Will: Yo Clark, I really liked your new book, Revolutionize Learning and Development, but there’s one thing I’m not sure I’m fully behind—your recommendation that we as learning professionals kowtow to the organization—that we build our learning interventions aimed solely to meet organizational needs. I grew up near Philadelphia, so I’m partial to Rocky Balboa, using the interjection "Yo," and rooting for the little guy. What are you thinking? Isn’t revolution usually aimed against the powerful? Clark: Will, what is powerful are the forces against needed change.  L&D appears to be as tied to an older age as Rocky is!  I’m not saying a complete abdication to the organization, but we certainly can’t be oblivious to it either.  The organization doesn’t know learning, to be sure, and should be able to trust us on performance support and informal learning too.  But do you really think that most of what is happening under the guise of L&D is a good job on the formal learning side? Will: Clark, Of course not. Much of L&D is like Rocky’s brother-in-law Paulie, having an inner heart of gold, but not living up to full effectiveness. I’ve written about the Five Failures of Workplace Learning Professionals three years ago, so I’m on the record that we could do better. And yes, there are lots of forces allied against us, so I’m glad you’re calling for revolution. But back to the question Apollo! To whom do we have more responsibility, the organizations we work for or our profession? To whom should we give our Creed? Clark: Will, your proposed bout is a non-starter!  It’s not either/or; we need to honor both our organization and our profession (and, I’ll argue, we’re currently doing neither).   When we’re building our interventions, they should be to serve the organizations needs, not just their wants. We can’t be order takers, we need to go to the mat (merrily mixing my metaphors) to find out the real problem, and use all solutions (not just courses).   Mickey’d tell you; you got to have heart, but also do the hard yards.  Isn’t the real tension between what we know we should be doing and what we’re actually doing? Will: I am so much in agreement! Why are we always order takers? You want fries with that? Here’s where I think some in our profession go overboard on the organization-first approach. First, like you say, many don’t have a training-request process that pushes their organizations to look beyond training as the singular leverage point to performance improvement. Second, some measurement "gurus" claim that what’s most important is to measure organizational results—while reneging on our professional responsibility to measure what we have the most control over—like whether people can make good work-related decisions after we train them or even remember what we taught them. Honestly, if the workplace learning field was a human being, it would be a person you wouldn’t want to have as a friend—someone who didn’t have a core set of values, someone who would be prone to following any fad or phony demigod, someone who would shift allegiances with the wind. Clark: Now you’re talking; I love the idea of a training-request process! I recall an organization where the training head had a cost/benefit form for every idea that was brought to him.  It’s not how much it costs per bum per seat per hour, but is that bum per seat per hour making a difference!  And we can start with the ability to make those decisions, but ultimately we ought to also care that making those decisions is impacting the organization too.  I certainly agree we have to be strong and fight for what’s right, not what’s easy or expedient.  Serious elearning for the win! Will: We seem to be coming to consensus, however, you inspired another question. We agree that we have two responsibilities, one to our professional values and one to our organization’s needs. But should we add another stakeholder to this mix? I have my own answer, inherent in one of my many below-the-radar models, but I’d like your wisdom. Here’s the question, do we have a responsibility to our learners/performers? If we do have responsibilities to them, what are those responsibilities? And here is perhaps the hardest question--in comparison to the responsibility we have to our organizations, is our level of responsibility to our learners/performers higher, lower, or about the same? Remember, the smaller the ring, the harder it is to run…the more likely we get hit by a haymaker. Good luck with these questions... Clark: Bringing in a ringer, eh?  I suppose you could see it as either of two ways: it’s our obligation to our profession and our organization to consider our learners, or they’re another stakeholder. I kinda like the former, as there’re lots of stakeholders: society, learners, ‘clients', SMEs, colleagues, profession, and more.  In fact, I’m inclined to go back to my proposition that’s it’s not either/or. Our obligation as professionals is to do the job that needs to be done in ways that responsibly address our learners, our organizations, and all stakeholders.  To put it in other words, designing interventions in ways that optimally equip learners to meet the needs of the organization is an integration of responsibilities, not a tradeoff.  We need to unify our approach  like boxing needs to unify the different titles! Will: From what I hear, boxing is dying as a spectator sport precisely because of all the discord and multiple sanctifying bodies. We in the learning-and-performance field might take this as a warning—we need to get our house in order, follow research-based best practices, and build a common body of knowledge and values. It starts with knowing who our stakeholders are and knowing that we have a responsibility to the values and goals of our profession. I like to give our learners a privileged place—at the same level of priority as the organization. It’s not that I think this is an easy argument in an economic sense, because the organization is paying the bills after all. But too often we forget our learners, so I like to keep them front and center in our learning-to-performance models. Thanks Clark for the great discussion. And thanks for agreeing to host the next one on your blog…

Anyone that is in education and uses Twitter probably has seen the name Tom Whitby (@tomwhitby). ...

Best free software for writing: 10 programs to unleash your creativity: Whether you want to write a...

Critically Examining What You Teach: Seven Questions: The author asks 7 questions that are valid for...

10 Skills for Active Listening. Original Here

25 Reading Strategies That Work In Every Content Area: Although they say these work in every content...

Dale: Smart Phones Belong in Schools -- THE Journal: "The personal power you can gain by using one...

Spout is the Prezi for social network feeds | iPad Insight: I have always liked those services that...

eLearning Tools of the Trade Infographic Which eLearning tools should I use to design my self-paced eLearning course? Use the eLearning Tools of the Trade Infographic to learn about the pros and cons of popular eLearning design tools at your disposal. Key Considerations: price, development, level of desired course, time, user skill features. Web Authoring Tools Pros: Widely used, easy to train and recruit for the skill. Cons: Not designed specifically for eLearning. Call for custom built elements and may require third-party add-ons. HTML Editors Pros: Offer flexibility to code or design. Course will be low bandwidth, easy to update, and compatible on different platforms. Cons: Not designed specifically for eLearning. Call for custom built elements and may require third-party add-ons. Media & Application Tools Pros: Produce slick visual presentations with nearly endless capabilities. Cons: Extensive learning curve and may have flash-only output. eLearning Authoring tools Pros: Built for the non-techie, easier to learn and use, and doesn’t require coding. Cons: Less flexibility than other tools. The eLearning Tools of the Trade Infographic was adapted from the book E-Learning Fundamentals. In this book eLearning development experts and educators Diane Elkins and Desirée Pinder deliver a comprehensive examination of the eLearning process from the ground up. The book provides the base of knowledge necessary to tackle everything from early concepts of eLearning down to its execution. Throughout, you’ll find vignettes that bring concepts to life as well as checklists and practical eLearning tools for designing and developing your first eLearning course. In this book you will: dive into the basics of eLearning design and development, explore the eLearning course design and development process—from analysis through evaluation, learn to write and storyboard a course, construct test questions, choose media, put the course together, and establish a thorough review process. You can also download the tools and checklists from the book in an editable format. Via: www.td.orgThe post eLearning Tools of the Trade Infographic appeared first on e-Learning Infographics.

What if you had the ability to put your hands on over 100 different education staff development...

Texas CREWS to Comparing 2 and 4 Year Programs in Texas: The Texas Consumer Resource for Education...

NPR recently had a story entitled: "Why NFL Teams Should Reconsider Giving Coaches The...

What is the best education technology self evaluation for educators? Free would be nice, but it is...

Anyone that has followed along with major college athletics should no doubt be familiar with the...

Google Earth Pro is Free. Grab a Copy: From the Google Earth Blog: "Over the last 10 years,...

TCEA Bingo: Print out your card and walk around the Austin Convention Center. As you hear the way overused phrase simply mark off your card! When you have Bingo (horizontal, vertical or diagonal) yell out "TCEA Bingo!" Variation: try this in a single location, like a keynote presentation! Good luck!

Underwater Dreams DVD Free with Code: USE THE CODE: STEM3M TO GET THIS DVD FOR FREE. This...

One of the key elements of the Univeristy of Plymouth’s Building Capacity project is learning from the JISC funded Learning Literacies for a Digital Age (LLiDA) project. In order to fully benefit from the LLiDA experience we are working with Helen Beetham, an expert in this area. Helen recently facilitated a workshop for us to help in Defining the Digital Literacy needs of UoP This workshop was attended by a range of Decision makers and Influencers from across the University and is a precursor to focus groups with students and staff. The key resources used in the Defining the Digital Literacy needs of UoP workshop were Managing change: organizations, roles and strategies Literacies development framework Learning Literacies for a Digital Age- institutional audit tool Plymouth workshop slides

There you are, walking around the exhibit hall at the Big Time Ed Tech Conference (BTETC®). All...

Microsoft seems to really be doubling down in the education field os of late. I haven’t seen...

Finland Has the Best Public schools in the world. They just dumped handwriting classes. Discuss. :...

Over 400 Session Handouts and links from #TCEA15: Thank you TCEA for aggregating these handouts...

Google has acquired Launchpad Toys, software developers of the wonderful digital storytelling apps...

OER and Mainstream Adoption from ISKME Transcript 1. OER AND MAINSTREAM ADOPTION April 2014...