07/09/2009

Failure is Morally Right

I watched a video from the 2009 TED conference recently about practical wisdom and it struck me as relevant to a lot of what I do when I design learning programs for adults.

It seems like U.S. society as of late has emphasized a growing anti-intellectualism among the populace. I would argue that the anti-intellectual movement was a primary reason for the ascendancy of George W. Bush. There is a thirst in the country for a lurch away from the "educated elite" and their supposed progressive policies and thinking. This, combined with the high cost of education, may be a key component in the dismal numbers of higher-educated Americans: only 36% of adults in this country possess a college degree.

Barry Schwartz in his TED presentation discussed how society needs to place more emphasis on practical wisdom and empathy to help regain common sense and moral virtue. He used examples of rigid interpretation of the rule of law such as removing a child from his family because the father accidentally gave him alcohol in a lemonade drink, as a glaring case of society's inability to "improvise" outside of didactic rules to apply common sense. Our abdication of "improvising" to find solutions for day to day situations is forcing us to become morally bankrupt, and is fostering an inability to make decisions that serve all parties in their best interest.

Morally wise people know when and how to improvise, when to make exception to the rule, and use moral skills to serve other people. Schwartz stated in his talk that "wise people are made, not born." "Moral wisdom," he goes on to say, "requires experience. Wise people fail and learn from failure."

I agree, and would go even further to state that people learn best when failing. Failure is good, because it requires a person to try and understand how their performance was irregular, wrong, or inefficient enough to result in said failure. Through that deduction, people learn... you've heard the saying many times, probably from your own mother, "If you fail, then try try again."

An over reliance on rules denies us the ability to learn from failure, to do the right thing, and to be empathic to others. By divorcing ourselves of having to make a decision, we instead rely on over-restrictive guidelines, such as the one mentioned above, and become unwilling to take any situation in its conditional context and apply a common sense solution. Instead, we let the state interfere, and apply its own process to the matter, often resulting in over-regulation, under-regulation, or nonsensical solutions.

It is incumbent upon those of us who design curricula to establish relevant "failure zones" in the interactions, and to foster moral wisdom through those interactions. How do we foster moral wisdom? Schwartz stated that "Any work you do that involves interaction with others is moral work." By placing an emphasis on collaborative learning, designers can encourage connections between participants, and help transfer the singularity of individual accomplishment to the crowd. By leveraging the "wisdom of the crowds" the designer is doing their part in appealing to virtue. Through this new-found collaborative learning effort, and the feeling that it's OK to fail, learners will feel more confident in sharing and encouraging others: two key components of empathy.

If teachers would be allowed to introduce empathy into their lesson plans, we might also be able to address the growing anti-intellectual movement. For society to move away from this troubling trend, we must begin to teach children the value of virtue, and respect, and not be disinclined to look beyond the rigidity of rules to find solutions for specific situations.

By appealing to the "wisdom of the crowds" and involving others in the fostering of collective wisdom, we may just be able to bring back the belief that it's OK to apply common sense to problems we face, and to incubate practical wisdom in our students.

07/06/2009

How to Design Instruction for the Read/Write Web Platform

Learning is about relationships. In the classroom environment, the learner has the opportunity to construct various types of relationships: with the instructor, with fellow learners, with the content, and even with the environment in which the learning is occurring. In the self-paced eLearning model, the relationship becomes more intimate – usually between learner and content only.

The read/write web platform presents several challenges to this relationship model. It enables the integration of the two models, and allows for even more dynamic forms of relationships to be constructed. For example, actions of the group can alter not only the course content, but potentially change the dynamics of the entire course flow. From the instructional designer's perspective, the challenge is to design meaningful and relevant information that is flexible, adaptable, and still meets the learning objectives.

Instead of relying on the ADDIE model for development where your intervention has a beginning and an end with measurable outcomes, you may want to move to an agile design (smaller deliverables in shorter times... I'll expand on this in another post), and build in a looping mechanism that enables user-generated touchpoints, groupthink, and two-way communication between your learners.

The biggest challenge is less about the knowledge or skills of the individual instructional designer, and more about the organizational transformation required to facilitate user-generated content to reside alongside more "formal" content. Adoption of the read/write web platform requires the ability for the instructional designer to perform what I call Stitch Design. Stitch Design involves weaving learning connections and social opportunities across the online community.

Key components of Stitch Design include:

  • An understanding of the learner's motivation to metastream. You are no longer the sole architect of the whole experience. The learner is more than a partner in the experience – they are an active agent, and key to the outcome. People will easily become distracted if the content is not relevant, credible, and authentic. They will “metastream” the experience before committing to engagement. Metastreaming is the act of performing a quick scan of the learning ecosystem which is performed during the first few seconds of learner involvement. In just those few seconds, the learner will determine whether or not to commit their precious time to your design. You must release yourself of the notion that you alone determine the learner experience.
  • Realization that dropping pre-determined solutions to the audience is ineffective. Your design should guide your audience toward the realization that they need to apply “design thinking” to improve their performance. Social networking enables you to make smaller, more intimate connections – which can create more engagement. The spontaneous output of collaboration will change the group's learning dynamic. 
  • Becoming technology agnostic. Technology does not matter when it comes to forming relationships (pivotal to successful learning engagement). Technology is merely the enabler. People will find ways to communicate, share, and build relationships regardless of the available technology. You should leverage the available technology, but only to build community. And never let the technology dictate the design... always design for maximum usability.
  • Seeking high resolution in visual imagery. Increase the persuasive effect of the design through high-resolution imagery. Images tend to hypnotize (consider the effect of propaganda). The use of higher quality imagery builds an expectation of authority. Considerable effort is put into improving the imagery in video games. Visual fidelity implies authority, whereas simplistic or unrefined graphics are often an indication of lower quality -- consider low-resolution or "poorly designed" product packaging -- it does not attract the consumer. Nor will low-resolution imagery engage the learner.
  • The realization that innovation is irrelevant to the learner. Your learner does not care how “innovative” your design is – they just want to be happy and satisfied. Good design will lead to happy learners – not an over-reliance on technological innovation. Focus only on their problems. The reason for the learning intervention should be fed only by the passion to solve that problem. Don't distract the learner with too much innovation.

With these ideas in mind, the read/write platform provides a forum for successful problem-based learning. It enables the learner to:

  • Think critically and solve complex, real-world problems
  • Find, evaluate, and use appropriate learning resources
  • Work cooperatively in teams and small groups
  • Demonstrate effective communication skills

06/02/2009

Prior Knowledge and Proper Leveling

Yesterday I spent a long time ensconced with Lynda.com working through ActionScripting 3.0 for Flash. Now, I'm not a super-sophisticated Flash user or ActionScripting writer, but I know my way around. If you don't know Lynda's training, they structure the courses through a series of 2-5 minute long screen capture videos with voice over. The courses do not offer clearly stated prerequisite knowledge and I wasted long minutes watching videos defining variables, functions and repetitive syntax. I work from the assumption that most people who are working with a particularly specific programming language through an expensive subscription tutorial service likely know what a variable is.

I wouldn't even be complaining about the slow step by step nature of the lessons if it weren't that when they got to the portion that I wanted to know, interactive buttons, it suddenly fast-forwarded adding multiple concepts all at once. After overexplaining basic syntax, it underexplained a multi-layer, multi-movieclip while purportedly teaching how to make a button work. Rather than demonstrating how to control action in a simple, reusable manner, they instead embedded it within a much more complex framework, which makes it difficult for this user to transfer it to her own purposes.

So after suffering through information that was overly basic, I was then overwhelmed by the complexity of the next lessons. I had a similar experience at a four day FileMaker Pro training session. The first day was review for me. The instructor went over database structure -- topics like "one to many relationships". I must mention that there were only 2 people in this training, both of whom had a fair bit database experience. Neither of us needed hours of discussion of fields, tables and relationships. Day 2 was moderately useful. The information covered was graspable. Day 3 and 4 however were pure torture. We breezed through layers of proprietary knowledge that was highly specific and highly detailed.

Throughout the four days I kept wondering, who is this training for? There was no database manager who could find all four days useful. I "earned" a certificate, but I didn't feel like I was well-served by the 28 hours that I sat in that room. 

The missing component in both these experiences was the acknowledgment that these skills would not come until we had time to practice them. There was no time for reflection or synthesis built in or encouraged by these training experiences. I understand the culture that creates training like this, but I think it's wrong-headed to omit time for people to actually ingest what they are "learning".

-Dolly

05/28/2009

Serving your learner

My natural inclination is to design for the imagination. I've long believed that if you give students the best tools to create with, that they then can transfer that knowledge to other applications. By the end of my time at the k-8 school, where I taught the same students for 3 consecutive years, I had 3rd grade students creating Flash animations and writing action-scripting. To me this was a major accomplishment, indicative of incredible potential for these students to become producers of multimedia, interactive projects. Every year, however, the complaint was that the students weren't learning how to format papers in Word. The parents saw computer class as a support to the other academic classes, not as a curriculum in its own right.

Now that I am working with students who have been traditionally under-served, I wonder about my own obligations to provide opportunities for academic success. Should this curriculum emphasize more immediate academic skills, formatting papers, learning powerpoint? Or should I emphasize their personal expression and storytelling through exposure to professional graphics, audio and video software applications.

I already know where I stand on this. I am still in touch with the majority of my inspirational art teachers. I learned more about how to present myself professionally from them than any of my drudgerous academic classes. I don't know if I can inspire disaffected students with any software app, but I feel that it's more likely in Alice, than it is with Excel.

05/27/2009

charming game #1

While there are plenty of games that get it wrong, I thought I might review a couple of games that get it right. Word Vine is one such game. It's premise is simple: link words to create inter-connected compound words on branching relationship. An easy level uses tree, sauce, apple, trunk. I'm stuck on a hard level with time, tower, prime, bell, cow, cash, machine, gun, minister, ivory, tower, zone. So what do I like about this game this morning (and last night, for a really long time)?

  • Simple task-- It is well within my skill set to make compound words and to click and drag small icons onto a hotspot.
  • "Educational"-- I'm not shooting stuff. I wouldn't be anyway, but I like figuring out this little verbal puzzle.
  • Visual-- Solving the harder puzzles requires tapping into some region of the brain that handles visual relationships; it's difficult to solve the harder puzzle (at least for me) without physically (virtually) dragging the word shapes onto some of the twining branches.
  • Aesthetics-- It's pretty. I like the soft greens.

I'm always trying to figure out how to combine content and gameplay. I can envision a social studies content game which links concepts, dates, and historical figures. How about a branching vine of German philosophers or early 20th Century artists?

--Dolly

05/26/2009

Crafting the Total Learner Experience

I design a lot of eLearning... but I also am a learner myself, and find myself taking quite a few online classes (especially since I'm pursuing a graduate degree online).

One of the reasons I think your eLearning probably sucks is because you may have not considered the "total learner experience" when you designed it.

Recently I had a moment of epiphany. You know what I mean, I’m sure you’ve had them as well. For me it led to what you’re reading now. I was in line at Starbucks, closing in on being late to a meeting, trying to beat the clock and get a jolt of caffeine before having to commence with my standard dog and pony show, when it hit me: Too often during my busy day, while I grind out deliverables, get content written, check off to-dos... somewhere along this busy road of work life that I travel every day, I lost a sense of purpose.  

As I left Starbucks with my venti, non-fat, triple shot, it became so clear to me: where was the learner? Did he or she even matter anymore? I had lost the sole purpose of what I should be doing: making sure I create the type of learning intervention that would not only transfer knowledge to improve performance, but also engage and motivate to action. It really should be all about the learner!

As you consider for yourself what a "total learner experience" may mean, keep your focus on the learner. Put the brakes on just a bit, slow down, and ponder what you’re doing to them. You may be causing more harm than good.

The bottom line is: until organizations synchronize their business goals with practical, usable employee training focused on engaging and motivating learners, business will continue to suffer compromised performance.

After my insightful Starbucks moment, I began to ponder what a learning experience should mean for the learner. Many instructional designers are focused only on the course content, and not on the Total Learner Experience, or TLE. The learner's experience with a course begins the moment that student starts to access the course. I formulated this definition for the Total Learner Experience:

A successful Total Learner Experience should promote the cohesive integration of informational resources into the overall structure of a course delivery system. A course delivery system contains every component designed to facilitate a learning intervention, including the interface access point for the course, which could be a learning management system, corporate intranet, or a simple web page.

Successful consideration and application of the Total Learner Experience enables the learner to:

  • easily find, access, and consume the appropriate learning intervention.
  • be engaged, motivated, and enthusiastic throughout the learning intervention.
  • transfer understanding into action after the learning intervention is completed.

The critical aspect in implementing a successful TLE involves crafting a non-corrupt, pure, instructional message that meets the objectives for both the organization and the learner.

I'm surprised how often I'm asked to create "shovelware"... just take manuals or slides, add some narration, and then throw them online. On the other extreme, I've seen considerable resources put into high-resolution, non-interactive "video-based" learning that may be pretty, but still perpetuates the "learn by listening" nonsense that has become the buzz of the day.

When you begin your design, be sure to try and keep the total learner experience in mind. It may help you formulate more relevant learning interventions.

Sharp content or content that remains focused on the learner should pass these Six Rules of Design Simplicity:

Six Rules of Design Simplicity

Show meaningful context

Is the information relatable to the learner’s real-world or on-the-job experience?

Present evidence and credibility

Are you able to demonstrate subject matter expertise and relevance to the learner? Will they trust your message?

Remove invasive user interface clutter

Is navigation intuitive? Is the user interface closing in on your content?

Remove irrelevant visuals

Do the visual media support the instruction?

Strip out jargon and
corporate-speak

Do acronyms, marketing language, and industry buzzwords run rampant in your content?

Remove barriers to content

Can the learner easily access the content without unnecessary log-ins, restrictive or confusing LMS design, intrusive pop-ups, and uninstalled plug-ins?

mind numbing games

I spend a portion of each day playing this almost mindless game on Facebook. In brief here are the non-linear steps to playing this game:

  • View Credits and Purchase Games: Each day I receive a certain number of credits based upon accomplishments and prize purchases. I must log in each day to claim and use these credits or they will expire. I use these credits to purchase the variously valued games offered.
  • Play Games: Obstensibly this is the primary reason for the entire game, but it actually takes the least time of all the steps. There are 3 games--Concentration, Bejeweled and Soduku.
  • Purchase Prizes: With the points I earn, I purchase prizes in certain sets which then allow me to move up levels, earning further points and playing more difficult puzzles.

Yawn.

But strangely compelling. And I wonder why. Here's what I came up:

  • Time Commitment: Besides the daily login, I don't have to spend a preset, particular period of time on the game. My puzzles, my points and my level accomplishments are saved indefinitly and if I go away for a time, there is no penalty.
  • Gameplay: While I dislike the Concentration and Bejeweled games--boring and unachievable--the Sudoko game is a well-rendered, easily playable version. Now that I have ascended up the levels, it has become mildly challenging and I'm looking forward to the more difficult stages.
  • Achievement: I do feel like I have various methods of achievement within the game, such as best times, percentage accurate, sets of prizes purchased and moving up the levels.
  • Easy entry: Besides a short load time, I can play a quick game with other commitment. I don't have to remind myself of the backstory.

So, so what? Clearly when designing educational or training games, these features should be considered and likely included.

-d

05/20/2009

Microsoft's Digital Literacy Curriculum Sucks. Surprised?

http://www.microsoft.com/about/corporatecitizenship/citizenship/giving/programs/up/digitalliteracy/default.mspx

I work as a program director for a non-profit devoted to mentoring and tech literacy in low income 7-12 graders. As such, I am often looking for useful curriculum related to a wide variety of programs, tasks and skills. I am often in debate with myself and others if it is better to provide the students with practical skills related to secretarial-type work or to explore the outer boundaries with projects in graphics, animation and web design. Our approach is to focus on allowing students to explore and produce with the more creative software while providing auxiliary work with students who see the value of learning the more practical Office suite.

Not wishing to reinvent the wheel, I regularly look for clear, self-directed lessons suited for my students. Oh, and free or cheap, because we're a non-profit. I've looked at Microsoft's Digital Literacy Curriculum several times to see if we can use it to demonstrate proficiency. Now I can hear some of my techie friends slapping themselves in the head, about to eviscerate me because I even mention the Evil Empire. Let me introduce you to the real world outside of your basement and Silicon Valley. Most people out here in the light, don't care or know about Open Source. They are just grateful that they can reliably turn on their computer and spit out some information. Their focus is on their work, not arguing about the benefits of Ubuntu versus Morphix.

Back to the Digital Literacy Curriculum, it sucks. No surprise there, it is a Microsoft product. Now I know I am late to the bandwagon, but I've still got to pile on. Everything about Microsoft sucks. I am a native proud Mac user, but practicality has required me to have a fairly good working knowledge of the Windows world. I work with Microsoft as a recipient of donated software and OSs as part of our non-profit work. Each month when I need to report our usage I curse in my head. It's almost as though they take pride in having an interface that is clunky and unusable. For a company that's flush with capital they sure are stingy with any ease of use or follow through to their systems.  The Digital Literacy Curriculum reflects this attitude. It's almost as though Microsoft is full of idea-men with no one to come back to ensure quality control. hmmmm....

I've looked at it before at work, but I wanted to give it a more detailed fish eye if I was going to record my impressions. Here on my mac computer I cannot even log into their curriculum because I don't have Internet Explorer. Really, I mean, really? Can Microsoft not see the writing on the wall. Nevermind that I'm on a Mac. What about all those people out there who are using Firefox or Chrome? (Too bad I can't round out that list with Netscape... I like 3s.) Why is it that they are so dead set on protecting their product that they cannot break their walls of paranoia and protectionism to become more welcoming and user friendly?

24 hours later...I had to reinstall IE, or maybe I didn't. It had been set to "work offline" which took a while to find. They have two tools pulldown menus that do not have the same functionality. It would be cooler to pretend like I don't have "user error" issues.  Everyone has user error issues; those of us with healthy self-image can own it. Anyway, accessed the curriculum at long last.

I was disappointed. After all my sturm und drang getting it set up, it wasn't horrible, it was just typically boring. A metallic voice read some prose to me; the sound screeched through my veins like fingernails on chalkboard. There was a lot of tasteful blue and gray on white. It was just dull. And basic. Now, I do have to consider the fact that this is designed for neophytes, people who still need basic computer skills. Just because people are ignorant shouldn't mean that they should get bad training; that's perhaps one reason that they are ignorant in the first place.

This material is clearly not current, and likely I shouldn't even be wasting breath on it. The last update was October 2007 which is so last century in Internet terms. Except it's not. I get emails regularly from Microsoft touting this curriculum. They just sent me another disk encouraging me to use it with my clients. More of the same didactic lecture and demonstration that is already failing learners all over.

--Dolly

Suck Quotient-- 2

usability 1 the actual content was fine, getting to it was an exercise in perseverance and patience.
aesthetics 2 non offensive
innovation 1 no
accuracy4 the content was correct, just dull
fun0 none

**Note
I was going to look at version 2 to be all fair and balanced, but while it worked when I first accessed it, once I installed the add ons that Microsoft recommended, I ended up with a black screen, no content. You win Microsoft!

02/26/2009

I Found the Meaning of Life by Playing Games

I believe the meaning of life is found in what John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas refer to as “the gamer disposition.”  The gamer disposition consists of five key attributes:
  • Bottom-line oriented
  • Accepting of diversity
  • Realization that life is ever-changing
  • Eagerness to overcome obstacles
  • Loves to complete tasks, embark on quests, and accept challenges

More than attitudes or beliefs, these attributes are character traits that players bring into game worlds and that those worlds reinforce.  People who possess a gamer disposition may be happier than those who do not, and quite simplistically, will have an easier time finding “meaning” in life – because I believe one must be “happy” to be able to find true meaning in life.

What makes us happy, and makes us function well?  Some researchers are discovering happiness correlates to gaming. Jane McGonigal defines four key aspects of happiness:

  1. Having satisfying work to do.
  2. The experience at being good at something
  3. Time spent with people we like
  4. The chance to be a part of something bigger

Guess what?  All of these aspects of happiness are prevalent in games (especially in multi-player games).  The best-designed games are setup to let you be good at things you're not good at in real life.  Games come with better instructions, a clear goal, and better feedback than in real life.  Games are designed to help us find our strengths and weaknesses.  They also have better community aspects because all the players have agreed to the rules.  Gaming is a shared experience that is not often reflected in the real world.

08/30/2008

Ubiquitous Learning

People often seem overwhelmed with information (I know at times I am). An individual can easily access a ton of information in just a few seconds on almost any subject. The great thing about this plethora of data is the ability for the individual to tailor information to their specific needs, and in some ways design their own learning experiences.

As the rise of social networking continues and the design of media development software makes it easier and more affordable for novices to design their own learning, more and more people are beginning to participate in creating learning content to share with others.

I think this moves us more towards what I call "ubiquitous learning." Most corporations provide on average about 40 hours a year of formal training for their employees. There are over 2,000 hours in an average work year. I can guarantee you that most workers don't reserve their learning to just those 40 provided by the company. Most people constantly learn, and most learning occurs through peers.

Since most of what we learn is informal, one has to question the efficiency of providing 40 hours of formal learning over the year. Does it really work? Why is it when people hear, "You must take this training course" they usually cringe?

I predict that corporations will find ways to involve their employees in ubiquitous learning: offer them collaborative learning environments, quick and easy ways to participate in learning events in different forms, provide informal and formal forums for information sharing, construct communities of practice, etc., and allow workers to integrate learning into the day-to-day work they do.

I predict "measuring" learning will become less important as the knowledge-based society matures, and learning will evolve into becoming a natural part of the average worker's tasks.