Engaged Learning

I lived in Springfield, Oregon during the time of the Thurston shooting in 1998 (wow, that long ago?). Springfield is a small sister town to Eugene, home of the UofO Ducks. I was teaching kids from the rival high school when this happened. In fact, I not only had a number of friends and friends family members who attended the school , but two cousins were in the cafeteria when Kip continued the most destructive part of his rampage. This tragedy has deeply affected my family. My heart goes out to those at Virginia Tech.

We learned more than we wanted to learn from our home town shooting. We were constantly wondering who was involved, if friends and family were OK and what on earth really happened? This took a long time to talk out.

9/11 comes and, although I did not know anyone directly affected at the time, the nation was asking the same type of questions but for an even longer period of time.

Virginia Tech happens. This time, because of new ways of collaborating, there was information as soon as it happened. The students, friends and family collaborated to create the largest, most quick reporting that has been found yet (in my estimation). This great article about Virginia Tech details how this happened. The learning was instantaneous, personal and healing to a degree.

I wonder how we would have handled 9/11 had it happened today. It would have been a totally different experience.

Although a large emotional jump, the theoretical jump to the corporate world is smaller. Information disseminated as soon as it happens by those who know. It is quick and personal. It is refined. Everyone contributes. Everyone benefits. Instead of guessing or not knowing at all, employees share information. Just as the information was powerful at Virginia Tech, so can it be here.

Labels: 9/11, Thurston, Virginia Tech, wiki

Gone are the days when you went to your favorite news web sites to see what is happening. Gone are the days of going to each page to see if there is new information. Gone are the days of not being informed because something did change but you were not informed. Those were the days of pull technology - you had to pull the information to you.

Today it is pushed to you. You choose which information you want to view. When it is updated it will show up. If there is nothing new, you won't see it. If you are looking for something in particular, let it come to you instead of searching it out.

Today is the day of RSS, a backronym for Really Simple Syndication. Watch THIS - a great video on how it works.

Imagine that the new information in your corporation is pushed to you. You choose the topics, the information to be fed and it shows up at your door. Instantly updated, never left in the dark. The information could be a corporate happening, project progress, changes in process or procedure, the latest white paper... The information is limitless. Imagine learning what you need to know this way, instead of taking training courses for information that is almost never used. Have the information you want delivered to you when you need it most.

Labels: RSS

Here is the new definition of e-learning: It stands for 'Engaged Learning.' Forget about 'electronic'. Actually, maybe it should be 'EP-Learning': Engaged and Personalized Learning.

How is that done? Courses? Online? In person? Workbook? Maybe. It all depends. Two of the most important questions when developing learning:

1. What will engage the audience?
2. How will they personalize the learning?

There is the Objectivist view that says that the learning needs to attain specific objectives because knowledge is there, you just need to learn it. On the opposite side there is the Contructivist view that says everyone will learn something different because knowledge is not there until it is created in the mind.

EP-Learning is in the middle. It is a guiding principle. You want them to go toward the end goal and help them learn something, but what they finally get out of it could be different for everyone because of the application. That is the 'personalized' part.

Yet again, this is from the 'training' perspective......

Labels: contructivist, e-learning, ep-learning, objectivist

How do you get your audience to be engaged and allow the learning to be personalized to them? There is a secret behind the madness. Although I have found that many, especially salespeople (blatant stereotype), don't like the secret. It is that the person must take responsibility for their own learning. I know, it is a bit of a stretch, but stay with me...

We go start in elementary school go through college. Why? To learn? Almost. Too often it is to get good grades and learning becomes a secondary objective. Because of this we have handed over our learning to others. We get in a mode for 16+ years of learning that others are in charge of our learning, we are in charge of our grades. So when we get out in the real world, what happens? Grades disappear and only learning matters. The rug is pulled out from underneath us.

But where is the structure? How will I learn? Alas, the corporate training system comes into sight and saves the day. They offer an LMS to record learning (after all, if it is not recorded, did you really learn it?) They offer certifications (grades). Ahhhhh. You feel at home again. Something to work toward. Recognition for learning

Unfortunately, learning so rarely comes in that form. Most learning is outside of a formalized environment. The motivation is not grades or a certification, but to experience the joy and thrill of learning. Instead of others directing our learning, we must take accountability for it. It is no longer needed (or OK) for us to wait to 'learn' until there is a course. The resources are there for us to jump in and learn.

The secret? One must take control of their learning. That is the only way we will become truly engaged. There are a ton of ways to facilitate this, but the learner must take control. Give them the tools and let them fish. In the learning profession we must allow them to take control, even encourage them to do so. We need to let go of the control and let it spread. We need to be there for our learners, give them what they need, even if it means a regular training or teaching class with grades or certification. But it need not be our focus. As Ted Hoff, VP of Learning at IBM stated, "There's so much to know, you want [employees] to be able to get information, and learn about what they need to know, at the moment they need to know it." (Training, April, 2007)

Andrew McAfee has a great post on 'busyness'. It seems essential, in the business world, to look busy, even though you may not be. Or, the flip side, to be busy, even when it looks like you are not. For example, when I read my list of blogs/news in the morning, is that effective use of my time? Or am I wasting time, pretending to look busy when actually I am not contributing to the company at all?

At the end of Andrew's post, there is a great example of this paradox found HERE:

Ford once enlisted an efficiency expert to examine the operation of his company. While his report was generally favorable, the man did express reservations about a particular employee.

"It's that man down the corridor," he explained. "Every time I go by his office he's just sitting there with his feet on his desk. He's wasting your money." "That man," Ford replied, "once had an idea that saved us millions of dollars. At the time, I believe his feet were planted right where they are now."

Life is fast, yet according to Steven Covey and his 7 Habits, you must take time to plan and 'sharpen the saw' to be effective. Time doing that actually saves 'Quadrant 1' time, or time spend in crisis & reaction mode. Too often workers must not only be busy but look busy.

Sometimes, being engaged on your individual level, and making the most use of your time, involves doing nothing but thinking, or studying a problem or research or... They may be activities that do not look busy, but can yield dramatic advances to your cause.

Being engaged has little to do with physically doing something than it does mentally. Sometimes those mental actions yield little or no physical action that can be observed by others.

So yes, be busy, but you don't have to look busy. Let other people wonder, then let the results speak for themselves.

Labels: 7 Habits, busyness, engage, Ford

I hate to admit it. I hereby announce my past follies: When I first heard of blogging, I thought, "What a waste. A lot of people talking and others reading their thoughts, their journals, in reality. Boring. What is the point?" Little did I know the power of blogging. Still it blows me away that I was so close minded to it and now that I am so open minded to it that I have one (actually two) of my own. Yet for things we don't understand we often question, "What is the point?"

Since then, I not only have learned the point, but I have learned how it applies to learning and what an incredible tool it can be. There is one that I don't get, however. And I wonder if it will be the same process as blogging. One new fad is Twitter. It gives its own best description, "A global community of friends and strangers answering one simple question: What are you doing?"


In a way it is like a blog. You post your thoughts. But these are smaller. Much smaller. For example, here are the first few that I find:

• off to intramuros for the PMAP earth day celebration
• youklis hit by pitch in bottom of 1st. It starts early.
• at Starbucks now...beyootiful outside
• Running
• daughter is big in Brazil.

Alright. So.....? I am still trying to figure it out. What amazes me is that some people are addicted to using this. Really, who cares that 'chadallen' is running right at this moment? Why would you want to take the time to inform others what you are doing or a simple thought or... and how do you know if anyone cares?

This one baffles me. But each time I think this I can't help but wonder if I am falling into another 'blogging' trap. Is there real benefit to it? I don't see it. Can it be used for learning? My guess is NOPE. But you never know, it may surprise me.

So do I not understand it? And I am sure there are other technologies and thoughts out there that I might even approve of, but not apply it to learning.

Take a look around you. What are you missing?

Labels: blogging, twitter

"Everything is fine"
"It is working well"
"There aren't any problems"

Too often these are masks for "No one is complaining." In fact, they are answers to the wrong question. The real question is not, "What's wrong," but instead, "What could be better?"

This could be a symptom of having too many things to do and not enough time to do them all. Many of us (emphasizing the ME in us) are guilty of this. But we can fall in the trap of judging urgent issues not upon actual current and future needs, but instead upon who is complaining and how loudly they can complain. The squeaky wheel.

So, when people say, "How can we improve education" the response might be judged off of our decibel level. I don't agree with this method, but it, to a large part, is a reality. There are much better ways to take care of things than from yelling.

Public educators may say, "We need smaller class sizes." Not necessarily. Smaller class sizes might help, but it won't solve the real problem. Why do they want smaller class sizes? So they can give more individual attention to the children. What if that can be done in a different way? Well, it would be easier to get smaller classes than overhaul the teaching methods. Neither of them are getting done, so which is more effective?

We know we need to engage and individualize more. Can we do that without without a ton of resistance? How loudly will people yell until we change? Do we have to hear yelling before we change? Can we just do it because it is better than the current model?