We recently passed one year of blogging here at the Electronic Papyrus. We would really appreciate your assistance in helping us assess how we can improve the next year by filling out this short poll. Click the link below to take the poll-it’s very short….Thank you! Click here to take the poll

What could be a more perfect recipe for learning opportunities than the introduction of each new increasingly sophisticated mobile device and the growing numbers of smart phone users worldwide? E-learning developers are clearly eager to apply their ideas and skills in the mobile kitchen and cook up some new mobile innovations. Mobile learning will be increasingly rich, pervasive, and personal, finding its way into nearly every facet of life—any time, any place, anybody, loaded with place-based GPS data and user tags, a new facet of reality augmenting our understanding of our lives and our world. But will mobile learning be fundamentally truly participatory or actually proprietary? Will it be extensible and interoperable, where third-party development extends participation, innovation, and openness; or will it be device dependent, closed systems controlled by proprietary gatekeepers, where "participation" occurs only by the terms set by the device vendors? This essential question, raised by Jonathan Zittrain, Harvard professor and co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, in The Future of the Internet, can and should be asked regarding the future of mobile devices. Zittrain describes the historical progression of computing and network systems—an arc from a proprietary model to a generative or participatory model and back toward a proprietary model. Zittrain starts his story in 1890, when the U.S. government commissioned Herman Hollerith to tally the U.S. Census using a punch card system he had devised. Hollerith’s machine business was a precursor to IBM and a proprietary or vendor-centric generation of computing machines. The key features of a vendor or proprietary system is that the manufacturer determines the specific purpose for its use and designs it so that the user can accomplish that specific use relatively easily and not much more. If the user needs additional functions, they must rely on the vendor to provide upgrades or new equipment, in addition to maintenance. The vendor essentially locks in future business for itself. In many cases, the vendor system works well—a coffee maker does its job, and a typewriter does its. If such a machine breaks, consumers accept that they may need to replace a part from the manufacturer or purchase a new one. The use is discrete enough that being beholden to a vendor does not impact the rest of one’s life (personal) or operations (business). Zittrain then describes a new generative or participatory movement with the rise of personal computers in the 1980s and culminating with the height of the Internet and World Wide Web. The key feature of participatory systems is that the manufacturer doesn’t determine what you will use it for—they leave it up to the user to either develop their own applications or install a variety of applications developed by a spectrum of third-party vendors. The code is open to being altered; anyone can join and use the networks; people can communicate between different types of machines and service providers. The benefits of participatory systems are clear—they encourage innovation and entrepreneurship while supporting the broadest number of users. Open, participatory systems, however, are not always ideal and sometimes not feasible, as Zittrain admits. These systems are vulnerable to security issues, and because people are allowed to tinker, they cannot be relied upon to operate 100% as expected all of the time. In other words, generative, participatory systems allow the world of users to create marvelous, unexpected new applications, but if what you really want is to be assured that your coffee will brew as desired every day, you may be better off with a proprietary machine from a specific vendor. So, what do we want from our mobile devices? What is more important—that they operate consistently for specific purposes, or that we are allowed opportunities for participation and unexpected innovation? If the decision is left to the mobile device manufacturers and service providers, they will choose the proprietary path to the future as that is likely in their best interest. But that may leave mobile learning in the less-than-ideal position of being tethered to the constraints, formats, and fates of the vendors. To consider the impact—imagine if Amazon or Apple or any other company had the power to set requirements for and approve or remove all your current e-learning materials on the Internet, and to take a percentage of the profit for the pieces of your business they did approve? Who’s going to call the shots and make the demands in mobile learning’s future? Are you concerned or complacent? Too excited by all the great potential of these devices to see where the road could lead? What other options do we have?

Ning announced today that it will soon convert existing customers to a fee-for-service subscription or cut them loose. Jason Rosenthal, CEO of Ning, announced the shift in the company’s business model while downsizing his company by more than 40%. The first question for most Ning community owners not willing to pay up is "where do I take my online community of practice now"?  Some suggestions follow. First, what does all this mean for the middle school teacher, educator or e-learning professional whose Ning community has amassed months of content and a band of faithful members? It depends. In terms of the platform, open source options abound and here are a few posts from Blackweb20 and Readwriteweb that offer some ideas: Buddypress (http://www.buddypress.org) Pligg (http://www.pligg.com/) Elgg (http://www.elgg.org/) LovdbyLess (http://lovdbyless.com/) Mixxt (http://www.mixxt.com/) Insoshi ( http://github.com/insoshi/insoshi) Xoops (http://www.xoops.org/) Community Engine (http://www.communityengine.org/) Astrospaces (http://sourceforge.net/projects/astrospaces/) If you were truly smitten by the Ning interface and have a blossoming community of practice, you might have been on the cusp of going with the premium option anyway. It could very well be that Ning’s move benefits you the most as they will hopefully be better positioned to grow revenue in a manner more proportionate to their bottom line. Now the implications…Is this the end of third-party, non-open source solutions or simply the fruition of an unsustainable business model? It’s neither and to some degree both. First of all, Ning is simply a blip in the larger unfolding narrative that is open source versus proprietary software. Ning, like many 3rd party, closed-code platforms or tools doesn’t allow one to peak under the hood or customize beyond surface level aesthetics and basic features. This frustrates some and is perfectly OK with  others. However, like many in the proprietary software camp, Ning has tried to make nice with developers by providing more API (application programming interface) access—think viewing your Netflix queue on a 3rd party Web site or phone app. In all honesty, I’m not surprised by Ning’s decision. I wrote about the challenge of the unsustainable social media business model awhile back when discussing the Facebook phenomenon—Ning is not the first to be forced to make this transition and will not be the last…Twitter alert! Matt Freeman at the Vatornews blog sums it up well with his blog title, "Ning exposes freemium’s underbelly"—indeed. That Ning is neither the end of proprietary platforms nor the poster child of an unsustainable business model is apparent when you realize they will still host sites; their community administrators will simply have to verify the viability of their site against their pocketbook—and this could be a good thing for Ning and everyone else. The perceived failing or success of a single platform can often encourage those on either side of the open versus closed curtain to proclaim victory as Matt Asay at the End of the Road Blog suggests already happened back in September 2009. While Matt’s thoughts on this topic are both sharp and informative, his prediction preceded iTunes’ domination of the digital content world (exaggerated, but do look at the Flurry analytics)—accomplished to a large extent in the wake of seemingly worthy open-source opponents that aren’t putting up much of a fight. Of course, prediction could become prophecy and end-users could stop using proprietary software systems altogether, but many closed software (free and for fee) platforms are landing volleys with progressively more velocity and direction, even in light of ever tightening gatekeeping systems tied to their distribution method, i.e. iTunes, Amazon, etc. The only significant loss (beyond some possible migration time) for those leaving Ning will be if the time spent facilitating the community did not result in a greater understanding around what constitutes and effective virtual community of practice. Anthony Bradley lists six principles of social media collaboration that help unpack the characteristics of healthy virtual communities and works by Etienne Wenger and other pioneers on this topic are a helpful aid in winnowing out the principles from the tools that instantiate virtual communities. Ironically, a colleague and I just presented at a conference on the topic of virtual communities of practice and in an attempt to more clearly understand organizing principles of such communities, we administered a poll to the 433 members of the Ning community. The results from the 88 respondents can be found in the middle of the SlideShare presentation below and are interesting. Web 2.0 Tools, Ning and Online Virtual Communities View more presentations from clabelleosu. So, once you’ve done some evaluation on whether to convert to premium or migrate your community elsewhere, hopefully you’ll take some time to reflect on the underlying principles that have resulted in intended outcomes or positive participant behavior and especially those that did not. As Warren Wiersbe once said (albeit in the context of theology and not software), "Methods are many, principles are few, methods always change, principles never do." Hopefully, regardless of platform, we’ll continue to be more concerned about the underlying principles related to transparency, persistence and other factors that boost community participation, digital or otherwise. Otherwise, we’ll truly be beholden to the upgrade treadmill and software migration paths that are necessary in the open and closed code context.

Learning opportunities are often geared for two main groups: those motivated to take a course, either because it is required or would provide advancement in their career or other practical benefit in their life; and those with a passionate interest in enriching their understanding of a subject or improving their skills in some activity. But what about the third group, those without interest or incentive? Educational sites, geared for interest-based and workforce development learning, are often designed to project a sense of comforting credibility and predictability. E-learning hosts must earn the trust of clients and users, or risk losing them. Wanting to make people feel like they are in the right place, a safe place, is an understandable tendency in online learning. But sometimes a more dramatic behavior change or change in perspective is desired. Sometimes the learner may be too complacent to make the bigger jumps in learning that are necessary. Sometimes the learner could benefit more from an uncomfortable, unpredictable, even disturbing learning experience. Antonin Artaud Consider the ideas of Antonin Artaud (1896-1948), the French writer best known for his concept of the "Theater of Cruelty." Artaud believed that theater should not create comforting entertainment but rather force audiences to question and confront themselves. Is there something to learn here for application to e-learning? Public art has often provided "provocative encounters" for lifelong learners—forcing people to stop and see themselves and the world in a new way. Some artists have even taken the shocking power of their work to extremes that invite criticism and disgust. Marco Evaristti, a Chilean artist working in Denmark, staged an event where he served meatballs made from his own fat that had been removed using liposuction. In another controversial installation, he placed live goldfish in blenders and invited museum visitors to turn on the blenders. Can you imagine the impact on the participants and witnesses? Their views on eating meat, cosmetic surgery, animal cruelty, and the sacredness of life were likely changed more profoundly by this experience than if they had taken a course with traditional online exercises. Certainly they will remember the experience much longer and more vividly. While traditional online educational courses may be well adapted to lead learners toward achieving cognitive learning objectives, unexpected, challenging educational encounters such as those proposed by Artaud and facilitated by Evaristti may have greater potential to fundamentally change the perspectives and behavior of illusive, reluctant audiences. Whether these acts are instructive or destructive can be debated, but they do suggest the rousing potential for educators to shake the assumptions of unwilling learners and force them to confront their reality in a new way. There just may be a time and place for such provocation, possibly in combination with a more conventional curriculum. Can you think of a case where learners would benefit from a strategic encounter with the unexpected?

A recent reference in the New York Times indicates the U.S. Army is close to declaring war on PowerPoint. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who heads U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, told the Times, "It’s dangerous because it can create the illusion of understanding and the illusion of control. Some problems in the world are not bullet-izable." For many, PowerPoint has become "a way of knowing." But is knowledge always best represented by a linear sequence of bullets? Are there alternatives? The concept of a nonlinear presentation tool has been has been around for a while. Rather than lead your audience in a step-like manner, why not give them more control over the sequence of your presentation? If the group is interested in one or two aspects of your presentation, why should you lead them through four or five others? A nonlinear approach gives you the potential to respond to audience needs by altering your presentation to match those needs. With a nonlinear approach, you can assess audience clues, cues, and questions to move the presentation into more fertile and relevant topics. I attended a very effective presentation on nonlinear storytelling that took it a step further and used audience response system clickers to query the audience on which path they wanted to take through the presentation. How do you create a nonlinear presentation? In earlier blogs we have discussed Pachyderm, a nonlinear multimedia authoring tool. This open source web-based application allows a non-programmer to create media-rich flash presentations that incorporate text, graphics, videos, audio, and external links using a simple template-driven approach. Pachyderm is first and foremost a tool for creating interactive presentations for individual viewing on a browser, but if carefully designed, it could be a means to create nonlinear presentations for smaller groups. The newly released version 2.1.1 offers a toggle to increase font size for accessibility issues and could offer a solution for more intimate small group presentations. Buzz has been growing about Prezi, a cloud-based nonlinear presentation design tool that offers a striking new paradigm for creating and delivering presentations. Rather than a linear sequence, Prezi acts more like a Google map of your information, letting you fly over an information landscape at will, zooming in to objects of interest—text, images, videos, links, etc—to pick up additional details. Prezi offers free access to public and educator versions, with 100MB of storage space. Additional features available are for an annual fee. A Prezi map. In my first attempt at using Prezi, I found that I had merely taken a linear presentation and forced it into a nonlinear template. The result was disappointing. The power of Prezi’s nonlinear delivery was lost: zooming into information became just another transition effect linking my fixed linear slides. I realize now that using a tool like Prezi-like Pachyderm-requires rethinking how you plan and organize your thoughts. For example, rather than an outline, create a concept map. Use that to create a map that you can fly over, zooming in to key concepts and media at will, and in any sequence. Here’s a showcase of Prezi examples. One that grabbed me is "The Future of Video" created by Jody Radzik from the Institute for the Future. Note that Microsoft has just completed a beta test for an add-on for PowerPoint called pptPlex that provides similar nonlinear capacity (PC only). Planning a nonlinear presentation using these tools or others will challenge you to rethink how you organize your information, and to just "let go" and give the audience more control over your presentation. I am not dismissing traditional linear presentations with PowerPoint, Keynote, or other tools; I am challenging myself and others to consider an alternative when the topic lends itself to a new, fresh approach. If you give it a try, let us know how it works for you.

Several months back, I posted a comparison of the iPad, iPod and Kindle from the perspective of e-reader functionality. Now, I’d like to provide some input about the iPad relative to what I  see as its true product category: the family room web device. Alas, I’ve already revealed the true nature of my feelings for this iconic tool now that I’ve assigned it to a floor plan and more specifically to a room where one generally relaxes and interacts with content in a more passive manner. Associating the iPad with content consumption as opposed to production is probably not a stretch as I’m guessing that even the most enthusiastic iPad user would concede the device falls short in terms of input. So, I’m hard pressed to imagine the iPad finding its way into the home office when it is obviously so comfortable in the family room. If nothing else, the iPad has generated some interesting discussions around the state of mobile computing. Case in point: I’ve had discussions about the iPad with my barber, my children, colleagues, Luddites and complete strangers. My barber and several strangers have sworn to me in hushed tone that the iPad has ushered in a new wave of accessibility for elderly readers who use the pincher functionality to increase font size on the fly and relieve strained eyes that have suffered under "pinch-less" monitors for years. Forget increasing font size or display size, from their standpoint, "pinch-to-expand" is the new killer feature that will revolutionize modern mobile computing. All of the OSU college students I’ve spoken to about the iPad believe the device is "OK," but not worthy of the cost since most of them already have a mobile phone with Internet access. Hence, the reoccurring statement from many of the student types, "It’s basically a large iPhone." Steve Job’s recent comment that the iPhone came out of development efforts on the iPad reinforces the connection between the two and form factor similarity.  While the lineage of the iPad is established, its utility to the average user is still less clear in my mind. My own view after seeing it for the first time in March was that it was the ultimate family room device—a tablet device that was more robust than a mobile phone and less obtrusive than a laptop, which could fulfill the typical family room computing tasks: web surfing, email, very light word processing and gaming. To test my hypothesis and provide more substance to my barber banter, I brought an iPad home last week and let my wife and two boys (10 and 5) try it out. The iPad was placed into "circulation" alongside of our laptop and my iPhone—the results? My wife found the iPad virtual keyboard a challenge. Many of the educational games my boys play are Flash powered. With no Flash support on the iPad, their interest in the device dropped significantly. The virtual keyboard was also not extremely intuitive for them. These two constraints pushed them back to the laptop until we were able to load some iPad apps. Cogs HD, ACrawler, TM Zero were well designed, but the selection for iPad-formatted content is still somewhat limited and one would be hard pressed to describe the iPad as a true gaming device, especially for a younger audience. Overall, my impression of the iPad changed after this testing period. It was obvious to me that my wife and children prefer using a laptop when at home or tethered to a wireless network. I also found the virtual keyboard a bit tedious and for some reason (even with two right thumbs), felt the iPhone keypad was more intuitive. On the positive side, I found the iPad’s speed impressive. Like the iPhone, the ergonomics in general are sublime and set the bar for other mobile devices. Magazines like Wired are seeing their iPad subscription base close in on their print-based numbers and this might be an indicator of a new growing demographic of well-heeled magazine mavens who will provide needed consumer viability around attempts to coalesce marketing, content and high-end digital manipulatives around a magazine’s brand and readership interests. In short, the iPad may become one of the crucial pieces needed to change one segment of the online reading experience. However, it’s premature to assume examples like Wired suggest a more broad scale adoption of more augmented reality or digitally enhanced subscription-based magazines is feasible or achievable in the near future. A recent post by Advertising Age unpacks some of the magazine specific enhancements found in these examples and the Atlantic also published a telling article entitled "Is the iPad Saving Magazines Yet?" I’m certain that these examples showcase the potential of online magazines and demonstrate some of the pieces we’ll see in the years to come: more integrated video, 3-D models, the inclusion of social media, content formatted more specifically for mobile or tablet devices. In the meantime, our family is perfectly content passing the laptop around the family room and pulling the iPhone out of dad’s pocket when needed.

Tidbits of wisdom for social media as dictated by the stars, planetary alignment, moon phases, and other Earth-bound sources*. Taurus: April 20-May 20. Not a good day to be boring. Express yourself today about what you know, and do it with passion. Don’t think of the facts, but instead think "story". It’s the most powerful media. And follow your bliss today. It’s infectious. Gemini: May 21-June 21. Try not to "push" your content today: celestial bodies indicate that we are in a "pull" market. Cancer: June 22-July 22. Passing along other’s wisdom is something that is best used in moderation. The planets are concerned that you might overuse hashtagging when you are orbiting in the Twittersphere. Leo: July 23-August 22. You are filled with compelling, creative energy today — so create something new that uses your own voice and expands your personal brand. Virgo: August 23-September 22. Be authentic and put your attitude in your stories. Romance-well, let’s say more effective relationships with your audience- will follow! It’s a good time to make new friends, and to expand socially. Libra: September 23-October 23. You are a major trailblazer today, so get out there and create great content that will bring the eyes of the world to your website. Your audacious spirit can make a big difference for you. Scorpio: October 24-November 21. Today looks auspicious for inserting yourself into other people’s online conversations. Build bridges and contacts by being heard regularly. It’s a good time to show off your connectedness and reach for your potential. Sagittarius: November 22-December 21. Express your essence through your blog today, and know that you will be ushering new contacts to your website. Remember that Twitter and Facebook will work to your advantage to bring new relationships to your blog. Capricorn: December 22-January 19. Your creative energies are in alignment, and you should be ready to make the most of it. Create some new inroads with your use of video, audio, as well as the written word. Experiment a little today; but make your choices wisely and follow your strengths. Aquarius: January 20-February 18. Direct your inquisitiveness outward today. Build your online relationships by asking your clients, "What can I do for you?" Remember, the universe is always asking WIIFM? Your energy will attract all sorts of wildly different individuals your way, so you can expect some interesting conversations. Pisces: February 19-March 20. You are in a good position to create an online space that works for your communication. Be bold, and go where your audience is. But be cautious of those who will confuse policies versus best practices as you build your identity. Aries: March 21-April 19. Your lucky numbers are 9,22,42, and 53. Be aware that 42 is particularly important at the cosmic scale. * All the above aphorisms taken with a grain of cosmic salt from the author’s recent interactions at the Association for Communication Excellence (ACE) annual conference in St. Louis, and from a particularly invigorating presentation there by Gary Vaynerchuk discussing his ideas from his book "Crushing It: Why Now Is the Time to Cash In On Your Passion."

Online teaching takes many shapes and isn’t always conventional in form. One of the more compelling online pedagogical approaches is digital storytelling that combines audiovisual elements and focuses on a human interest story. A well-known medium for digital storytelling is the audio slideshow. Audio slideshows have been around for some time and have been used successfully by reporters and online issues of newspapers and journals. I recently accompanied our department’s photographer on a story that seemed to be a solid fit for an audio slideshow. Our objective was to distill a "day in the life" of a group of laborers, referred to as "Hoedads," who spend much of their day traversing difficult terrain in remote areas of Oregon in order to plant saplings. The "office" of the typical Oregonian Hoedad is expansive and oftentimes stunning-lending itself to the visual medium. Their work can be characterized as much by the sounds of their singing, banter and tools as it can by their weather-worn faces. We felt the audio slideshow format would help us highlight these compelling images and couple them with audio accompaniment. While a layer of narrative can be  added to provide context, some of most powerful stories are those that utilize the ambient sounds and highlight the most salient moments of the event with an appropriate photo. In the example below, the "Bagging Up" section is an example of story without narration. Hoedad Audio Slideshow The Basics Audio slideshows combine high quality photographs with "on-the-ground" synchronized audio. The typical audio slideshows display photographs for 7  to 15 seconds (shorter or longer when needed) and often include audio narrative and ambient sounds that help the viewer identify locale and the slideshow character’s mood, activity, and circumstances. The rate of pacing and the integration of audiovisual elements draw the viewer’s attention to significant and discrete moments in the narrative. The overall quality of audio slideshows generally hinges on several elements: appropriate photographs, high-quality audio, a compelling and appropriate narrative, and accessibility, and usability of the end product. This medium can be used to tell various types of stories, but as mentioned, is best suited for human interest stories. Examples of how audio slideshows have been used to tell such stories can be found in many different online versions of newspapers and journals. Some compelling examples come from the New York Times. New York Times: One in eight million New York Times: Choosing to Stay, Fighting to Rebuild (Rebuilding in Haiti) Other current and potential Extension uses of this tool could include: •    Oral history projects •    Short autobiographies •    Brief narratives about a significant location or occurrence •    Stories of individuals overcoming hardship •    Interesting and relatively unknown jobs or industries that highlight individuals (i.e. Hoedad story) Software Used For slideshow: Soundslides Plus, SoundForge or other audio editing tools For website: Dreamweaver, Fireworks, CSS, HTML and some Flash Hardware Used SLR digital camera, high-end flash card microphone, shotgun microphone with windscreen for long-range audio, computer with sufficient speed to process editing tasks.

On a recent flight to Madrid, I sat next to a glassblower from the Portland area and we talked shop. After hours of discussing the intricacies of blowing and shaping glass, I tried to explain to him where my work as an instructional designer and technologist finds overlap with his occupation. I learned that working with glass requires an eye for the artistic and a concern for the technical. Glass can be stretched, colored, tempered and rendered opaque; yielding common tableware or a postmodern work of art. However, for most glassblowers, artistic concerns often take back seat to the exigency of making a living. So, the glassblower’s primary focus on any given day is to create objects that meet customers’ requirements: price, time frame, color, size and other form-related variables that can be manipulated. While cable TV often portrays the art of glassblowing in showy and captivating clips demonstrating dramatic movement of metal rods shaping molten glass, much of the work of the glassblower is in fact invisible to the customer. In fact, much of the behind-the-scenes process has little to do with the act of shaping glass. The more he talked, the more I realized how much instructional design resembles glassblowing. 1. Like glassblowing, instructional design is systematic. According to my glassblower friend, the customer sees the plate, vase or sculpture and marvels at its beauty while grumbling about price. Like instructional design, much of the cost around producing a deliverable is buried in the process of qualifying what approach to use, the audience’s needs, the scope and complexity of the project, ensuring accessibility and usability, and so on. Business maxims about 9 parts planning and one part execution are as true about glassblowing as they are about course design and production. To some, glassblowing might resemble a systems approach to design (Dick and Carey’s model in particular)—interrelated parts working together towards a predefined goal. 2. Glassblowers generally start their project by determining their patron’s constraints. Time, cost and complexity are most frequently the core considerations that define project specifics. If nothing else, these factors help keep the utility of the produced item at the forefront, prevent scope creep, and help establish project expectations early in the process. While there are glassblowers who spend more of their time creating art, this is the exception in the industry, and for most, constitutes a small portion of time on the job compared to those projects that allow one to pay the bills. Instructional designers also live in a world where constraints matter. Does a customer bring $300 or $300,000 to the project? Do they need it next week or next year? Is the course one hour long or one hundred hours long? Many businesses over the last decade have utilized e-learning as a means to cut costs of travel and this factor also feeds into a systems-based approach to instructional design. Are high-level stakeholders primarily motivated by cost cutting or by instructional concerns? The reality is that both viewpoints tug on a project and help shape its limits, tone, and utility. 3. Glassblowing is technical. Sketching, painting, shaping clay are artistic expressions that are generally accessible to the novice, albeit there are technical aspects found in each art form. Blowing glass requires access to a furnace and knowledge of how to inflate molten glass into shapes that depend on the molten glass viscosity. In short, the skill of the gaffer or glassmith is one that demands attention to the technical. Instructional designers must also be intimately familiar with how the various parts of a course fit together: process, production, editing, evaluation, distribution—and competency in each area should be developed enough to allow one to complete each step of the process with little or no assistance when the project demands it. And so, it might be fair to say that both the glassblower and the instructional designer are misunderstood: The glassblower does inflate molten glass and the instructional designer does design. But, both share a title that captures only a single piece of their occupational focus. There is tremendous variety in what defines a glassblower. Some work in factories, others for cable TV. Some craft art and others are all about utility. At the end of the day, process and technical considerations are what all glassblowers have in common. While my new-found glassblower friend might find my analogy full of hot air, I still think back to our shared conversation and see the similarities between the life of the glassblower and the instructional designer. Like glassblowing, instructional design is both a science and an art. Moore, Bates and Grundlind  believe that instructional design is both a science and an art (2002): "a science because it is rooted in learning theories and an art because the designing of instructional materials is a highly creative process." Dick, Walter, and Carey, Lou. (1990). The systematic design of instruction. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown Higher Education. Moore, Dermot, Bates, Annemarie, and Grundling, Jean. (2002). Instructional design. In Mishra, Arun K. and Bartram, John (Ed.) Skills development through distance education [on-line]. Available: http://www.col.org/skills/.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.] In our first video blog, EP Blogger Jeff Hino offers some tips for creating ear-friendly podcasts.