Jay Cross has posted some further reflections on the Hole in the Wall project that was presented in a keynote speech by Sugata Mitra at Online Educa Berlin two weeks ago. Although the Hole in the Wall has been going for at least 7 years and has been deployed (as Sugata told me privately) extensively not only in various locations within India but also in Africa and Cambodia, confirming the potentially universal application of the results, the deeper findings of the ongoing experiment only came home to me in Berlin, which -- incidentally and somewhat ironically -- perhaps reveals that public presentations by an active speaker in front of a passive audience may occasionally be an effective way of transmitting knowledge. This post can also be read as my personal answer to the Big Question for December, since the Hole in the Wall (HiW) was indeed the most significant revelation of the year for me. It’s always pleasant to see the experimental confirmation of one’s favorite hypotheses (concerning both social learning and e-learning as a resource), but as with all empirical evidence, I’ve discovered in HiW material for extending the original hypotheses and introducing new dimensions (e.g. the organizational, the psychological and the ethical).It seems to me that the fundamental key to the success of HiW is the notion of "self-organized groups" who learn on their own. If education is to become truly non-invasive, as Jay suggests, it must refrain from defining both the goals and the means to reach them, entrusting the groups with this task. If educational gurus (authorities) notice that a group is neglecting what is considered "essential" in the curriculum (for whatever reason, whether it’s basic security, survival or inculcating an existing set of values), the group could be challenged to account for why they may be neglecting a certain topic or reminded of the interest in pursuing it. Respecting the self-organizing group and its decision-making capacity is the sine qua non of success. It also happens to be the absolute opposite of the organizational principles of traditional education and training.It's worth reflecting on how learners in self-organized groups use external resources to solve problems. One of Sugata’s anecdotes in Berlin concerned a girl who was overwhelmed by the exposure to the micro-biology courses in English (a language she had to learn as the medium of instruction). She stole some money from her mother to phone her uncle in Delhi, who she hoped might be able to explain in simple terms what DNA was. His vague and unscientific but nevertheless informative answer gave her the minimum she needed to begin constructing her understanding of the lessons she wanted to explore.In other words, everything one already knows or has access to in the world becomes a potential resource for building rather than simply receiving knowledge, traditionally from a single authoritative source. This is probably also the best answer to Andrew Keen - another keynote speaker in Berlin whose stock-in-trade is lamenting Web 2.0’s loss of the sense of established authority common to traditional education and the Web 1.0 -- because it demonstrates that even sources of knowledge (the uncle) that are not fully reliable can contribute to the construction and refinement of knowledge. Being exposed to a multiplicity of sources and entering into dialogue with them is the best way of evaluating the components of knowledge and understanding relationships between complementary elements. Inevitably such increasingly complex networks of knowledge (and interpretation of existing knowledge) produce a more diversified intellectual culture capable of appreciating value rather than relying on arbitrary criteria, such as university degrees or media-induced standards of celebrity: see for example this interesting article in the LA Times on the Trump University.I expect that within the family (in Indian culture) the mother could forgive her daughter for the theft. It’s worth noticing that in some cultures - and especially within educational institutions -- that theft would not be forgiven and the child would be branded as a real or potential delinquent. It’s the old Jean Valjean problem that our western cultures are still struggling with, where the "rule of law" can easily become a rigid regime of "law and order" and human potential stifled with a vengeance.Sugata told me that his results apply strictly to an age range of 6 to 13. He wouldn't commit to drawing any conclusions about how the findings might apply to older children and even less to adults. It's obvious that a similar experimental setting would be difficult to imagine. But I believe that parallels can be found, that the principles concerning the motivational factors of learning are similar and that, with some imagination in the "learning design", similar results could be produced in adults. The place to begin, of course, is CoPs since what the HiW children effectively did was to build and run their own CoP. And isn't "self-organized group" the best and most succinct definition of a CoP?

Happy New Year! As promised ...The Big Question for January is:What are your Predictions for Learning in 2008?To help you get started, you might want to look back at the posts on last months big question and last year's predictions.December 2007 - What Did You Learn about Learning?December 2006 - Past experiences. Present Challenge. Future Predictions.How to Respond:Please post on your blog or put thoughts in a comment and I'll put a link to your post. You will get bonus points for:Including a link to this post and even better include the Big Question logo.In your comment, provide an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste. For example, Tony Karrer - My Aha Moments in 2007 is great. To do this simply use an anchor tag in your comment.Posts So Far:Manish Mohan Benjamin HamiltonClark Quinn's Learnets: 2008 Predictions for LearningJohn Shaffer - Learning Predictions for 2008Wendy WickamClive ShepardStephanie SandiferJay CrossTony Karrer - Ten Predictions for eLearning in 2008 Karyn RomeisGabe Anderson - "Articulate Will Dominate" in 2008Peter Isackson - InterCultural MusingsSuzana Gutierrez - My prediction (in Portugese)Sergio Lima - here (also in Portuguese)Dan McCarthyKapp Notes: 2008 Predictions, Remembrance and ChallengesOehlert's 2008 PredictionsChristy Tucker: Predictions for E-Learning in 2008G-Cube: US Economy and e-Learning in 2008http://www.soprando.net/ap/previsoes-de-aprendizagem-para-2008

Cammy Bean helped spark and work through the February 2008 Big Question with me.Instructional Design - If, When and How Much?In a bit more detail, the critical question seems to be:For a given project, how do you determine if, when and how much an instructional designer and instructional design is needed?To help you get started, I would recommend looking at some of the thoughts in the following posts:Cammy Bean - The Value of Instructional Designers - Don't Miss the Comments Tony Karrer's Big Question Summary - Significant Work Needed to Help Instructional DesignersThe more that Cammy and I have explored this topic, the more questions we feel we have:What value do we really offer beyond a SME with a tool? How do we distinguish the cases where we are needed?(Reuben Tozman) What skills/knowledge do instructional designers bring to the table that is unique to our profession that other trades do not? Is our value in wielding the latest and greatest rapid development tools? Not if our SME's are using them also? Is it our knowledge of psychometrics when we create assessments? Nope. Is it our writing abilities? Is it our knowledge of communications?Do you think instructional designers should be able to use the tools? Do you think instructional designers should go away and leave the rapid tools to the SMEs?If we want SMEs to use rapid eLearning tools to create content, do they need training in ID? What training?If someone without a background in ID is told to "create this course" - are they doing instructional design? Or is it something different? Is there some kind of range of ID capability? How do you explain the spectrum?How can I really tell if there was good ID work? Could I have done as well by producing something far less?If it takes more to create something "better" - do I really need to do that? How about when up-front knowledge of return on investment is not really known?How is this different in academia vs. corporate.Cammy's thesis - and I agree - is that ID is widely varied. But with that variety comes a big question of the value of ID as compared to a SME with a Wiki or rapid eLearning tool.How to Respond:Please post on your blog or put thoughts in a comment and I'll put a link to your post. You will get bonus points for:Including a link to this post and even better include the Big Question logo.In your comment, provide an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste. In other words - please include an HTML anchor tag in your comment. PLEASE.Posts So Far:Manish Mohan - ongoing discussionsJay Cross - My two cents.Learning Circuit's big question for Feb 2008 Instructional Design ... Instructional Design - If, When and How Much? - My ResponseTony Karrer - Common Sense and Intuition Not EnoughBill BrandonClark Quinn - My $0.05.Benjamin Hamilton - My ThoughtsNicola Avery - mineDonald Clark - On DesignCammy Bean - The Big Question: Instructional Design as SpectrumMick Leyden - Here is my takeMichael Hanley - My Reply: ISD - on the precipice of a crossroads?Anil Mammen - Instructional Design - If, When and ButGeetha Krishnan - responseJack Pierce and I (Tony Karrer) had a recent back and forth around a closely related topic:Online Training vs eLearning : eLearning TechnologySee the commentsw/Mindshare: Juggling eLearning vs Online TrainingVinnie - How much ID do we need?Peter Isackson - my contributionJane Bozarth - When is design done (short, but good ... does it prove itself in her post?)John Shaffer - Is ISD Needed?Malinka Ivanova - Instructional Design as a Building SkeletonGary Hegenbart - Why Bother with Instructional Design?Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyViplav Baxi - My two cents hereManish Gupta -G-Cube: Training - One Fourth Preparation; Three-Fourths TheatreJeffrey Keefer - Silence and VoiceKarl Kapp: We Need a Degree in Instructional DesignKarl has touched off some reaction - see:More on the Digital Curator Formal or Informal Masters for Instructional Designers? Need for ISDers We Need a Degree in Instructional Design Christy Tucker Patterns in Instructional Design ResponsesA tag cloud of the words used in the discussion - fun way to look at it.

Karl Kapp helped me with the March 2008 Big Question which is:What is the Scope of our Responsibility as Learning Professionals?This question comes from several recent experiences. One was a Chief Learning Officer panel discussion where it seemed that supporting informal learning or communities of practice was not something they were considering. There was also discussion on my blog around the fact that in corporations there is a limit to what we can do as a training organization (see Corporate Learning Long Tail and Attention Crisis and Long Tail Learning - Size and Shape). All of this makes me wonder:Do educational institutions and corporate learning & development departments have responsibility for supporting Long Tail Learning? Do they have responsibility for learning beyond what can be delivered through instruction? If so, what is their responsibility? Where is the edge of responsibility?Similarly, does the instructor have a responsibility to help students make sense of or deal with content he or she did not teach the students? In other words, if a student finds information on the Internet or some other place, how much time and attention should the instructor allow for the discussion of such content? Should it be discussed at all if it is non-conventional or generally thought of as not credible or contradicts the instructor? Who determines credible research? Is all non-referred research questionable?Karl and I feel this is an important question for all of us to think about and as a community to begin to address.How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a commentOption 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Designor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyPosts So Far:Karyn Romeis (Karyn's erratic learning journey) - The Big Question for March: Scope of Learning ResponsibilityClive Shepherd - The big question: What is the scope of our respons...Note: Both Karyn and Clive have helped crystallize aspects of the key questions and issues, but my guess is that there is going to be some disagreement with nuances of what they are putting forward. For example, I somewhat take issue with Clive's bottom line:The learning professional can never be 'responsible' for anyone's learning, but they help to create an environment in which learning takes place in every context.Learnlets - Scope of Responsibility.Bill Brantley - Design of Knowledge: How Responsible Are We For LearningJacob McNulty - Scope it OutLearning Revolution: Responsible learningTaruna Goel : The Role and Responsibilities of Learning ProfessionalsIgnatia - Scope of Learning Responsibility: not my concern!Tony Karrer - Learning ResponsibilityBill Brantley - More Thoughts on the Long Tail of LearningJay Cross - When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.Stephen Lahanas - The Learning Enterprise is Everyone's ResponsbilityKarl Kapp - Kapp Notes: Who's Responsible for This?Mick Leyden - Professional Responsibility???Tony Karrer - Learning Objectives, Performance Objectives and Business NeedsMaria Hlas - Who's Job is it Anyway?Nicola - quick thoughtsCatherine Lombardozzi - The Learning Leader's Responsibility at Tony O'DriscollPriya Thiagarajan, Chicken Soup for the MindGeetha Krishnan Scope . . . Responsibility . . . Learning ProfessionalsMichael Hanley. Learning Professionals: the Economists of KnowledgeLimits of Responsibility : Caddickisms

Virginia Yonkers inspired the April 2008 Big Question which is:What would you like to do better as a Learning Professional?Simple question, but I'd expect some interesting answers.How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment. This may be more attractive this month since the answer might be relatively short.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Designor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyPlease note that I will not be moderating roughly from April 5-12 this month. Thus, it may take a while to copy the posts up.Posts So Far: Karyn Romeis said... Here's mine. Shaun said... Another great conversation starter, my 2 cents here Michael Hanley said... Very tough one this month! Here's my "do better" list...Nicola - my 3Malinka Ivanova - The Students' Long TailJeffrey Keefer - What I Hope to Improve as a Learning ProfessionalBenjamin Hamilton - Push BackChristy Tucker - My Goal: Better E-Learning InteractivityStephen Downes - Mine...Great LeadershipDesigned for Learningbetter, not differentWhat Would I Like To Do Better As A Learning Professional?- From, TATA Interactive Systemsthoughts on the question.my list of wishesMy thoughts on the question...Peter Shea Here's my ambitionNot be a production pixieeCube team blog - Do better as learning professionalVirginia YonkersSylvia Currie - My listG-Cube: Putting Learner Back Into LearningJane - A few thoughts ....Natalie - Design for LearningGina's is hereAct LocallyRay Cole - This Month's "Big Question"From Jacob...Learning to be betterSameer Lele What I would like to do better!Also see the comment below for additional thoughts.

Karl Kapp helped me with the May 2008 Big Question which is:Learning design differences for Digital Natives?In other words:Do you believe that we have to design, develop and deliver instruction differently for the so-called Digital Natives? Are there differences in learning expectations and styles or can we just design good instruction and know that it meets all generational needs?If you have an audience that includes natives and immigrants, how can you effectively design instruction without breaking the bank?This has been discussed a bit out there, but I'm not really sure where I stand on it. So, some background reading: Gadgets, Games and Gizmos for Learning BookDigital Natives, Digital ImmigrantsDigital Nativism, Digital Delusions and Digital Deprivation How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below. This may be hard given the complexity of the topic.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - LMSor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - LMS : eLearning TechnologyPosts so far:Karl Kapp-Kapp Notes: Do we really need to design differently for the so called "Digital Natives"?Michael Hanley - Learning design differences for Digital Natives? A Game-changerKevin Jones - Engaged Learning: Learning Design for Digital Natives - Missing The GoldmineKaryn Romeis - here's mine.Kerry McGuire - My thoughts...Clark Quinn - Bugwash!Anil Mammen - Digital Natives and LearningBenjamin Hamilton - my responseWhy must we attach an ethnicity tag to learning?Wendy Wickham - For what it's worth.Taruna Goel - Interesting question. But does the divide exist? My views hereMaria Hlas - Yes, But Not Necessarily Just For Digital NativesGina Minks: The Big Question: Are there learning design differences for Digital Natives?Jack Pierce - The Wall Between Digital Natives And ImmigrantsG-Cube: The ‘Digital’ learning divide - native Vs immigrant

This is the new home of the master list of Big Questions:May 2008 - Learning Design Differences for Digital Natives?April 2008 - Do Better?March 2008 - Scope of Learning Responsibility?February 2008 - Instructional Design - If? When? How much?January 2008 - Predictions for Learning in 2008?December 2007 - What Did You Learn about Learning?2007 September 2007 Where to Work?July 2007: Choosing Tools? June 2007: Where are all the eLearning Examples? May 2007: Powerpoint: What is appropriate? When and Why? April 2007: ILT and Off-the-Shelf Vendors - What Should the Do? March 2007: Supporting New Managers? February 2007: What Questions Should We be Asking? January 2007: Quality vs. Speed 2006 December 2006: Past experiences. Present Challenge. Future Predictions. November 2006: Are our models (ISD, ADDIE, HPT, etc.) relevant in the future?October 2006: Should All Learning Professionals Be Blogging?

This month's question came from a reader the June 2008 Big Question is:Second Life Training?More specifically:In what situations, do you believe it makes sense to develop a learning experience that will be delivered within Second Life? If you were to develop a training island in Second Life, what kind of environment and artifacts would you consider essential for teaching?Just as there are considerable differences in blended learning and virtual classroom training, what are some of the major differences (surprises) in training within virtual worlds?This has been discussed a bit out there, but I'm not that familiar with good sources on this topic, so feel free to provide links to sources. I look forward to seeing responses. How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below. This may be hard given the complexity of the topic.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Designor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyPosts so far (and read comments as well):Clark Quinn - Virtual WorldlySecond Life et alBill Brantley - Using Second Life for Online Classes50 Tips and Tricks to Create a Learning Space in Second LifeMick Leyden - Can we possibly use Second Life?G-Cube - e-Learning and Second Life - How viable is it?Donald Clark - 10 reasons not to use Second Life in learningPeter Isackson -Second Life... compared to what?Tony Karrer - Virtual Language ImmersionKarl Kapp - Immerse Yourself in Another LanguageTony Karrer - Second Life as a Learning ToolVirtual Worlds & LearningTaruna Goel - Catch my views on Second Life and training hereKevin Shadix - Shady Learning BlogKapp Notes: Think Virtual Worlds: Not Second LifeA problem based learning example

I'm trying something a little different this month. I'm taking a bit more of a position in the question (maybe you could even call it a rant). I'm hoping this will spark some discussion ...Karl Fisch - wrote the Edublog post of the year in 2007 with Is It Okay To Be A Technologically Illiterate Teacher? - a wonderful post that concluded with:In the first few years of the 21st century, you can still be successful if you’re technologically illiterate, but it’s getting harder (and those that are literate have many more opportunities available to them). And by the end of the next decade, I think there will be very little chance of success for those that are technology illiterate.In order to teach it, we have to do it. How can we teach this to kids, how can we model it, if we aren’t literate ourselves? You need to experience this, you need to explore right along with your students. You need to experience the tools they’ll be using in the 21st century, developing your own networks in parallel with your students. You need to demonstrate continual learning, lifelong learning - for your students, or you will continue to teach your students how to be successful in an age that no longer exists.Back in March - we asked about the Scope of Learning Responsibility and received a lot of response. Most (if not all) respondents felt that we have fairly broad responsibilities that go beyond formal learning opportunities.So, if we have responsibility for informal learning, social learning, eLearning 2.0, long tail learning, etc. then ...Don't we have to conclude that learning professionals must be literate in these things?If so, then what should learning professionals do to become literate?I personally see this as much bigger. Work Literacy is trying to figure out how knowledge workers can be helped to improve their skills to take advantage of things like social media and new forms of informal learning. This leads me to ...Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?Shouldn't they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?And then shouldn't the learning organization become a driver for the organization?And like in the world of libraries don't we need to market ourselves in this capacity?To me, these are substantial issues facing all learning organizations and workplace learning professionals. It is THE big question today. It represents a shift in responsibility. A revolution in workplace learning. We can't be training organizations. We must become learning organizations. As learning professionals, we must lead the charge by being in front.How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a commentOption 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Designor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyPosts So Far:The Learning Revolution: Where have all the leaders gone?Harold Jarche - Skills 2.0Gina Minks: Adventures in Corporate Education What Competencies do Knowledge Workers Need?Clark Quinn - Learnlets: Lead the Charge?Tony Karrer - eLearning Technology - Learning Professional LeadersKaryn Romeis - Going off half-cockedWendy Wickham - One Project at a TimeStephen Lahanas - Welcome to The RevolutionShilpa Patwardhan: Would you trust a firefighter who did not know how to fight fire?Catherine Lombardozzi - The short answer is yesThe E-Learning Curve - Web 2.0 technologies and learning professionals' opportunities and challengesKerry McGuire - Live and Learn: What's the real question?Kevin Shadix - There's no "I" in "We."Clive Shepherd Christy Tucker - Experiencing E-Learning: Leading by ExampleTony Karrer - Work Literacy - Conscious Performance - Path to ImprovementDeb Gallo - Lead the charge?Jay Cross - No, no, no, no.Taruna Goel - New Work Literacies - Leading the WayTony Karrer - Value of Social MediaPeter Isackson - Phoning it in Geetha Krishnan - The LCB Question BankMark Oehlert - July's Big Question...Tony K and the "Learning Discipline"Kimberly McCollum: The networked nature of informationTony Karrer - Leading Learning and New Skills

Just a quick FYI that due to my vacation, I will not be holding a Big Question in August. See you back in Sept.