Dear President Obama,You're a technophile I have heard. So, I have an improvement to suggest for the FDA, particularly how it deals with food-safety issues.Here's what the FDA does now.In the age of web technology, the FDA's methodology is just plain laughable.I propose a webpage with a database that would enable citizens to submit food-safety alerts.This should be damn simple. The post office has a list of all addresses in the country. Why can't the FDA create a list of all foods sold in the U.S. plus a list of all food sellers (grocery stores, restaurants, etc.). Consumers who suspect they have some bad food could go online and within a few clicks select their product and where they bought it from. They could describe the issue, etc.In the background, the system would monitor products for unusual activities (larger than normal number of alerts) and create an alerting response when something looks wrong.If the FDA doesn't have the wherewithal to design and create such a system. I would be glad to take this on with my strategic partner Centrax Corporation (they build high-premium e-learning and web programs and could whip this up no problem). Seriously, the FDA could save lives very simply and at a relatively low cost. Let's just do it.Thank you Mr. President for considering this.Please let me know what I'm supposed to do with the yogurt in my refrigerator that tastes bad. If you think I'm going to call one of those numbers, you just don't get it. --A worried citizen/consumerUpdate Thursday April 16thYesterday I decided I should make those calls. I called the yogurt manufacturer and went to their website and I called my regional FDA hotline person (who called me back today, a day later). Stoneyfield Farm has posted the following recall information (their phone complaint line was horribly implemented with long wait times and no one has gotten back to me from their online complaint system):Londonderry, NH - April 3, 2009 Stonyfield Farm is conducting a voluntary recall of Fat Free Plain Quarts in Stonyfield Farm branded containers limited to specific dates. The products are being recalled because they may contain a presence of food grade sanitizer. Affected products are limited to Stonyfield Farm 32 ounce Fat Free Plain yogurt UPC # 52159 00006 carrying one of the following product codes printed along the cup bottom that start with the following date codes: · May 06 09 Time stamped 22:17 thru 23:59 (limited to these specific time stamps only) · May 07 09 All time stamps Approximately 44,000 quarts were distributed to retail accounts nationally. We have received several reports of people noticing an off-taste when eating the product. We have received no reports of illness of any kind after consuming the product. The issue was a result of human error in not following our Company's standard operating procedures. Stonyfield has taken all the necessary corrective action to prevent this from occurring again. Consumers are advised not to consume the product and to return opened and unopened containers to the store where it was purchased. Anyone returning these products will be reimbursed for the full value of their purchase. Customers with questions should contact Stonyfield Farm Consumer Relations at 1-800-Pro-Cows (776-2697) or visit our website at www.stonyfield.com.This is listed on their website when I checked today. I didn't notice it yesterday (they have a very busy home page), but it probably was there.Note to Stonyfield Farm: I am not satisfied with your announcement stating, "We have received several reports of people noticing an off-taste when eating the product. We have received no reports of illness of any kind after consuming the product." THAT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH!! You should (1) tell us what we ingested, (2) get health experts to provide us with some expert guidance on what symptoms or dangers we might be subject to. More:I just called Stonyfield Farm Consumer Hotline again (and actually got through to them today) and the guy said it was a Food-Grade Sanitizer, FDA approved, organic, etc. He told me ingesting it wouldn't hurt me, but I'm not convinced. I told him I wanted to know what it was I ingested. He wouldn't or couldn't tell me. I asked him if I ate a whole container whether it would hurt me...He said no.Hey Stonyfield. You can do better...

For years I've been compiling research from preeminent refereed journals that shows, time and time again, that aligning the learning and on-the-job performance context is key in supporting long-term remembering. Now, I continue by focusing on cultural and linguistic context.  Read the research report.Here are the major recommendations: Utilize decision-making scenarios. Consider using them not just in a minor role—for example at the end of a section—but integrated into the main narrative of your learning design. Figure out what the salient cues will be in the workplace situations that your learners will face in utilizing the content you are conveying. As much as possible, simulate those cues in your decision scenarios. Consider using multimedia to augment this effect, relying on excellent acting, directing, and set design to enable the context effects that will trigger remembering. In simulating workplace cues, consider the range of cues that your learners will pay attention to in their work, including background objects, people and their facial expressions, language cues, and cultural referents. Determine the most important points you want to get across AND the most important situations in which these points are critical. Then, provide extra repetitions spaced over time on these key points and situations. Utilize culturally-appropriate objects, backgrounds, actors, and narrators in creating your scenarios. Consider not just ethnicity, but the many aspects of culture, including such things as socio-economics, education, international experience, immersion in popular culture, age, etc. Pilot test new designs using valid evaluation methods to determine the most effective designs for your learners, your workplace situations, and your learning points.

Tonight at the ISPI conference in Orlando, I attended a tribute to Geary Rummler, who recently died after a long and distinguished career in the "Performance-Improvement Field."I didn’t know Geary, so I didn’t know how I would react or how long I would stay. I brought my laptop to do emails while I listened. I sat in the back of the cavernous ballroom. I became transfixed as speaker after speaker who had worked closely with Geary talked about his work and the contributions he made to the field.The following is my stream of consciousness note-taking with some later annotations. Not worthy of a tribute, but perhaps enough to help me remember some of Geary’s work—and perhaps enough to encourage YOU to take a look at his books and writings.Notes and AnnotationsEntrepreneurial experimentation. Science and sweat. Learning through trial and error. Creating one-week program on programmed instruction. Didn’t have time to tell, to present objectives, etc. Showed them, had them practice. Curiosity, interested in what did NOT work, not just what DID work. Pre-Testing then Programmed Instruction then Maintenance of Behavior. Annotation: Even way back in the 1960’s and 1970’s someone was thinking about maintaining performance after training, and we are still struggling to get most of the field to do this.After the initial workshop was developed and deployed, then Management of Behavior Change Workshop. Then General Systems theory workshop. Started small and specific—built up to systems.During 1960’s Geary and colleagues wouldn’t do training without a thorough front-end needs analysis.  Annotation: Hmmm. With today’s pressures, many are eschewing FEA. Geary rebuffed a man who insulted one of his woman colleagues by telling him, "Shut up, she knows more than you do." Praxis (a Geary company) had a mission (we didn’t earn that much money speaker said)—to make the world a better place by improving the place where people worked. Annotation:One of Geary’s former colleagues sang a song in tribute (a tear-inducing moment). Geary was an engineer. Geary worked with Tom Gilbert. Helped plan Motorola University. Did coaching of functional managers of manufacturing curriculum. One of nice things about Geary is that as a consultant as he learned—he would even tell about the mistakes he made. Quote from Geary (paraphrased): "Beware of false prophets, the HR people, who would rank and rate you, but don’t really understand the organization."Article: "You want performance, not just training."Did Situation analysis. Asked these questions: (1) What is happening now? (2) What should be happening?, THEN Define desired outputs. "As-is" "To-Be"This all become six-sigma, etc. Annotation: Several people said Geary’s work became basis for the Six-Sigma movement, TQM, etc.Geary said: You’ve got a lot of white space on the org chart you need to manage.Annotation: People like Geary and his colleagues have been doing very valuable stuff for years (For example, they got cycle time from 17 weeks to 5 days), but why hasn’t this spread? Why hasn’t this performance-based approach gradually knocked-out the dominant training-based approach?Rummler stuff got repackaged into 6-sigma stuff. Motorola bought license from Geary Rummler’s stuff into 6-sigma and TQM.Geary’s true legacy: Changed the lens we all look through, moving from training to performance improvement. Provided a common language: White space, disconnects, organization as a system, cross-functional processes. Geary Rummler: Managing the whitespace: Performance Design Lab (Came out of retirement and started/joined this company).Geary retired, but had to come back and knew the world didn’t get it and had to get back in the game, forming Performance Design Lab in 2000, where they were focusing on performance management systems (maintaining  improvement after the performance improvement).Serious Performance Consulting. A Geary Book.Geary always had to have a vehicle for packaging  his insights into his workshops and his books in ways that would make sense for people.A speaker said, "He believed that it could be possible to create a prosperous society by construction a good system that will hold successful organizations and generate superior results."Two places that Geary touched, who seem to want to use Geary’s work to improve the world. Performance Improvement Institute in Cd. Obregon. Sonora Inst of Tehcnol and norwest of Mexico.Geary Quote: "We cannot continue working the way we are expecting to get different results."Speaker quote (paraphrased): "Geary would share his materials more than anyone I know, I think because he was a learner, he wanted us all to know enough so that he could  discuss with us and we could learn together."Drinking alcohol and developing relationships with good discussions was a recurring theme. Many stories about drinks being drunk."If you put a good performer in a bad system the system wins every time." Quote from Geary Rummler.One speaker, quieted by tears, haltingly spoke about imagining Geary becoming a star in the sky…Annotation: I really didn’t know that much about Geary’s work, but now I am motivated to learn more. Also, I’m glad I went because it gave me nice perspective on the field, even knowing that this "history" was filtered through the lens of tribute protocol. Bottom line: I was touched and I’m motivated to learn more. Thanks to ISPI for providing this, for all the speakers (who I apologize for failing to capture their names), and for all the people who came to Orlando especially for the tribute.Here are two of Geary's most popular books:

I got an email today from someone asking me about a term I created called "Evaluation Objectives." I realize that I have not actually written anything for public consumption on this, SO this blog post will suffice until my book on workplace learning is released. Apologies if the following is not completely clear.The basic idea is that we ought to have evaluation objectives rather than learning objectives in the traditional sense. Specifically, we need to decouple our learning objectives from our evaluation objectives so that what we evaluate is directly relevant. Of course our evaluation objectives and learning objectives have to be linked, but not necessarily with a one-on-one correspondence.   AN EXAMPLE Suppose you want to train managers to be better at championing change efforts. Traditionally, we might have objectives like: The learner will be able to describe how people tend to resist change. Or, put in a more performance-oriented fashion, a traditional objective might read: The learner will engage in activities that lessen colleagues' resistance to change. Examples of evaluation objectives might be as follows: 1. The learner will initiate a change effort within one month after the training ends and be successful in getting 75% of his/her colleagues to sign a public statement of support for the effort. OR, if real-world compliance cannot be assessed, an evaluation objective might be something like: 2. In the "Change-Management Simulation" the learner will score 65 points out of a total possible of 90. OR, if a simulated performance can't be created, an evaluation objective might focus on ratings by employees. 3. Two months after the training ends, the learners' colleagues will rate them on average at least 4.5 (of 6 levels) on the multi-rater 360-degree change-management scale on each of the 5 indices. OR, if this can't be done, an evaluation objective might focus on a series of scenario-based questions. 4. On the 20-question scenario-based quiz on change management given two weeks after the course ended, the learner will get at least 17 correct. NOTE: More than one evaluation objective can be used for any learning intervention. THE POINT: Evaluation objectives are NOT tied to individual learning points that have to be learned, though of course they are linked because both should be relevant to the overarching goals of the learning program. THE BIG BENEFIT: When objectives focus on the big picture, as compared to when there is a one-to-one correspondence between learning objectives and evaluation items, (1) they are more relevant, (2) the learners are more likely to see them as valuable and worth achieving, (3) organization stakeholders are more likely to see the evaluation results as having face validity, (4) the evaluation results will give us additional pertinent information on how to improve our learning interventions.   Anyway, I'm going to cover this in more detail in the book I'm working on, but for now, that's what evaluation objectives are all about.

Just came across this presentation by John Karlin, who worked at Bell Labs back in the mid 1900's, and found it fascinating. This was the guy who created the "Karlin dot" on rotary phones and helped people dial the phone. The dot gave dialers a spot to aim their finger at, increasing dialing speed (which if you remember rotary phones, was very important, especially if the number had lots of 7's, 8's, and 9's).Interestingly, now the behavioral economists with their etched flies in urinals think they invented this idea. Check out John Karlin's speech from 2003. On paper he's an engaging fellow.

Here are some purchasing support tools you can use:Buying wine imported to the US? Slate Magazine GuideRead accompanying article: Slate Magazine ArticleBuying cosmetics and want to avoid toxins: Environmental Working Group Cosmetics Buying vegetables and want to avoid pesticides: Environmental Working Group PesticidesAlso download an iPhone App: Environmental Working Group Pesticide iPhone Anybody know of others?I was at a conference recently and somebody gave me a job aid the size of an employee security card. Too detailed, but potentially a great idea.What other workplace performance job aids and performance supports have you seen?Another tool in our toolbox.

It has been my pleasure and privilege to co-teach several learning measurement workshops with Dr. Roy Pollock, and to follow the important work that he and his colleagues have done at The Fort Hill Company over the years. I acknowledged their work by awarding Cal Wick, Fort Hill's Founding Father, the Neon Elephant Award back in 2006. I've also reviewed their ground-breaking book, The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning, and have recently reviewed their new book, Getting Your Money's Worth from Training and Development. Now, I have captured Roy in a video interview, that I think you'll enjoy and learn from. You can purchase the book by clicking on the Amazon.com link below: Again, I highly recommend the book. Read my book review to see how much.

Back in the early 1990's I was involved in a project which we ended up calling the Classroom, Inc. project. It was a joint venture between Teachers College, Columbia University (where I was a doctoral student); Morgan Stanley, the Mariposa Foundation led by Morgan Stanley's COO Lewis Bernard, and the New York City Public Schools. The project was designed to help at-risk kids in Brooklyn learn about business and to empower them to think like business leaders. It was a great project and has blossomed into a full not-for-profit organization that continues to do great work---taking it way beyond what we were able to do. I was the project leader on the learning-development simulation-development side of the project. We built two computer-based simulations and accompanying learning materials. The programming wizard and educational technology guru on the project was Hilary Wilder, who played many other roles as well. It has been a pleasure to see her career unfold over the years since then. Recently Hilary won a Fulbright scholarship to do educational technology work in Namibia, where she has been involved for years. WP Perspective, a publication of William Paterson University, where Dr. Wilder is an Associate Professor, published the following article about Hilary's Fulbright. I couldn't be more proud. Congratulations Hilary!! Hilary Wilder, associate professor in the educational leadership and professional studies department, has been named a Fulbright Scholar for the spring 2010 semester. She will be lecturing and conducting research at the University of Namibia (UNAM). The university, with an enrollment of 10,000 students, is the sparsely populated, African country’s only comprehensive four-year institution of higher education. Wilder will also be establishing Namibia’s first and only master’s program in educational technology, her area of expertise. "The people of Namibia are very open to new ideas," Wilder says. "I’m really excited about the opportunity to develop an educational technology master’s degree program, in a country which so desperately needs it. I’m hoping this program will help create a solid cadre of local expertise in educational technology." Her work dovetails with a national development plan established by the Namibian government called Vision 2030, which calls for a shift to a knowledge-based economy by 2030. "Before independence in 1990, Namibia’s education system was based on apartheid practices and the majority of its children were taught through low-level rote-learning, often in rural bush schools with no resources. Today they are eager to move forward and ensure that their children will be successful and productive twenty-first century global citizens. The government, private sector, non-governmental organizations and international organizations such as the World Bank are all committed to making this happen" she says. Wilder will be working with teachers who will go on to become educational technology experts in their schools— helping their peers integrate technology literacy into the curriculum and their teaching. "There will be a trickle-down effect," Wilder says. "My students will learn the technology integration skills, and take that back to their fellow teachers. The idea is that by 2030 the students who are then taught by those teachers will have acquired the technological literacy skills necessary to be a part of the knowledge-based economy."    WP Perspectives, Vol.7 No. 1 April 2009, p. 7One of the things that sets Hilary apart is that she is able to bring together a background in learning and educational theory and research (as a graduate of both Teachers College Columbia AND Harvard schools of education) WHILE at the same time bringing practical wisdom to her work (with her real-world experience as programmer, instructional designer, and educational technology specialist). The ability to bridge the theory/research side and the practice side is fundamental to making on-the-ground improvement in the learning field. We can all aspire to follow Hilary's path.

FINAL DAYS TO REGISTER FOR MAY 27th SKILLCAST! Featured Presenters: Anne Marie Laures, CPT and Will Thalheimer, PhD "Is Your Learning Organization Healthy?"   Wednesday, May 27, 2009 1:00 pm ET/10:00 am PT (60 Minute Session) --  Is Your Learning Organization Healthy? How to Audit Your Learning Function and Create a Plan for Improvement Anne Marie Laures, CPT, Director, Learning Services, Walgreens Company and Will Thalheimer, PhD, President, Work-Learning Research This session will describe how a large, geographically-dispersed organization conducted a learning audit to determine the state of their learning function, the recommendations based on the audit, and the plan for changes. As a result of this session, participants will: Gain ideas and tips for conducting a learning audit Gain new ideas for using field expertise to support learning and career development Learn to blend formal learning strategies to informal learning opportunities Anne Marie Laures, CPT, is Director of Learning Services, which has been a repeated winner of ISPI's outstanding instructional and non-instructional awards. She has been responsible for supporting Walgreens' learning function within the company's corporate and operating divisions for over 30 years. She was a member of the group that designed the Certified Performance Technology (CPT) certification. She has presented at the annual conference 3 times and was invited to do an Encore Presentation at ISPI's 2005 conference in Vancouver.  Will Thalheimer, PhD is a learning-and-performance consultant and researcher who specializes in helping clients build world-class learning interventions. Dr. Thalheimer has worked in the field since 1985 as an instructional designer, simulation architect, project manager, trainer, and consultant. He founded Work-Learning Research in 1998 to provide research-based consulting services, workshops, and learning audits. Will speaks regularly, often receiving "best session of the conference" evaluations. His research-to-practice papers lead the industry with information backed by research and vetted with practical wisdom. Will Thalheimer has been invited twice to do Encore Presentations at ISPI's annual conference. Register Today by clicking here!! Designed to enhance the skills and knowledge of the Performance Improvement Professional, each month ISPI will feature the latest thinking from the experts you rely on for your continued professional development. In just one hour, you'll come away with new ideas, perspectives, and tools that you can put to work immediately. Put your focus on your own results, for a change, and join a SkillCast! ISPI Members:  $29 per SkillCast Non-Members:  $69 per SkillCast

If you work in the workplace learning-and-performance field, one of your jobs is to ensure that employees are maximizing their cognitive performance, their decision making, and their overall work output. If people's cognitive abilities decreased with age, that would be a problem. More importantly, if we can improve our employee's cognitive abilities, we have a responsibility to do just that. The benefits will accrue to our organizations and to our employees too (and probably then to their families and society at large).This begs the following questions then: "Is there research in refereed scientific journals that provides evidence for cognitive decline as people age?" "Is there research in refereed scientific journals that provides evidence that we can help improve people's cognitive abilities as they age?" I've created a short 4-item quiz for you to test your knowledge in this area. Take the quiz. When you are done it will return you directly to this blog post (is that cool or what)?Take the Quiz. Test your Knowledge of Aging's Effect on Cognitive Ability.Click here to take the quizThe quiz is based on an article by Christopher Hertzog, Arthur F. Kramer, Robert S. Wilson, and Ulman Lindenberger.HEY, what are you doing? Go take the quiz first. There's research to show that the sort of questions I ask in the quiz will actually help you remember this topic. Doh!The article by Hertzog, Kramer, Wilson, and Lindenberger is in Volume 9—Number 1 in the refereed scientific journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest that was just published in 2009. The title of the article is: Enrichment Effects on Adult Cognitive Development Can the Functional Capacity of Older Adults Be Preserved and Enhanced?HEY, really. Go take the quiz first!!Both of my parents (75+) are doing everything right according to the article.Findings:Cognitive ability does tend to decline with age. See graph from the article: But notice that though AVERAGE cognitive ability declines there are wide ranges. And since I'm 51 years old as I write this, I'd like you to note that maximum cognitive performance seems highest near 50 years of age. Can Cognitive Ability be Improved?Yes, these researchers conclude that it can. Although they admit that more research is needed. What Can Improve Cognitive Ability?Well, they didn't look at everything that might impact cognitive ability, so we don't have a clear picture yet.They highlighted the strongest findings in their conclusion: "The literature is far from definitive, which is no surprise given the inherent difficulties in empirically testing the enrichment hypothesis. However, we believe there is a strong and sound empirical basis for arguing that a variety of factors, including engaging in intellectually and mentally stimulating activities, both (a) slow rates of cognitive aging and (b) enhance levels of cognitive functioning in later life." p. 41"What is most impressive to us is the evidence demonstrating benefits of aerobic physical exercise on cognitive functioning in older adults. Such a conclusion would have been controversial in the not-too-distant past, but the evidence that has accumulated since 2000 from both human and animal studies argues overwhelmingly that aerobic exercise enhances cognitive function in older adults. The hypothesis of exercise-induced cognitive-enrichment effects is supported by longitudinal studies of predictors of cognitive decline and incidence of dementia, but also by short-term intervention studies in human and animal populations. The exercise-intervention work suggest relatively general cognitive benefits of aerobic exercise but indicates that cognitive tasks that require executive functioning, working memory, and attentional control are most likely to benefit." p. 41They also noted some other more-tentative findings:"...these data support the idea that a higher level of social engagement is related to a reduced risk of cognitive decline and dementia in old age. The basis of the association is not well understood, however." p. 33"...these data suggest that chronic psychological distress may contribute to late-life loss of cognition by causing neurodeteriorative changes in portions of the limbic system that help regulate affect and cognition, changes that do not leave a pathologic footprint (e.g., dendritic atrophy) or whose pathology is not recognizable with currently available methods. These changes, when extreme, might actually be sufficient to cause dementia, but it is more likely that they contribute to cognitive impairment and thereby increase the likelihood that other common age-related neuropathologies are clinically expressed as dementia" p. 36"...in observational studies that examine more than one lifestyle factor, cognitive activities appear to be the strongest predictor of cognitive change. However, this could be the result of several factors, including the following: (a) Rarely are physical activities characterized in terms of intensity, frequency, and duration; (b) the period across which activities are assessed has been different for cognitive and physical activities; (c) with one exception, activities have been treated as unidimensional in nature. Clearly, these issues require additional consideration in future studies." p. 39They also offer a word of caution about software programs that are marketed as ways to improve cognitive ability:"The majority of software programs marketed as enhancing cognition or brain function lack supporting empirical evidence for training and transfer effects. Clearly, there is a need to introduce standards of good practice in this area. Software developers should be urged to report the reliability and validity of the trained tasks, the magnitude of training effects, the scope and maintenance of transfer to untrained tasks, and the population to which effects are likely to generalize. Arriving at thisinformation requires experiments with random assignment to treatment and control groups, and an adequate sample description. Just as the pharmaceutical industry is required to show benefit and provide evidence regarding potential side effects, companies marketing cognitive-enhancement products should be required to provide empirical evidence of product effectiveness." p.48So, to answer the quiz questions:1. What happens to most people's cognitive abilities as they age from 50 years onward? Answer: Declines with age.2. Is there valid research evidence from scientific refereed journals that suggests that people can improve their cognitive outcomes by engaging in certain activities? Answer: Solid evidence, but still some controversy.3. Which of the following have been shown to improve cognitive ability as people age. Answer: The article didn't cover all the territory, but the strongest evidence is for (1) mentally and intellectually challenging activities and (2) aerobic physical activity.4. Imagine that you work for a company that consists of a substantial number of workers over the age of 50. If you had a set budget to spend to improve their cognitive functioning, which of the following investments would garner the greatest results? Answer: Well, the research review does NOT compare the differences between (1) mentally challenging activities, (2) aerobic exercise, and (3) social engagement. However, see their overall conclusion below, which suggests that intellectual engagement and physically activity are key.Their overall conclusion:"We conclude that, on balance, the available evidence favors the hypothesis that maintaining an intellectually engaged and physically active lifestyle promotes successful cognitive aging." p.1More research on benefits of exercise:"Unlike the literature on an active lifestyle, there is already an impressive array of work with humans and animal populations showing that exercise interventions have substantial benefitsfor cognitive function, particularly for aspects of fluid intelligence and executive function. Recent neuroscience research on this topic indicates that exercise has substantial effects on brain morphology and function, representing a plausible brain substrate for the observed effects of aerobic exercise and other activities on cognition." p. 1They cite the potential for training interventions: "...cognitive-training studies have demonstrated that older adults can improve cognitive functioning when provided with intensive training in strategies that promote thinking and remembering. The early training literature suggested little transfer of function from specifically trained skills to new cognitive tasks; learning was highly specific to the cognitive processes targeted by training. Recently, however, a new generation of studies suggests that providing structured experience in situations demanding executive coordination of skills—such as complex video games, task-switching paradigms, and divided attention tasks—train strategic control over cognition that does show transfer to different task environments. These studies suggest that there is considerable reserve potential in older adults’ cognition that can be enhanced through training." p. 1But they offer a warning against one-shot interventions:"There is no magic pill or no one-shot vaccine that inoculates the individual against the possibility of cognitive decline in old age. As noted earlier, participation in intervention programs is unlikely to affect long-term outcomes unless the relevant behaviors are continued over time." p. 47 What do we have to do?Well, if we take our job seriously, we ought to heed the research. We can improve our fellow employees cognitive abilities as they age, so we ought to figure out how we might support that. I certainly haven't got this nailed but if your company is interested, I think it would be fascinating to see what we might do.

In 2006, I reviewed the research on the spacing effect and published a research-to-practice report, Spacing Learning Over Time: What the Research Says...Since then I have been buoyed by the enthusiastic response to that report and by the changes that it  engendered. More training and e-learning has been built using spacing and more and more learning software has been built that incorporates the spacing effect as an inherent part of its design. If I died today, I would at least know that I'd made a small difference in our field.Examples WantedI am working on an updated version of the report to include the latest research and new examples.If you know of any examples of the use of spacing effect, please let me know. Send me demo links or disks so that I can see for myself how the spacing effect has been used. Or, just write me an email.Testimonials WantedAlso, if you read the original version and want to write a short testimonial about how it changed the way you build learning, that would be awesome. Just write me an email.One Product Example: A Cameo AppearanceJust to get your juices flowing, check out this YouTube Video produced by a company who built a product with the spacing effect in mind, Yukon Learning. Yukon has built a very nice tool to support learning using the spacing effect. The product name is Cameo and the link below will take you to the Cameo website.You can check out Cameo at this website.

This article in Slate suggests that new fonts are coming to the web.This opens up new territory for web designers and perhaps e-learning designers as well. Many e-learning designers think of web design as the default design for e-learning. Maybe the new web will usher in a new era of e-learning design as well.One thing to watch out for: Do you or your team have the aesthetic training/empathy to know how to use fonts to set a mood, convey a meaning? Ahhh, something more to build.

It has been over three years since I offered $1,000 to anyone who could demonstrate that utilizing learning styles improved learning outcomes. Click here for the original challenge. So far, no one has even come close. For all the talk about learning styles over the last 15 years, we might expect that I was at risk of quickly losing my money. Let me be clear, my argument is not that people don't have different learning styles, learning preferences, or learning skills. My argument is that for real-world instructional-development situations, learning styles is an ineffective and inefficient waste of resources that is unlikely to produce meaningful results. Let me leave you with the original challenge: "Can an e-learning program that utilizes learning-style information outperform an e-learning program that doesn't utilize such information by 10% or more on a realistic test of learning, even it is allowed to cost up to twice as much to build?" The challenge is still on.

Randy Olson has written a book to help scientists communicate better. He argues that scientists need to do a number of things to better connect with their audience--especially their lay audience (their non-scientific audience). That they need to take their complicated information and make it understandable to real people. Isn't that what we do as instructional designers? Yes, so maybe we have something to learn from his messages. You can check out a radio interview below. You can check out a blurb from his book below (scroll down when you get there). www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113832764 You can buy the book at Amazon:

If social cognition comes down to just two dimensions, Warmth and Competence, might our learners also rely on these two categories in deciding how much to engage in our learning interventions? AND, if so, do we need to ensure that all our learning events exude both warmth and competence?I got thinking about this while reading a review of Susan Fiske's keynote for the Association for Psychological Sciences. Susan Fiske, who was awarded the 2009 William James Fellow Award, is one of the world's leading social psychologists, often working with Shelley E. Taylor. As Jesse Erwin's review states, "...after years of research, it looks like social cognition [how we make decisions about other people] can be boiled down into judgments of two key elements: warmth and competence."As Erwin suggests, we might imagine this in a 2x2 matrix (my drawing): Boiling it down to two dimensions might have provided evolutionary value in that people often had to make quick decisions about who to trust, who to partner with, etc. Having a simple framework might have allowed quick decision making, enabling survival. If human beings are programmed to think in this way, might this programming affect learning? Certainly, learners evaluate trainers in the same way they evaluate other humans. When I was a young leadership trainer, I learned how to emphasize my credibility in a stealthy way so as not to appear as if I was bragging. I upped my credibility without lowering my warmth factor. Good trainers boost their warmth index by appropriately using humor, telling stories, exuding respect for learners, listening, giving others a chance to speak, etc. Good trainers emphasize their credibility by surreptitiously mentioning their experiences, citing clients they've worked with, having great content, citing research, being organized, etc. Clearly, we ought to design facilitated training with warmth and competence in mind.But what about non-facilitated learning interventions like CBT's, asynchronous e-learning programs, etc.? I think warmth and competence play a central role there as well. One of the biggest e-learning mistakes is to forget to focus on the warmth dimension. Off the cuff, I would estimate that 95% of all e-learning programs are almost completely devoid of humanity. They lack a human connection. Research lends support here as well. A more personalized writing style (using the second person instead of the third person for example) has been shown to improve learning engagement and results. Using people-based learning guides (a talking head, an avatar, etc.) has been found to improve learning for some learners. The secret here is that the learning guide can't be seen as goofy or too game-like, hey, because that reduces credibility!!Based on reviewing lots of e-learning programs, here's some quick advice on ensuring more warmth: Write in a personalize style Don't present too much material. Keep material particularly relevant, and emphasize the relevance. Provide realistic situations for learners to engage with. Use audio--it really helps in adding emotional depth. Maintain reasonably high production values. Show the learner how the program will help them. Be honest with the learner about what it will really take to put what they're learning into practice. Consider using a personalizing agent to talk directly to the learner (as long as it maintains credibility). Pilot test your e-learning and measure your e-learning so you can add warmth if needed. Here's what the warmth-competence matrix might look like for learning interventions: This warmth-credibility hypothesis (regarding learning interventions) is certainly worth testing. In the meantime, based on tangential lines of research and based on my review of hundreds of learning programs, I'd bet this simple formulation is worth following. From the point of practicality--and evolutionary survival--sometimes simple is better. The review of Susan Fiske's keynote can be found in the Association for Psychological Sciences, Volume 22, Number 8, edition of the Observer, Jesse Erwin author.

Last year I was asked by Michael Allen--one of our industry's most influential creators and most successful entrepreneurs--to contribute a chapter to his first e-Learning Annual, which Pfeiffer had urged him to manage and edit. Michael introduced my chapter as follows: "In this article, one of the learning and performance field’s leadingvisionaries looks back on his twenty-two years in the field with both loveand regret, while looking forward to the future by challenging all of us inthe field who see ourselves as learning-and-performance professionals.Dr. Thalheimer’s challenge is simple. He asks every person in the fieldto understand the forces that control their thinking and influence theirdecision making. It’s as if the author wants to say: the unexaminedprofession is not worth having."  I'm still thrilled to hear Sir Michael call me a visionary--though I'm sure he was talking about hallucinations of some sort. Because the article still resonates for me, I thought I'd share it with you.Download We_Are_Professionals_by_Will_Thalheimer_ I encourage you to take a look at the whole book. Michael Allen’s 2008 e-Learning Annual does a great job covering the historic and institutional foundations of the learning-technology field--with chapters from more than 20 luminaries who have been at the heart of the learning field for a long time, including folks like Thiagi, David Merrill, Allison Rossett, and Greg Kearsley, and so many more. Here are some of my conclusions in the chapter: Our graduate schools preparetechnicians, not thoughtfulscientist-practitioners whounderstand learning, thinkcritically, and build wisdom overtime. We don’t measure the outcome ofour work in ways that enable usto build effective feedback loopsand make improvements that willlead to better learning, on-the-jobperformance, and business results. The work pressures we face(for example, Internet-inducedinformation overload and businessdemands for cheaper, fasterresults)—combined with ourtendency toward professionalarrogance—don’t predisposeus to keep learning, to test ourconjectures, to build a rich andcomplex knowledge base over time. Our trade associations, magazines,and conferences provide uswith information that sells, notinformation that necessarily tellsthe truth of how we should betterdesign our products and services. Our consultants and vendors area large source of our information,and we tend to think uncriticallyabout their offerings. Learning-and-performanceresearch is not utilized when itmight provide substantial benefits. Industry research is severelyflawed, but we rely on it anyway. Contests, awards, and best-of listsgrab our attention and distortour thinking about what is mostimportant. Okay, those were the list of our failures. I also add a list that begs for hope for our profession.What do you think of our current practices?Of our future?

Scientists may have found how exercise induces calm--and how it may help people in stressful situations perform better.Check out this article from the NY Times...Given that lots of us are stressed these days--and even the relaxed folks have to occasionally make a big stressful presentation, etc.--enabling people to exercise might give them a competitive advantage.

Starting today, December 1, 2009, bloggers who review products will have to fully disclose their ties and reveal any free products they receive. See article in NY Times announcing the ruling.Within the last year, I was sent a learning product worth over $500, presumably to try to entice me to use it and give it a good review. That product is still in its shrink wrap. I've also had several inquiries over the years about whether I'd be willing to review a learning intervention and say nice things. I won't make such a deal.Do you ever wonder which workplace learning blogs are slanting their reviews? Me too.Anyway, today such incentivized bias is supposed to stop.

I've got a file in my email from Indian e-learning companies who have contacted me because I am an important decision maker at Work-Learning Research, Inc. (my research and consulting practice). I must have gotten emails from over 50 Indian e-Learning companies. Almost enough so that I have begun to feel a deep personal relationship. Perhaps this is why I read this article in the New York Times with such interest. It says that Indian companies are afraid they will remain the low-cost provider and they will fail to innovate.Well, I wonder if this is true in the learning-and-performance field. I'm not an industry analyst so I'm sure I don't see the big picture here, but the following data points come to mind: Almost all of my emails from Indian e-learning companies highlight their cost advantage. My efforts over the years to get consulting or workshop business with Indian e-learning companies has been fruitless. If they wanted to differentiate their work by investing in research-based insights, you'd think at least one Indian e-learning firm would have attempted to warm themselves in the glow of my wisdom. WINK. WINK. Maybe my marketing might is poorly directed. I have heard some Indian e-learning company employees talking about Indian e-learning companies taking over the U.S. marketplace within the next 10 years... Many U.S. vendors I have talked with who off-shored their development work to India talked about poor instructional design. Of course, they might just be ticked off at the price competition or worried about their jobs. NIIT bought one of our most premium brands, Cognitive Arts, many years ago now, but such mergers don't seem to be trending up. What's going on? If you have an idea--or just some more data points--leave a comment below.Until they begin to hire me, I won't believe they are truly ready to innovate. I can be reached in the U. S. at my contact information. SMILE.Seriously though, anybody know who's keeping tabs on the Indian e-learning invasion? Anybody know what's going on?

Is this effective e-learning?Click here to see e-learning using only audio and photographs.Sure, it's missing interactivity, retrieval practice, and a focus on application; but it does hint at the emotional power that can be created with good simple design.

It is not always enough to know something. Often people must respond immediately to circumstances. Often they must respond under stress and distraction. To be able to do this, they need to develop a cognitive link between situational cues and action. On January 9th 2009, firefighter Robert O’Neill was at the wheel of a 22-ton fire truck as it headed down a steep street in Boston. When O’Neill attempted to apply the brakes, nothing happened. As the truck gained speed heading straight for a large brick wall, O’Neill made frantic attempts to pump the brakes and shift into another gear—ultimately shifting into neutral. His efforts went to no avail and the truck crashed through the brick wall into an apartment building injuring several children in an afterschool program and killing his colleague, firefighter Lieutenant Kevin M. Kelley who was riding beside O’Neill in the truck’s passenger seat. Photo from Boston Globe Story After an 11-month investigation, District Attorney Daniel Conley reported that O’Neill received "limited classroom instruction and no driver training in the proper use of air brakes in downhill and emergency circumstances." What’s really tragic is that O’Neill’s actions in that time of panic may have actually made things worse. As the Boston Globe reported: The driver did not know to check brake pressure before he got behind the wheel that day and then, when the brakes failed, did not know how to engage secondary braking systems. Instead, he pumped the brakes, releasing any remaining air pressure from the brake system, and put the truck into neutral, preventing the secondary brakes from engaging. Many things might have prevented this tragedy. The truck could have been better maintained. A job aid that forced drivers to do routine safety check might have been used to ensure brake pressure. Management oversight might have prompted the drivers to actually engage safety routines. Training that helped drivers understand how air brakes worked might have helped—just before the accident the driver turned the truck around in a parking lot releasing air pressure in the braking system. Finally, the driver could have been trained to spontaneously remember what do when facing such a situation. Ideally, when someone is in an emergency situation, the cues from that situation ought to remind them of what to do. As learning professionals we want to help our learners engage in spontaneous remembering. To do this, we need to help our learners make links between situational cues and actions. It can help to teach these links, but it is even better to have learners practice these links. Research on general context-alignment effects shows the benefits of making such links (for reviews see Bjork & Richardson-Klavehn, 1989; Smith, 1988; Smith & Vela, 2001; Eich, 1980; Roediger & Guynn, 1996; Davies, 1986). Research on retrieval practice shows us the benefits of retrieval practice in automating such responding (for reviews on retrieval practice see Roediger & Karpicke, 2006a; Pashler, Rohrer, Cepeda, & Carpenter, 2007; Bjork, 1988; Crooks, 1988). Finally, recent research on implementation intentions shows how powerful it can be to help learners link situational cues to action (for review see Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). If firefighter O’Neill had been properly trained, when he found himself careening down the street with inadequate brakes, the situation would have reminded him to apply steady pressure on the brakes and engage the secondary braking system. What makes this situation even sadder is that firefighters typically have lots of time between emergencies to engage in training. Even if a high-fidelity simulation was too expensive, a simple e-learning program that simulated driving emergencies might have worked to create cognitive links sufficient to create spontaneous remembering.   Research Bjork, R. A. (1988). Retrieval practice and the maintenance of knowledge. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues, Vol. 1., Memory in Everyday Life (pp. 396-401). NY: Wiley. Bjork, R. A., & Richardson-Klavehn, A. (1989). On the puzzling relationship between environmental context and human memory. In C. Izawa (Ed.) Current Issues in Cognitive Processes: The Tulane Floweree Symposium on Cognition (pp. 313-344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481. Davies, G. (1986). Context effects in episodic memory: A review. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 6, 157-174. Eich, J. E. (1980). The cue dependent nature of state dependent retrieval. Memory and Cognition, 8, 157-173. Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. Pashler, H., Rohrer, D., Cepeda, N. J., & Carpenter, S. K. (2007). Enhancing learning and retarding forgetting: Choices and consequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 187-193. Roediger, H. L., III, & Guynn, M. J. (1996). Retrieval processes. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (eds.), Memory (pp. 197-236). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Roediger, H.L. & Karpicke, J.D. (2006a). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181-210. Smith, S. M. (1988). Environmental context-dependent memory. In G. M. Davies & D. M. Thomson (eds.) Memory in Context: Context in Memory (pp. 13-34), Chichester, UK: Wiley. Smith, S. M., & Vela, E. (2001). Environmental context-dependent memory: A review and meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 203-220. Story of the accident: http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/01/fire_engine_cra.html Story of the accident investigation: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/12/11/poor_training_cited_in_crash/ Photo from Massachusetts AFL-CIO website Lieutenant Kevin M. Kelley (Killed in Fire Truck Accident)

Training Magazine is looking for nominations for the Best Young Trainer Award (have to be under 40). Let's nominate someone who utilizes research-based recommendations--and does it with practical wisdom.If you know someone, nominate them using this link.

If you're a knowledge worker, your productivity depends on your ability to give attention to your tasks. Unfortunately, the human cognitive system is designed to be wary of environmental events so it devotes some of its ongoing processing to scanning the environment. Thought interruptions naturally occur, lowering our productivity--including our output, creativity, effectiveness, and completeness. If you've got your own office and your own door, you may be able to control outside distractions. But for many of us, we've got noisy creatures near us--our colleagues--requiring us to devote cognitive capacity to their trivial activities. Fortunately, there are solutions. I just found a great one-two combination that is really working for me--for those times when I really need full-frontal attention. Noise-Canceling Headset. White Noise (see for example www.SimplyNoise.com) I have a Audio-Technica Headset and I just discovered www.SimplyNoise.com, which allows me to hear white noise, pink noise, and red/brown noise--and I can even have it oscillate. Thoughts on Noise White noise (or pink, red/brown noise) is great for when I really need to concentrate. I do a lot of writing and so hearing words--like song lyrics--is really disruptive. I have found a great grouping of African musicians on Last.FM, and that will often work great because most of the words are not in English so the lyrics don't disrupt. Other people like Pandora for music, but their "instrumental" section doesn't work for me. Somebody needs to come up with a way to filter out songs with English words. Noise-Canceling Headsets If you haven't used noise-canceling headsets, here are some things you should know (before you buy): They do NOT block out all ambient noise, but they blunt its ability to disrupt your thoughts. They block much, much more ambient noise when you are listening to music or white noise. In fact, without adding noise inside the earpieces you may not think the noise-cancellation technology is doing enough. If you are buying these specifically for airplane travel, know that you are generally NOT allowed to wear them on takeoffs and landings (when the noise is at its height). I don't really know whether one brand of noise-cancellation headsets is better than another. For example, it's not clear if Bose is worth the extra money. I do think an investment in noise-canceling headsets will pay itself back in productivity. On the other hand, your spouse may get really annoyed... ----------- If you want to be like me, here is a link to the updated version of my headsets:

The 2009 Neon Elephant Award goes to Ruth Clark for her many years in leading the workplace learning-and-performance field with research-based insights and recommendations, and—by so doing—helping to professionalize our field.The Neon Elephant AwardThe Neon Elephant Award is awarded to a person, team, or organization exemplifying enlightenment, integrity, and innovation in the field of workplace learning and performance. Announced on the day of the winter solstice—the day of the year when the northern hemisphere turns away from darkness toward the light and hope of warmer days to come—the Neon Elephant Award honors those who have truly changed the way we think about the practice of learning and performance improvement. Award winners are selected for demonstrated success in pushing the field forward in significant paradigm-altering ways while maintaining the highest standards of ethics and professionalism. Ruth Clark's Special Contributions Ruth Clark, EdD, a recognized specialist in instructional design and technical training, holds a doctorate in Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology from the University of Southern California. Prior to founding CLARK Training & Consulting, Dr. Clark served as training manager for Southern California Edison. She is past president of the International Society for Performance Improvement and author of six books and numerous articles. Dr. Clark is the 2006 recipient of the Thomas F. Gilbert Distinguished Professional Achievement Award from ISPI. Ruth is the author of many important books, searchable at Amazon.com under her full name Ruth Colvin Clark, including: The New Virtual Classroom: Evidence-based Guidelines for Synchronous e-Learning, Efficiency in Learning: Evidence-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load, e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, Graphics for Learning: Proven Guidelines for Planning, Designing, and Evaluating Visuals in Training Materials, Developing Technical Training: A Structured Approach for Developing Classroom and Computer-based Instructional Materials, Building Expertise: Cognitive Methods for Training and Performance Improvement In addition to her lifetime of work, Ruth Clark is honored this year for the 3rd edition of her excellent book, published just a little over a year ago, Building Expertise: Cognitive Methods for Training and Performance Improvement. Although this is said to be the 3rd edition, the research cited is fresh and up-to-date. This book may be Ruth’s masterwork. It covers a wide swath of the learning research. It’s written by a research translator at the height of her powers. It’s a must-read (and must-study) for everyone in the field of workplace learning-and-performance.  It’s not easy to examine learning research from refereed scientific journals and compile it so that it is practical for others. The time commitment is incredible, the research skills must be of the highest caliber—and it requires guts and gusto. Some of what the research reveals cuts against the common wisdom. Sometimes it chaffs and brings angst and heat.Ruth’s continuing perseverance over the last three decades is testament to her passion and tenacity. Her work itself is testament to her integrity and skills. I would imagine that over the last two decades there is no one in our field who has improved the work of as many instructional designers, trainers, and e-learning developers as Ruth Clark. For me, she continues to be a beacon—proof that research-based work is valued by our profession. For our field, Ruth’s work is simply indispensable. Using evidence-based reasoning and recommendations is not just useful in practice. It is what respected, successful professions are based on. We owe Ruth Clark our most grateful thanks.To Learn More...To learn more about the Neon Elephant Award, including the selection criteria, past winners, etc., click here.To visit Ruth Clark's website, click here.