magic you only get up close and face-to-face. Above all, from that point on you can boast how you saw them live.
2. The very best speakers live and online or recorded delivering a live event. You�re still getting great content, but without the hassle of travelling and the high ticket prices.
3. The second division of speakers live and online or recorded. Here the utility of not having to leave home to see them is not outweighed by the risk of missing a lifetime opportunity.
4. The second division speakers live. Not so good because you�re committed to all that hassle of getting to the event. In these cases it�s the other benefits of a live event, such as the networking, which is going to assume the top priority.

The same dynamics could be seen to apply to training events as well as webinars, but here there is a moderating factor. Whereas you can run a webinar for practically any size audience, a training event is likely to run for 16 people or less, and division one teachers and trainers only have so many hours in the day, leaving plenty of scope for others. So, to summarise, where the star system could operate most noticeably is with presentations, whether live or recorded. The world is becoming a much smaller place, and that makes it easier for the powerful to become more so.

Designs on learning: An interview with Vikesh Taylor

This video is the fourth in a series of interviews that I have been conducting with leading e-learning designers in the UK, in conjunction with e.learning age magazine. This one appears in this February's issue.

See previous interviews with Mark Bennett, Stephanie Dedhar and Lisa Minogue-White.

Why scenarios are the future of e-learning

I hate to say it, after so many years of trying to reverse the trend, but it seems that far too many people (finance directors excepted) really dislike e-learning. First let me be clear, I am using a narrow definition of e-learning here. I'm referring to those interactive self-study materials which employees sit and complete on their own (if they can't get someone else to do it for them). I'm not referring to virtual classrooms, online content such as web articles and videos, or any form of social media. Just those things that we used to call CBT - computer-based training - and which we've been trying to get right since about 1975.

People don't dislike all e-learning. What annoys them is instructional e-learning, particularly that sort that aims to provide knowledge, normally in the form of a tutorial. Tutorials could and should be fun - interactive, challenging, engaging, thought-provoking - but I'm close to giving up on us realising those aims, at least on a routine basis. Particularly galling is that the standard is actually dropping as we increasingly force learners to wade through endless slides full of irrelevant abstractions and patronising interactions.

Instructional e-learning is not a great way to convey information. We have much simpler media at our disposal which just about everyone on the planet uses day-to-day without difficulty and without coercion - web pages (or PDFs if you like them pretty and printable) and videos. Given the fuss currently about HTML 5 and mobile learning, we can sometimes forget that these media already work just fine on any device going. Instructional e-learning tries to provide knowledge in one hit and this is rarely going to be a successful strategy. What most people need is information you can go back to when you need it - and no-one does that with e-learning.

If you in any way make your living from e-learning, then this may sound like a bleak situation, but there is hope. My experience over the past three years of awards judging has demonstrated to me that for everyone who hates instructional e-learning there is someone who loves doing scenarios.

Scenarios can be used in an instructional context, as a form of practice, but they are most productively used as a form of guided discovery. The learner is placed into a situation in which they have to make decisions. The scenario progresses on the basis of these decisions, for better or for worse. With any luck (and careful design) this process will provide the learner with insights which they can take forward and test in the real world. If they are realistic and challenging, they will emotionally engage the learner and increase the chances of lasting learning. This is laboratory learning in a safe environment - not as powerful as real-life decision making but a whole lot safer.

At their simplest, scenarios are just case studies with questions on which the learner can reflect. At their most sophisticated, they can be thought of as simulations. Whatever the terminology, they represent a useful resource in a whole range of situations, particularly in the context of a blend. Scenarios are the future of e-learning.

Guided discovery is a great strategy for selling the big ideas and influencing attitudes, but when you're tasked with building knowledge or increasing skills then instruction can still be the best approach. So has e-learning got any role to play in the future of instruction? I think so, but not as the provider of information - as I've said before, there are much simpler content formats that do the job better. What e-learning can do is provide the means for practice - for drilling must-know information and for rehearsing skills (think language learning, solving quadratic equations, learning to type). Just don't use it as a form of information dump. We've been trying it for 30 years and - as any learner will tell you - it simply doesn't work.

2014 is The Year of the Blend

At Learning Technologies 2014 in London this week I provided a first taster of my More Than Blended Learning project, which will comprise a book, case study videos, tools, interactive scenarios and possibly some form of course. A great deal of this work has already been completed but to get the whole project off the ground will take until September or October. Nevertheless, I'm confident enough to call this my Year of the Blend.

Don't expect too many postings from me over the next few months as I concentrate my efforts on the project alongside my work for clients. There should be a micro-site up and running sometime in March and I'm going to try and get my presentation from last week up on SlideShare in a form that makes sense without me being there.

Inspiration trumps information

At Learning Technologies 2014, Reed Learning were giving out copies of The Little Book of Inspiration. Here is my contribution:

You don�t have to be inspired to learn, but it certainly helps.

One of the principal goals of any sort of course is to inspire the learner about the subject - to make them care about leadership, health and safety, anti-money laundering, troubleshooting a piece of equipment, the company for whom they work, or whatever the subject is.

Without inspired learners, the best you can hope for is a grudging compliance, another tick in the box. And when it comes to effective performance in the workplace, it is doubtful whether this will be enough to achieve your objective.

In Daniel Pink�s book Drive, he talks about three intrinsic human motivators - a sense of autonomy, a desire for mastery and a sense of purpose, and inspiration is the result of all three of these motivators firing at once.

Teachers and trainers would do well to look at their priorities. Focus on imparting high volumes of abstract information and all you will achieve is a demotivated, befuddled group of learners. Concentrate on inspiring them, and they will go seek out the knowledge for themselves.

Inspirational teachers and trainers can change the world. In an age of ubiquitous internet access from mobile devices, those that are more intent on showing how much they know will soon be surplus to requirements.

Online version of the book

To get a printed copy