Views From the Gulch

I confess.

I’m an e-learning technology convert.  I now see so many possibilities for e-learning and it’s associated technologies in my practice as an adult educator.  Mind you, my conversion isn’t complete – I still see a definite need for f2f interaction and I don’t believe that an e-learning “course” is the panacea for all training woes.

What I do see are the possibilities that e-learning technology provides - to go beyond the bounds of traditional classroom training;  to move towards communities of learning for organisations; to increase dialogue and interaction between staff and to capture the “explicit knowledge” in the organisation – all enhancing learning for both individuals and organisations.

I’m now promoting my ideas and learnings to others and trying to encourage a similar acceptance in my colleagues by demonstrating how we can use the technology.

At a recent conference on emergency management training I attended a stream on e-learning.  Good I thought, more ideas and ways to apply them to what we do.  So, off I went and encouraged some colleagues to do the same.

What a disappointment – while the presenter knew her stuff it was pretty much a “show and tell” session - using PowerPoint!  We had the opportunity to look at some of the technologies such as blogs, wikis and Skype – but only at their websites – there was no attempt to contextualise the information and give participants ideas on how the technology could by used in emergency management training.

An article I read recently stated “… technology implementation in a positive learning experience can be one of the strongest influencing factors in their subsequent uptake” (Weller, Pegler & Mason, 2005).  This conference was an situation where the exposure to e-learning tools and technology was not positive – in fact it had the opposite effect on my colleagues – they left the session as soon as possible, uninspired.

If only this session had used some of the technologies to present the message, or had been contextualised to show how the tools could be used in developing and presenting training materials for emergency management agencies I could have had a cohort of supporters.  This observation was supported by my colleagues’ responses to another session which did exactly this – they came to me saying “we’ve got to get this really great program – we’ve seen how we can use it to make our training better”.

This is another salient lesson for me as I endeavour to covert others in my organisation and win support for the introduction of new technologies and approaches in the learning arena. 

Where to start with so many options available to me is the next question – I need to reign in my enthusiasm, give it some direction and remember how to eat an elephant – mouthful by mouthful.

Reference

Weller, M., Pegler, C. & Mason, R. 2005, Use of innovative technologies in an e-learning course.  Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 61-71.

I have just experienced my most positive group work experience – via participation in an online learning community.

I’m the first to admit that I don’t enjoy group work – I have high standards and I don’t like to be in a situation where I have to rely on others to achieve them.  Too often, in both study and work environments, I have found the outcomes of group work not reaching my standards.  While this may be perfectionist tendencies (and something I need to deal with elsewhere) it’s been a reality for me. 

Social constructivist theory holds that we learn best from interacting with others and the environment – debating, sharing, collaborating.  The research recommends this approach for online learning.  Now it was time to put it to the test.  So, it was with a certain amount of trepidation that I approached a group project to design an online learning community

After some initial discussions seven people joined together to form the Mending JuJu project – it was actually two small groups with slightly different aims but with enough similarities in purpose for us to think we could achieve the desired outcome.

The members had met briefly and had interacted online for approximately 6 weeks- via discussion forums, blogs and comments – but had no real affiliations.  The group largely self-selected – people with like interests or aspirations were drawn together to achieve an outcome.  The other similarities are all based around my perceptions of my group members- all looking to utilise e-learning in their work; all busy people with full work, academic and personal lives; a variety of experience in e-learning and all high achievers. 

The group reflected all learning styles – activitsts, reflectors, theorists and pragmatists.  All contributed actively to the group processes and learning.  We shared our strengths, learnt from each other and contributed to the group goal.

The group went through Tuckman’s stages of group development – we formed, we stormed (a little – maybe more internally than externally), we normed and then we performed – and achieved our stated objective to the satisfaction of all members.  We are yet to adjourn/mourn, although this is likely to come as our studies draw to a close.

What helped this group to form and function so effectively?  This is a question I find fascinating – especially as almost all members expressed similar reticence with group projects.  There are a number of factors that I think contributed to the effectiveness of the group which I wish to reflect on and explore in more depth over the coming weeks.  These include:

• A stated group charter where we learnt more about each others aspirations, concerns, strengths and limitations, perhaps engendering a sense of trust among the team members
• Self-selection by members
• A common goal – both in terms of the project outcome and our personal goals
• A shared theoretical basis – of social constructivism and e-learning community design
• The mix of learning styles, and personalities
• A common personality trait – high achievers
• A common background in adult education and a commitment to developing our own knowledge and practices as educators
• The impact of e-learning technologies and “virtual” group work

 Maybe it was one or more of these factors, maybe it was just a serendipitous event.  Regardless of the cause I now have a new perspective on group work and am looking forward to my next experience.

Informal learning occurs regularly in our workplaces.  For example staff with a learning need will often consult a more experienced, longer serving staff member to gain advice and resolve the problem.  This is an informal learning activity.  Unfortunately it is often not recognised or valued as such by organisations. 

Communities of practice, particularly online communities, are a way to recognise and validate informal learning in the workplace.  This involves learning professionals working to foster an enabling culture within the organisation that validates informal learning and accepts involvement in CoPs as a valuable and legitimate learning experience.  The next role is to leverage the technology to support the learning process, and achieve the most effective learning outcomes.   The careful design of the community, incorporating all a structured, theoretical basis, “best practice approaches” to CoP’s and the best technological solutions for both the community and the organisation, is vital.

This morning I received a notification from the community I monitored for Assignment 1.2.

One of my observation of the community was to question whether it had reached the end of its life cycle.  Today, the moderator was asking just that.

“It has been really quiet in here of late and I wonder if the community has reached full maturity now and no longer requires this type of discussion forum activity? Nowadays I find myself more often than not putting aside time to participate in a one hour online live event that is relevant to me in my work rather than spending much time in asynchronous (any time) for a (community) such as this one. Is that true for you too?”

In the few hours since the post there have been two replies.

1) “The EDNA Groups are really great communities, but it has sort of run off the rails. Some contributors use the areas for show and tell and not for discussions and learning. While others can’t support what they believe in. As I have said many time, “If we all agree we will learn nothing”. I really believe while this place is used in the way is has been it may be for the best that it closes. Like most adult learning no one wants to learn they just want to tell everyone what they know and expect other to gush with awe. Thanks for the memories”

2) “I think the difference is, we used to have a moderator who stimulated discussion, and now we don’t.”

Both responses support my observations in Assignment 1.2 and the rationale behind some of my suggestions for the design of an e-learning community in Assignment 2.   While it’s sad to see this particular community facing closure it’s also been interesting timing to see the theory I’ve been studying in this journey turning into reality. 

While e-learning and online learning communities have made opportunities for learning more accessible and convenient there are a number of potential problems that have become evident with this approach.  One of the biggest ones, based on my personal experiences, is that of distractions in the workplace.   Workers are now faced with multi-tasking not only in their job, but also learning and work.  E-learning is yet another task to be juggled into the person’s already busy schedule. 

Terri Thompson (2004), in a paper presented at the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Health Care & Higher Education, outlined some of the challenges of undertaking e-learning in the workplace. These all revolve around the need for support from the organisation and include:

• Developing skills in collaborating online
• Developing competency with the learning technology utilised
• Ensuring an environment conducive to learning, free of distractions (phone calls, emails, people dropping by the workstation)
• Recognition that the practise of belonging to a community improves e-learning events and outcomes, via dialogue and shared construction of meaning
• Organisations legitimising engaging in online learning activities, including participating in communities of practice, during the workday

In developing an e-learning strategy it is important that these issues are addressed.  While some can be addressed by training and mentoring, others will require the commitment of management to providing appropriate environments (or sanctioning work practices that minimise disruptions).  Finally, learning and development practitioners will need to negotiate with management at all levels to ensure that staff are supported in their online learning endeavours and given the time and recognition for this.  Another change management task to be included in the design of e-learning activities.

References 

Thompson, T. (2004), The Virtual Classroom at Work: How Teaching Shapes Workplace Learning.  In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare & Higher Education (ELEARN) 2004, AACE, Chesapeake, UA, pp 2166-2171.

This week I had the opportunity to see some of the theories I’ve been reading about in action.  It confirmed for me the importance of some of the musings I’ve been having about designing learning programs. 

16 staff from my organisation spent all of last week undertaking their initial training to become fire fighters.  The course has been designed around “adult learning principles” – information is presented, there is an opportunity for practice and coaching followed by reinforcement of the theory.  There is then an opportunity for further coaching and reflection prior to assessment.

By the end of day 4 of the course the group was interacting well and seemed to be relatively comfortable with the new knowledge and the processes.  During the revision session at the end of the day a discussion started regarding vehicle entrapment procedures which had been covered on day 2.  It started like this…”After dinner last night we were talking…and I just wanted to check…”.  Then other voices chimed in. What resulted was a twenty minute discussion on the information initially presented, what had happened during practice and some of the points that had been discussed amongst participants during the week.  The conversation ended with 1 participant stating…”So, if this happens what I’m going to do is…” and others agreeing or putting their own slants on it.

While there is a set procedure to follow in this situation it was fascinating to watch how this group of people had taken that information, interacted and had dialogue with others around it and then created their own meaning from it.

What an opportunity for me, via interacting with others, to confirm my own thoughts and know that what I’ve been applying theoretically in my study of e-learning really does work.  My learnings – to make sure that I do develop future learning programs using a social constructivist approach (it really works).  My next challenge – how do I convey what seems like a “theoretical concept” to my 50 trainers/assessors and help them have their own “aha” moment about their practices.

Yesterday I was approached by a peer from another organisation about his plans for establishing a network of trainers/assessors using social networking software.  The request was made because of my current studies and some discussions we had had on this topic.  My peer had suggested the idea to his colleagues but been soundly dismissed.  This surprised me as I know the group and had thought they were quite innovative in their operations.

This got me to thinking about the group I’ve been observing as part of my studies.  There is a paucity of postings to this community and I had been thinking about what motivates people to contribute and what doesn’t.  Research has shown that it is only 1% of participants in a community who make regular contributions and 90% are lurkers (Nielsen, 2006).  This is similar to some of the change management statistics I’ve seen – 20% early radaptors; 60% move slowly & 20% won’t move.

So – how do we motivate some of the 60% to at least lurk and maybe post?  This is where the social constructivists come in – learning by observing, interacting, creating knowledge.  A community needs to provide appropriate models; build on the participant’s existing level of knowledge; get other “thought leaders” to contribute; have a variety of presentation media; make it interesting; provide rules of conduct/netiquette; have strong facilitation/moderation.  The list goes on. 

But what happens when this occurs and there’s still no response, as in the community I have observed?  What else do we need to do to motivate people to contribute?  While at some point we need to recognise that at some time the lifespan of the community needs to be recognised and the community ended, how do we keep the lifeforce going for sufficient time to allow members to benefit from participation?

I think one possibility is incorporating a change management strategy into the community design – as well as the educational design features.  This will involve overt support all levels of management of an organisation, managers modelling behaviours by contributing to the community and an ongoing promotional campaign for the community.

I have posted Assignment 1.2 – Analysis of a Selected Learning Community.  Click here to view this work.

The Australian Flexible Learning Framework has develeloped a business planning framework to assist people implementing e-learning.  The tool provides a strategic approach and structured guide to the development of flexible learning options.  

One of the tools included is a tutorial on, and template for an  Business case e-learning resource .  The tutorial is clear and concise, covering each part of the busines case and providing some useful tips for its completion.   It is a great tool for people who are new to developing business cases, and as a refresher if you haven’t written one for a while.

There are also a number of useful links from the website to other resources for implementing e-learning. 

Well worth a look and tagging for future reference.

 In my recent meanderings through the wealth of information on e-learning I came across Marc Rosenberg’s “E-Learning Readiness Survey“.According to Rosenberg the questions in the survey “represent some of the most important strategic issues organisations face when transitioning to e-learning.”  While a few years old now, the survey is a useful tool to help people focus their thoughts on implementing e-learning in their organisations and to identify areas of strength and potential weakness in the process.