Jay Cross recently posted some interesting (and startling) statistics about the impact of what we, in the custom learning design and development business, make a living doing. (Low Hanging Fruit is Tasty) Consider the following blurb (three times - once to allow your amazement to pass; a second time to allow your denial to pass; and a third time to slowly and deeply consider the ramifications, if this is even remotely true): Formal training programs are not the only learning game in town. CLOs who spend the bulk of their time improving the development and delivery of training might be optimizing the insignificant. Consider this: According to Tom Gilbert and Peter Dean, training only accounts for 10.5 percent of the total potential change in worker behavior. Clarity of objectives, working conditions and other factors are more important. According to the Institute for Research on Learning, at most, formal training only accounts for 20 percent of how people learn their jobs. Most workers learn their jobs from observing others, asking questions, trial and error, calling the help desk and other unscheduled, largely independent activities. According to Robert Brinkerhoff and Stephen Gill, people who do attend formal training never apply 80 to 90 percent of what they learn back on the job. They forget the bulk of what they’re exposed to in a matter of days. So, formal training accounts for 20 percent x 20 percent x 10 percent of the possible improvements you can make to worker performance. That’s 0.4 percent. To account for potential double-counting and other quirks, let’s say training might influence 1 percent of worker potential. C-level officers who want the human capacity to thrive over the long haul are looking for more. Now, I'm certainly not lobbying for the end of formal training, but perhaps there is some merit to calling for the end of the *current version of* formal training. With all that is known about HPT/HPI, Simulations, and Story-based Learning, not to mention long-available but minorly-leveraged knowledge about EPSS, why is it that the vast majority of the eLearning work that is done today resemble electrified versions of what was used to teach our great grandparents?  Why are Jay's ideas regarding "informal" and "free-range" learning (for instance) readily accepted in theory, but largely ignored in practice? We can do better (and it doesn't have to mean a loss of business). When will learning professionals, who know in their heart that what their client is asking for isn't going to solve their problem or have the desired impact, feel confident to act on their responsibility/obligation to say as much? When will customers (internal and external) allow the T&D professionals they've hired (again, internal or external) do what they do best, rather forcing them to act as glorified order takers and production shops for knee-jerk/best-guess remedies? It may be a utopian wish that will never arrive, but, as Robert Browning said, "A man's reach should exceed his grasp or what's a heaven for?" (Jon Revelos is Director - Instructional Design, USA with Tata Interactive Systems)

via Learning Circuits: TIS's Chetan Mahajan asks "Are all e-learning projects equally easy to execute offshore?" and goes on to discuss the important considerations for off-shoring e-Learning development. Please click here to read the full article.  

What does it take to train 15,000 people, most of whom are on sea, sailing around the world? How would you make a learning management system work on a ship and link with the central system at headquarters? Christian Volkle should know. Chris is Manager - Fleet Training with Holland America Line (HAL) and was in India recently, visiting us at Tata Interactive Systems. Chris was a sailor for many many years before he moved on to his current managerial role. And surprisingly, for someone who has visited about 140 countries, this was his first visit to India. We caught up with Chris for a brief chat on the training challenges at HAL and their plans around eLearning on their ships. The entire chat is available as a podcast, ~10 minutes. Download the mp3 to listen to it in a player of your choice or simply use the player below. Here are some of the key points Chris made.  The training audience of HAL includes more than 15,000 employees from 68 nationalities, with educational levels ranging from 3rd grade to a PhD or even multiple PhDs. HAL is perhaps the first company in the world to link their Learning Management Systems in their ships to the main office through satellite communication systems. HAL took a strategic look at training and devised a training plan that focused on three long-term initiatives: o Move as much of their training as possible to eLearning. o Install and implement a Learning Management System. o Have a specially built wired and connected training room in each ship.  Mobile Learning is an area that Chris would look at closely in the future.  HAL has a Kid’s Club on their ships, which addresses the entertainment requirements of kids on cruises with their parents. HAL is looking at computer-based educational entertainment products for Kid’s Club. And here are some photographs, from (and one fantastic one of) the different ships that HAL operate. Please click on the thumbnails for an expanded view.

Here is November’s Big Question from Learning Circuits: Are our models (ISD, ADDIE, HPT, etc.) relevant in the future? The question does not stop there. The LC blog follows it up with "Are ISD/ADDIE/HPT relevant in a world of rapid elearning, faster time-to-performance, and informal learning?" Although Learning Circuits must have seen both these question together as defining one problem statement, I see two distinct questions here.  Let me respond to the "first question" first. The relevance of a model depends on how you use it rather than when you use it (past, present, and future). In this case, the question seems to imply that the models in question are traditional (ISD, ADDIE, HPT, etc.). However, the use of brackets, the addition of "etc." and the absence of the word "traditional" or "conventional" makes the question open to interpretation—which is not a bad thing.  "Our models" are somewhat like this question. A model by its very definition is generic; it acquires specificity only in local contexts. So, if one is to assume that ADDIE is top-down, behavioristic, and ID driven, then it will appear to be so. On the other hand, if a few learners decide to use the process elements of ADDIE to design learning for their own use in a Second Life kind of platform, the application of this model takes on a completely different perspective.  Therefore, the problem lies not with the models, but in how we approach them and what we take out of them. We should be able to appropriate models, not just apply them literally or reject them outright. By appropriating a model, we make it relevant to us and to our times.The second question, on the other hand, assumes that the future of learning lies in rapid e-learning and informal learning. And this "future" seems to be arguing for a shift in the ownership of content creation. Who is the best person to generate content? Is it the learner (Learning 2.0), the instructional designer (Learning 1.0), or the SME (LCMS)? Should content generation be top-down, self-directed, or collaborative? Such questions most often lead us toward tautologies and not toward answers. Moreover, no content is born out of nowhere; most types of content are extensions of or responses to already existing content. If we need answers, we might have to ask the following questions: What kind of learning experiences will help me sharpen my perspectives, take the right  decisions, and do the right things? Where and how can I find, create, and participate in these experiences? How should I organize these experiences so that I’m able to make meaningful associations?  I’m not arguing that these questions are unambiguous—"right decisions," "right things," and "meaningful associations" are all ambiguous words in the absence of a defined criteria. The point I’m trying to make is this: Learning is linked to memory, retention, application, critical thinking, and creativity. And if adapting certain processes or ways of organizing content can lead to a learning experience that aids long-term retention or provides deeper insights, then there is nothing wrong in using a model that suits the purpose. Give me the discursive content of a Google search and the conversations of a blog, but don’t deny me the effectiveness of a well-designed learning program. And models like ISD, if used creatively, can help produce highly effective learning programs. Let the future of learning be not defined by platforms (Web 2.0 or otherwise) but by the rigor of thought and the boldness of assumptions—supported by research, empirical evidence, and lived experiences. (Anil Mammen heads the content & instructional design specialist group at Tata Interactive.)

We recently celebrated the festival of lights and we would like to share some snapshots with you. Please click here to view the photo album.

At TATA Interactive Systems, we have taken up the issue of Learning Disabilities (LD) as part of our Corporate Social Responsibility. We chose this area because it is congruent to our skills and capabilities in learning design and development. The three areas of LD that we are focusing on are Dyslexia, Dyscalculia, and Dysgraphia. In this respect, we support the Learning Disability Clinic in Sion Hospital through financial grants, development of learning materials for both students and special needs educators, and administrative support. Moreover, we have also authored a book, Brain Teasers, comprising fun activities for children with LD. This book has been published by Tata McGraw-Hill.  The latest initiative that we have taken up is the TATA Interactive Learning Disability Forum (TLDF). The TLDF is an international symposium on LD. The event offers a platform for leading educators and LD experts from across the world to network and share innovations and ideas to help address critical LD issues.  This event is the first of its kind in India and one of our key objectives is to increase awareness and promote remedial activities, best practices, and knowledge sharing of LD in India —we believe this is a gap that needs filling. We plan to hold this event annually from now on. Please click here for detailed information about this event.

(John Gibbs, Instructional Design Consultant with TIS describes the proceedings at the annual TATA Interactive Learning Forum which was held at 2 locations this year) The TATA Interactive Learning Forum innovated this year by using a participative approach to engage the audiences, which totaled more than 100 for the two events, Sept. 28 and 29 at the UN Millennium Plaza in New York and Oct. 2 and 3 at the Allstate headquarters in Chicago. On the second day of each event, teams competed to achieve the highest stock price for a fictitious company using the "General Management II" TopSim module, manipulating pricing, hiring, advertising, and production variables. In New York, the education track featured speakers from Western Governors University, McGraw-Hill, Boston University, and Axia College. Corporate presenters represented Learning Tree, Telstra, and Staples.  Carol Silk of New York Presbyterian Hospital described an accelerated training roll-out to learners with limited English and computer skills using proctors to assist learners with computer basics. Gary Dickelman of EPSS Central gave the keynote presentation on "Performance Centered Design in the 21st Century, and Chris Proulx of eCornell adressed "Aligning Corporate Learning and Higher Education." The single track at the Chicago event included presentations by representatives of Allstate, Holland America, Northwest Airlines and Motorola. Dave Vance of Caterpillar University delivered the keynote on "Best Practices in Alignment and Measurement." Steve Smith and Lynn Misselt of Northwest Airlines described their approach to rapid task analysis. Joje DiDonato told how Countrywide accelerates time to proficiency in IT skills using a 20/30/50 model—20 percent classroom training, 30 percent through out-of-class technologies, and 50 percent via performance support systems. Chicago participants debated what constitutes "informal learning." Podcasts may be received by learners as informal media, yet considerable design and production expertise may go into creating them.

What’s a corporate blog for if we can’t talk about our own achievements once in a while? We are delighted that we have won the Performance Centered Design Award 2006 given by EPSScentral LLC. The award was presented at the Training Solutions Conference & Expo at Denver, Colorado. "These extraordinary PCD solutions and tools foster business improvement and human performance by immediately establishing goals, supporting users through best practices, facilitating the proper flow of work, minimizing translation and providing immediate access to supporting content at the time of need," said EPSScentral's CEO, Gary Dickelman, who is also teaches Performance Centered Design (PCD) at George Mason and Boise State Universities' Graduate School of Education and Engineering in the U.S. This award is particularly important for us, considering our focus on Electronic Performance Support Systems - it makes us believe that we are on the right track as far as the quality of our design is concerned. As Saurabh Mittal, who runs the operations of our EPSS Practice said, "TIS helps organizations improve their productivity, reduce turnaround times, and achieve consistent best practice performance from all employees. Our EPSS provides on the job, context relevant knowledge support and tools to improve performance execution. It is an integrated online support system, which guides employees at every step of complex operations, enabling them to take appropriate decisions. This ensures consistency in decision-making, improved productivity, and lower training costs." So if you are looking at improving the performance of your employees, you know which company to contact.

It’s nearly been a year of having our corporate blog up and I would like to pause momentarily and share some thoughts on this initiative with you.  When we started out we were pretty clear on what we wanted to achieve. We wanted to enable you to have a clearer and deeper insight into our world. We wanted you to see how we worked, celebrated, met challenges and innovated. And most of all we wanted you to talk to us, to engage us in dialogue, bringing forth newer insights and thoughts. How successful have we been? I think we have got off to a good start. As expected, members of our Instructional Design group were first off the mark in posting their thoughts and engaging others within the broader worldwide ID and eLearning community. We have also received some very positive feedback for our photo albums capturing life@TIS, from people considering TIS as a potential employer. I think this is because from the outside, an organization often appears impregnable and this is one of the boundaries that we have been successful in lowering. We are constantly working to involve more folks here at TIS and digging deeper into our various groups and departments to try and bring new perspectives, opinions and thoughts to the surface using the blog as a common platform. It’s fantastic to see people post and have responses come in from around the world and see a dialogue start to take shape. A big thank you to everybody who have sent in comments, emails and helpful tips from time to time. Stay plugged in! (Ankush Gupta manages our corporate blog and drives blogging efforts across TIS; he is a blog evangelist and is passionate about using technology to bring people together and facilitating meaningful dialogue)

Click here to view pictures from this event. It was unexpected for many reasons. Neither the speaker nor his topic was on the agenda. In a symposium dominated by speakers with striking backgrounds — neurologists, pediatricians, psychiatrists, principals of world renowned special needs schools, vice-presidents of international associations — to delay a planned session and invite an "unknown" to speak out of turn was something of an oddity. Ashok Kurien was introduced simply as India's Richard Branson. That did arouse a murmur of interest and even as everyone wondered what this white-haired individual had in common with the English entrepreneur, he began to speak. Ashok Kurien talked of his days as a child, how he had struggled in school, failing numerous exams. The school kept him merely because he was an excellent athlete. Inside the classroom he was the object of derision. He could hardly even spell correctly. His mother who headed a department at a university whipped him and called him slow. As did his teachers. When he went on to college more insults were heaped on him. He dropped out. His mother refused to talk to him and they didn't exchange words for over 45 years. Kurien took up a job in the villages of India, flying small planes to spray fields with insecticide. Five years later he headed back to the city and enrolled in a college again. This time, he persevered to finish his graduation and joined an ad agency. Though his colleagues ridiculed him, his clients loved him for his creative input. Seven years later, with less than Rs. 5,000 in his bank account, he started his own ad agency. Ambience was a big success and was eventually bought by the French agency Publicis, who retained Kurien as the managing director. He went on to become one of the founding directors of India's first independent media company, Zee. He also established India's first privately owned lottery, Playwin and started DishTV, India's first Direct-to-Home TV service. Today he is worth thousands of crores. Like Branson, Ashok Kurien achieved success despite his dyslexia. And he achieved it in a society that ill-treated him and refused to accept his problem. The over 250 strong gathering at the first TATA Interactive Learning Disability Forum (TLDF) applauded Ashok Kurien all the way back to his seat. His unplanned, simple and inspired speech was one of the many highlights of the TLDF, held in Mumbai on 30 November and 1 December 2006.In organizing the TLDF, Tata Interactive Systems (TIS) was aiming to increase awareness and promote remedial activities, best practices, and knowledge sharing of LD in India. TIS also hoped that the TLDF would encourage networking and sharing of ideas and innovations, eventually helping address critical LD issues. The invitees comprised a mix of people from various fields concerned with LD, from pediatricians to psychiatrists, to instructional designers and special needs educators, to parents of children with learning difficulties. Attendees were treated to a variety of interesting talks, covering several important areas of LD — biology, psychosocial and educational interventions, government policies — by experts from various fields. Dr. Gerald Erenberg, Child Neurologist, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, US, expounded on The Biological Basis of Learning Disabilities in his well-received keynote address. Dr. Erenberg traced how our understanding of the biological basis of LD has improved over the years and expressed hope that with new research and better scientific tools we would soon be able to understand and control the primary biological causes of LD. Dr. Erenberg also addressed the symposium on ADHD — Its Role in Leading to Learning Difficulties and Medication/Remedial in which he advocated the three-pronged approach of medication, education, and psychosocial intervention to help a person with ADHD successfully integrate with society. Dr. Madhuri Kulkarni, Professor and Head of Pediatrics, Sion Hospital, India, in her talk The Learning Disabilities Movement in India — Where We Are, brought the audience up-to-date on the history of the LD movement in India — from its beginnings to the landmark judgment of the Mumbai High Court in 2006 that made it easier for LD children to study in mainstream schools. She also outlined the challenges faced by the LD movement in India: little awareness of LD related issues, lack of remedial centers in all schools, and few standardized psychological and educational tests in Indian languages to identify children with LD. Lalitha Ramanujan, the Founder Director of Alpha to Omega Learning Center, India, took the audience through the different Types of LD — Dyslexia, Dyscalculia, Dysgraphia, and ADHD. In a talk peppered with anecdotes about her experience of bringing up a child with LD and her work with LD children at her learning center, Ramanujan stressed on how remedial action for LD children was the best way to help them work around their difficulties. Glenys Heap, Senior Training Principal with Dyslexia Action, UK, in her talk, Remedial Techniques an Overview, spoke of practical techniques like cursive handwriting and synthetic phonics, to help LD children. She made a strong case for structured multi-sensory learning that works best for LD children by reinforcing links between sound and symbols. Patricia Barthorpe, a Special Education Needs Consultant, UK, addressed the audience twice during the symposium. In Maths and Learning Problems in Maths, she outlined the use of innovative techniques like getting the LD students to tell a mathematical story and helping them discern patterns in numbers and figures to help them overcome Dyscalculia. Speaking on LD in Adolescent and Adult Life — Career Choices, she elucidated on how developing the interpersonal and intrapersonal skills of LD children helps them lead fruitful lives as adults. With the push for equal opportunities at work, people with LD are now able to find an occupation more in tune with today's networked economy instead of traditional unskilled jobs. Karen Dakin, Vice-President of the International Dyslexia Association, did a Review of Multi-tiered Instruction Model for Reading Disabilities, Assessments, and Intervention Techniques for the Classroom and described the three-tiered education approach followed in some classrooms in the U.S. Karen also addressed the audience on the Orton-Gillingham Therapy for Dyslexia explaining the basis of the therapy and how the therapy teaches phonological awareness, morphology, and semantics through a direct approach and diagnostic teaching. Dr. Sardesai, who works with the Government of India in Education and Child Health, while talking on How the Government Can Help, outlined how the Government is reaching out to students with LD through its Sarva Shikshan Abhiyaan using the guidelines provided by the High Court of Mumbai. She also pointed out that sensitizing the teachers and school principals, training subject teachers to recognize LD, and organizing remedial teaching were big challenges and that the government as yet had no effective ways of tackling them. Dr. Smita Desai, Special Educator and Psychiatrist, Drishti, India, tackled a problem peculiar to India, Vernacular Languages and LD. India's multi-lingual ethos require assessments and interventions to be administered in numerous languages and stressed the need to develop a standard indigenous assessment portfolio. In his talk on Social and Emotional Aspects in the Learning Disabled, Dr. Kersi Chavda noted that feelings of frustration, inadequacy, and loneliness result in higher than normal incidence of depression and suicide in kids with LD. There were also talks by Jean Salt who spoke on Inclusive Education — Every Teacher is a Teacher of an LD Student, highlighting the inclusive education policy followed in the U.K. Anita Guha described how IBM included people with special needs in its workforce while speaking on Career Opportunities for People with Disabilities. She pointed out that it is necessary to position diversity and inclusivity not only as something to "help" a special group but also as a policy that helps an organization deliver better value to its clients and the society. The symposium also featured a couple of short films on the issue of LD. Laura Cryer from SEN & Inclusion Publisher, Semerc, Granada Learning, UK, while talking on Supporting People with Learning Disabilities Using Information Technology demonstrated some e-learning products that helped LD students. A separate medical track featured talks by Dr. Nandini Mundkur from Bangalore Children's Hospital (Medical Aspects of LD), Dr. Madhuri Kulkarni (Procedures of Assessment), and Dr. Sunil Karande, Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Sion Hospital (Case Studies of LD). Two panel discussions, one each at the end of every day, analyzed some aspects of LD. Dr. Smita Desai chaired a discussion that had Kate Currawala (Maharastra Dyslexia Association), Laura Cryer, Manisha Mohan (from TIS), and Achama Matthew (CEO, Bombay Cambridge Schools), analyzing Technology and Teaching in LD. The discussion concluded that technology, especially computers, being non-judgmental and fast, could be a great tool for LD children to practice their lessons and by giving them the control, could also empower. The Way Forward was chaired by Kate Currawala. Dr. Madhuri Kulkarni felt increasing centers and people testing for LD were the areas to focus on. Rukhsana Kolhapurwalla, felt that a move away from rote learning to understanding, in India’s schools would benefit LD children. Mr. Sanjaya Sharma, CEO of TIS, pointed out that while experts could tell what needed to be done, TIS can make it happen by bringing its project management approach to the challenge. The TLDF ended on that practical note. Judging by the reactions of the audience and the speakers, the TLDF seemed to be quite a success. Glenys Heap felt that the TLDF was "A great experience, a wonderful opportunity to meet with other specialists from all over the world." Dr. Gerald Erenberg pointed out that the "well planned list of topics and top notch presenters" ensured that the TLDF was well received. Patricia Barthorpe pointed out that while it was a good first attempt, TIS needs to build on this each year. This is just the beginning and TIS intends to make the TLDF an annual feature. The TIS team that organized and attended the TLDF is already thinking of ways to realize Mr. Sharma’s vision. Going by the TIS' record of bettering performances each year and the promise shown by the first TLDF, the second symposium will definitely be worth the wait. And you never know, Richard Branson, might be the surprise speaker next year. (Mandar Talvekar is a Senior Instructional Designer at Tata Interactive)

"What? You go to Manhattan every day? Ayyayayay!" my New Jersey taxi driver shakes his head in total disbelief. "You sure you want to commute every day from New Jersey?" My Madison Avenue project manager asks with something bordering on pity. It’s not an emotional divide that one crosses so nonchalantly every day, you see. It takes a special kind of madness and loser-ishness to choose to go back to NJ after seeing the splendor of Upper East Side everyday. I do it because I like being part of the commuters’ sub-culture. It’s like a covenant, with arcane rituals, rigid rules, and unspoken demands for conformity. You pick up the rules by subconscious osmosis—within 24 hours, you know which part of the train you should get in to get down at the most convenient spot at the destination; you pick up that the correct etiquette of traveling in jam packed trains is not to make physical or eye-contact as much as possible; you understand that on the narrow escalator, the right lane is slow and left lane is fast; and you know how to pace yourself so that you don’t run over people or get run over by them. I also like the drama with which I get delivered into Manhattan. First, the train that has been chugging happily along the tired and slightly depressing suburbs of NJ suddenly gets into a long, dark, and mysterious tunnel. It is so long and deep that your ears pop due to the pressure difference. Then you are thrown into the utterly chaotic, bewildering, and labyrinthine maze of the NY Penn Station. There, you are borne by the jostling crowd, attacked by competing aromas from different eating joints, startled by the sporadic announcements interspersed with (for some really strange reason) classical instrumental music, and made to climb up/down at least 100 steps (I counted) before finding yourself on the street or on a subway platform. Then of course there is the quintessential NY experience of subway travel. Filled with the regulation junkies, musicians, sharply dressed professionals, individuals talking to themselves, school kids and tourists, it’s a melting point of everything that you have read and heard about New York. Finally, I just love the way Manhattan bursts on me as a revelation and a reward after almost 90 minutes of commute. As I walk past the decrepit panhandler, past the old newspaper vendor, past the hot dog cart, past the shop specializing in nylons, and on to Madison Avenue, I always feel like a million dollars. Because as my friend succinctly puts it, "It doesn’t get bigger than this, baby!" At least not in the Milky Way. (Priya Thiagarajan is Deputy Head - Instructional Design, Products & Skills Training Practice at TIS, and a recently besotted NY fan)

The Learning Circuits Blog’s question of the month for December 2006 was actually three questions (very soon they may well start sending questionnaires): What will you remember most about 2006? What are the biggest challenges for you/us as [we] head into 2007? What are your predictions for 2007? Some of us had expressed our individual views through our personal blogs, but we wanted to put up a TATA Interactive response. We decided to have a panel discussion to articulate our views. We approached the questions from various lenses - design and business, our company and the overall industry, e-learning organizations and client organizations. And here it is - a podcast of the panel discussion. Download the mp3 to listen to it in a player of your choice or simply use the player below. It’s a bit on the longer side (~32 minutes / 12.4 MB), but considering the informal nature of it, it has not been edited - so what you hear is everything that was said in the discussion. The panel comprised Albert Lewis, Head - Business Excellence & Technology Strategy; Geetha Krishnan, Corporate Mentor - Productization; Manisha Mohan, Head - Design & Innovation; Anand Subramanian, Head - Systems Design; and Anil Mammen, Head - Instructional Design. We would love to receive feedback from industry experts and client organizations on our perspectives and predictions.

This month, the Learning Circuits Blog threw up another toughie. What are the trade offs between quality learning programs and rapid e-learning and how do you decide?We tossed the question to two of our colleagues. An instructional designer brings the (surprise, surprise!) learner into the picture while a business manager puts his nose to the grindstone (and the client to the forefront) as the two of them put mouse to mouse pad. Dr. Shwetaleena Bidyadhar, Senior Instructional Designer I would like to approach the ‘Big Question’ of this month from a Need Saliency perspective. Most motivation theories stress that intrinsic factors (such as job satisfaction) are higher order motivators and should be valued more than extrinsic factors (like money). Is this necessarily true? In reality, an individual’s needs may be intrinsic, extrinsic, or some combination of both. The Need Saliency Theory (Kanungo, 1982b) evolved as an alternative approach to such theories. It states that our involvement in a job depends on its potential to satisfy our salient needs. We should first identify an individual’s/group’s priorities and then look for ways to satisfy these, rather than make generalizations about what would motivate them. Is there a lesson in this for us? Should we label a design strategy as being of ‘better quality’ in isolation of learner profile and training requirements? Based on this theory, can we draw a parallel to the issue of rapid vs. quality e-learning? When designing an e-learning course, quality learning products may seem like the ideal thing to recommend. We know that this approach inevitably means more design and development time. It also leads to higher costs. Does this approach always translate into enhanced learning retention and a high return on investment? Is the degree of correlation between these variables significant?  Is something that is interesting for us to design equally interesting for a learner to go through? The underlying assumption that rapid e-learning does not lead to quality learning may be questioned. Rapid e-learning has its uses and applications. It may suit certain types of learners and situational requirements better. It also brings higher benefits to clients by reducing development costs and ‘time to learning.’ The design decision should be arrived at after a detailed analysis and evaluation of all information available. We should not approach this stage with the preconceived notion that rapid learning means ‘less learning’. Borrowing terminology from research methodology, if ‘design decision’ is an independent variable’ and ‘effective transfer of this learning’ is the dependent variable, some of the moderating variables could be: User psychographics Type of content Desired level of learning Immediacy of need for learning Delivery medium or blend suitable Budget A rule of thumb could be to use rapid e-learning where the important learning material is structured, and simple. It can be ideal for easy-to-memorize skills or for highly motivated and busy learners. Enhanced treatment including use of games, simulations, and multimedia may work best for content that requires a higher degree of cognitive processing and analytical skills. In the real world, our proposed solutions mostly use an optimum combination of both. This increases effort to some extent but may lead to better transfer of training. I would like to conclude by reiterating the importance of the first and last stages of the life cycle of most e-learning projects - taking into account the learner profile of the present project and analyzing learner feedback from similar projects. Sometimes it’s as simple as paying attention to the basics! Ajay Menon, Senior Business Manager The most critical decision in any business (e-learning or otherwise) is, "What can be compromised - Quality or Schedule?" Try as much as we may, the answer is never "either quality or schedule."  Wish it was that easy but you can never choose one over the other. But if push comes to shove my opinion is that it is always quality that gets the pride of place. Yes, there are instances where the time-to-market factor influences the client’s decision (and hence our response) but even then the focus is on delivering quality within the stipulated timelines. This could probably be achieved by involving additional resources or by working late hours. Getting back to the trade-offs between quality and rapid production - no client is ever going to be happy with a product of inferior quality even if it is delivered before or by the agreed dates. It would also help to remember that the process of production is not complete at the time of delivery. There are a lot of activities (including reviews) that the client performs before the final signoff.  This means that even if we compromise deadlines but ensure quality, the client will not have to spend additional time for reviews and corresponding rework thus not impacting the final delivery. In one of the projects we worked on (for a University in the U.S.) we had to repeatedly go back to the client with requests for extension of the deadlines for a variety of reasons (SME issues, our inability to comprehend the subject, etc.). The client obviously wasn’t too pleased but agreed to the relaxation of the deadlines provided we ensure quality. This just goes to prove that clients are always open to re-scheduling if they are informed in time and given valid reasons. It is almost impossible to find clients who will compromise quality just for the sake of ticking out a date on their calendar. If that is an established fact, then the whole debate of Quality v/s Schedule becomes irrelevant. We need to understand that quality is not just a client expectation; it is also a reflection of an organization’s delivery promise. So when we debate about a tradeoff between quality and schedule, it is not just the client reaction but also your organization’s policy that is under scrutiny.

We participated in the Mumbai Marathon 2007, once again running for the cause of Learning Disability. Please click here to see some pictures from this event.

Training professionals are often called upon to stretch their skills into the broader world of performance improvement consulting. Short of a certification in performance improvement, what is a practical step to take in this direction? I propose the development of blended models that emphasizes the elements that training and non-training solutions have in common rather than what distinguishes them. My interest in a blended model was heightened by my work last year with Caterpillar University in Peoria, Illinois. In addition to instructional systems design skills, Caterpillar teaches its internal learning consultants a human performance improvement (HPI) model based on ASTD’s model. While ASTD uses an HPI model, ISPI offers a human performance technology (HPT) model. Both are designed to attack a broad range of performance problems with either training or non-training interventions, as appropriate.An actionable model is a project plan. So I wondered how to integrate ISD and HPI models into a single plan in Microsoft Project. First, I tried inserting the various phases and activities of an HPI model beneath the framework of an ISD model. This yielded a serviceable plan with all the necessary activities, but it seemed to violate the spirit of treating HPI as a superset of ISD. After all, learning solutions are only one galaxy of interventions within the universe of performance problems. But most of the solutions we develop at TATA Interactive include a learning element, so I didn’t want to entirely subordinate an ISD approach to an HPI system. I reshuffled the plan so that neither the ISD nor the HPI components were a subset of the other, but both ran in parallel, sharing the same major phases. At the point where a solution set is selected, the training solutions would follow ISD approaches and other interventions would follow their appropriate tools and disciplines. One way to use an HPI mindset in an ISD world is simply to use it to deflect requests for training when a performance problem is not amenable to a training solution. If you’ve got an employee selection problem or an incentive problem, trying to train your way out of it risks wasting resources and disappointing the sponsor. But a blended model is too valuable to restrict its use to sending clients and sponsors elsewhere when they prematurely jump to the conclusion that they need training. It can also help to integrate the design and development of various solutions so they work together rather than ignore each other. Some performance improvement solutions, such as the restructuring of incentives plans, may seem far removed from training solutions. But even if the training department doesn’t design the new incentive structure, wouldn’t it be natural to train the affected people on the new incentives and to take them into account in developing training? Other non-learning interventions integrate easily with learning. The most natural example is job aids, which are often developed by training organizations even though they would most often be classified as non-training solutions. At the high end of non-training performance solutions, TATA Interactive Systems develops sophisticated solutions in the ePSS (electronic performance support systems) space. An important integration of training with an ePSS involves determining which bits of information must be recalled frequently. If the information merits being embedded in the mind for quick recall, a training solution could be the answer, and if the information is so varied that it’s not feasible to train on every conceivable aspect, a just-in-time look-up system could work very well. A closely integrated model can keep all the toolsets handy to meet the miscellany of performance needs and can help to coordinate rather than isolate them. (John Gibbs is an instructional design consultant with TIS.)

iKnowledge Solutions (iKS) a Tata Technologies company recently launched V5 for i.get.it®, a specialized social network for the Engineering Design community. The global launch happened in presence of a large press delegation from leading media houses, at Taj Mahal Towers, Colaba, Mumbai on 25-Jan-07. This was followed by a fun filled mega launch amongst the next-generation design engineers from India, at Techfest 2007 at IIT Mumbai with approx. 35,000 attendees. The end product www.myigetit.com, is a cool place to hang out with Blogs, Forums, industry headlines, tech tips, really cool wallpapers and videos for downloading. Not to forget, courses for continued education, resource repositories and power tools. With a ‘fundoo’ graphic design and using terminology like Lady’s Room, Break Room, Nerve Center to put the message across, it was only appropriate that the launch at the IIT Techfest 2007, included a spectacular video that combined racing and i.get.it®, in an open air venue with thousands of people in one place, with a fireworks show and a rock concert atmosphere. Jointly developed by the TIS' software solutions practice & iKS, working across geographies on technologies like ASP .Net, AJAX, Java and SQL Server, the new i.get.it® leverages SaaS (Software-as-a-Service, also known as On Demand) business strategies and WEB 2.0 design patterns. With different teams working, the development process was virtually on 24x7. The new i.get.it® also includes an integrated search query powered by Google hardware and software, thereby providing the end users of the application, unlimited search capabilities. This joint development initiative provided TIS & iKS an excellent opportunity to combine their expertise and experience of developing software applications in the domain of e-learning and engineering design respectively and create a 'one stop' solution. To know the ‘faces’ behind TIS' development team from its software solutions practice and learn about their experience - click here - and visit the i.get.it friends section from the home page

When I was asked to go onsite to Iowa City for three months, I was a little hesitant. It was more than just Mumbai to Iowa City - I’m sure you’ll agree that a change of temperature from an average of 30C to one of -20C is not particularly pleasant. However, I agreed. And here I am. The flight was fairly uneventful, but I did have an interesting conversation at the immigration counter in Chicago (my port of entry). Sam (the immigration guy with a friendly smile): So this isn’t your first time visit to the U.S.?Me: No, I’ve been here before.Sam: Where are you headed?Me: Iowa City.Sam: And where did you go the last time?Me: (suspicious tone) San Francisco.Sam (grimacing): Yikes! You’re gonna hate it in Iowa City then. It’s in the middle of nowhere. And compared to San Francisco it’s, well, BORING! Alright here you go…go through Gate 7… As I waited for my connecting flight in O’Hare, I mulled over what Sam said. "Flee" was the first thought that came to my mind, but it was too late; my flight was announced and I needed to rush. A blast of cold air literally paralyzed me when I stepped out of the airport at Cedar Rapids, IA. I rushed into the first taxi I found and headed to the apartment I was to be sharing with a colleague.It’s been three weeks now and I’ve settled into a comfortable routine. Work 9—5, go home, stare at the walls for bit, cook, chat online and with my roommate, sleep. And yes, Sam was right: I quite hated it here because there’s really not much one can do in the biting cold outside. Until yesterday, the most exciting thing I had done was go to the Barnes & Noble store at the mall and visit the Public Library (which, by the way, is an absolute treasure). Then, yesterday, one of our client contacts here caught us just as we were leaving the office and handed over some tickets to a university-level basketball game. It was the University of Iowa "Hawkeyes" versus the Northwestern University "Wildcats." Now, I’m not much of a basketball fan (my knowledge of the game begins and ends with Michael Jordan), but that didn’t stop me—here was an opportunity to got out and still not freeze, and I wasn’t about to let go of that. So, we rushed home from work and went straight to the Carver Hawkeye Arena, where the game was to be held. The place was teeming with people of all ages, dressed in black and yellow—the Hawkeye colors. We took our seats and I quietly absorbed the electric atmosphere. People around me were passionately discussing who would win or rushing to get some food. I didn’t budge from my seat because I didn’t want to miss ANYTHING! When the home team came on court, the band launched into the "Iowa Hawkeye’s Fight Song" and the crowd went wild. Everyone sang along as the lyrics flashed on the "HawkVision" screen:        Hawkeyes Fight Song "The word is "Fight! Fight! Fight! for IOWA,Let every loyal Iowan sing;The word is "Fight! Fight! Fight! for IOWA,"Until the walls and rafters ring (Go Hawks!)Come on and cheer, cheer, cheer, for IOWACome on and cheer until you hear the final gun.The word is "Fight! Fight! Fight! for IOWA,"Until the game is won." It wasn’t very difficult to get swayed by the passion of the song and the crowd; soon I found myself cheering every field goal the home team scored and booing every time the opposition scored. The timeouts during the game were also fun. The cheerleaders would come on to the court and perform gravity-defying moves. Herky the Hawk egged the crowd on to make more noise and to keep cheering. During half time, the Step Dance team from the University of Iowa put up a great performance too. And through the game, lots of freebies like t-shirts and mini basketballs were continuously thrown into the crowd. The two kids sitting next to me tried hard but couldn’t get their hands on anything. As the game continued, I learned more about the game and its associated "lingo." I now know what terms like three-point line, jump ball, and air ball mean. And when the Iowa Hawkeyes won, everyone went completely wild, including me. It’s great to be in Iowa City! (Rohini Gupta is a lead content developer with Tata Interactive Systems)

We are delighted that Brain Teasers will go on sale from 27-Feb-07 in Landmark, a leading national bookstore chain in India. Brain Teasers is a book we created to meet the special educational needs of children with learning disabilities. The book has been developed in association with the LTMG Hospital in Sion, Mumbai and is published by Tata McGraw Hill. This is a proud moment for all those involved in the creation of this valuable book. Brain Teasers provides practice in reading, writing and mathematics, and is intended to help children with learning disabilities rediscover the joy of learning. It also helps parents understand learning disabilities and find ways to address them. If you are interested in getting a copy of the book, visit any Landmark bookstore in Mumbai, Gurgaon, Bangalore, or Chennai. If you live elsewhere, please do write in to us, and we’ll try and figure out a way to get it across to you.

Devry University is one of our key clients and we did a Math Mastery System for them. The project went of really well, and we had a satisfied client on our hands. Then this plaque landed, making us realize that we did not just have a satisfied client; we had a delighted client. Congratulations to the team for making this possible. Thanks, Devry, for the appreciation! It makes us strive even better.

Like all corporate citizens caught up in the daily rush to create and deliver great products and services, TIS-ites are also prone to some amount of social guilt. The ‘I wish I could do something for my country, city, neighbourhood’ thought is something most of us have toyed with. The Kolkata Marathon, held on 25th February, 2007, which invited people to run for their city, provided the opportunity to convert those thoughts into actions. Even then, the process did not begin smoothly, and the reason was this. "6.30 am on a Sunday morning?? You must be kidding!""The last time I ran, there was a mad dog behind me""I can run 10-hour programs but running 4.2 kms…no way!" Amidst all this, somebody said the magic words "Don’t be boring" and that did it. Because ‘boring’ is one of those unforgivable states of being as far as TIS is concerned and one by one the employees rose to the occasion, like crusaders on the march to spread the religion of the interesting. We decided to take this opportunity to increase awareness about Learning Disability in India, LD being a key community that TIS supports. The slogan for the banner read ‘Use Your Feet to Lend a Hand’ and our T-shirts sported the Learning Disability logo. If, at this stage, anyone was still wondering why they had registered, they had their reason and a good one too.The TIS group, which was over 40 people strong, arrived at the venue around 6.30 - there were people who apparently woke up at the ungodly hour of 3.30 am to be there at 5 am and then there were those who battled minor mishaps (like failing to hear the alarm) to be there by 6.45. The area where we assembled near Fort William is one of the prettiest parts of Kolkata, with an abundance of green and long stretches of good quality roads. Seeing thousands of people gathered there to take part in the marathon lifted our spirits immediately. Chaos and confusion, the usual side effects of mass participation, greeted us; but soon people managed to find their groups and were waiting eagerly for the race to start. The wait proved a tad long, since we were participating in the Fun Run, which got underway after the main races - the general marathon and the women’s marathon. Some of those gathered for the Fun Run were so eager to get going that they actually started running with the marathoners! Announcements followed and those who thought they had actually missed the beginning of the Fun Run, were reassured that the ‘fun’ had not begun! Amidst speculation about what happened to those who took off with the marathoners on the 42 km route, we took our positions. There was fair amount of interest in the Learning Disability banner and the general boisterous nature of the TIS group got them a fair share of newsbytes. And then, it began. Most of us had laid our cards openly before the start - we cannot run and will only walk. But in the excitement of the moment, we found ourselves running and it felt just great! True, we slowed down to a brisk walk after some time, but the adrenalin rush was worth missing the precious hours of sleep on a Sunday morning. The prankster in the Kolkatan soon surfaced, and people started taking short cuts, tempting others with offers of a sumptuous breakfast at K C Das, which was on the way. But we resisted and marched forward, and surprisingly, the older members of TIS (above 30 years, that is) proved more energetic than the younger ones! The youngsters decided they had to make an impression too, and in a great burst of energy, they started sprinting with the LD banner, almost knocking off a fellow runner’s cap when they swept the banner over his head! Towards the end of our route, the women marathoners passed us - we were mortified, as much by the sight of their rippling muscles and steady breathing as by the thought that they had already run 12 kms while we were still to finish 4.2!! Maybe it was this or our talent for showmanship that showed its influence as we were nearing the end - we decided that we must run to the finish. So we ran the last half km and as we approached the finishing line, we found people actually cheering us on!!  As we rested, all energy spent, the rumblings in our stomach reminded us that we had missed breakfast. Being in the vicinity of Flury’s, the most favoured breakfast destination of Kolkata, the idea struck instantaneously. With renewed energy, we descended on Park Street and found, to our chagrin, that all the other marathoners had the same idea. Flury’s was packed. Not prone to give up easily, especially where good food is concerned, we landed up at T3 (short for The Tea Table), the old Flury’s shop. Then followed a great exercise in self-gratification and sinful self-indulgence peppered by liberal doses of laughter, leg pulling and wisecracks. After satiating ourselves with some great food washed down with Darjeeling tea we returned home, happy in the knowledge that we did our own bit, however small, for the city and for the cause of Learning Disability awareness. I’m sure all of us are now agreed on one point - there is no better way to spend a Sunday morning! (Poushali Chatterjee is Senior Specialist - Instructional Design with TIS)

CNBC has started a new 5-part series on Innovation called, "The Business of Innovation". The first episode ("Innovators and Iconoclasts") has already aired, but is available online here.  It's really quite good, with interviews with many well respected figures from the business and innovation arena.  Well worth the time to watch the 4 segments... So what does this have to do with learning? Although the series is hosted by Maria Bartiromo, she is assisted by Roger Schank, well-known educational provoker and Artifical Intelligence/Cognitive Science expert.  From my perspective, he steals the show (full disclosure: I studied under Schank at Northwestern's Institute for the Learning Sciences). Consider these snippets from the episode's opening: Innovators don't really fit in very well (with others) Nearly everyone starts out as an Iconoclast (a rule breaker) - little kids don't know the rules; they do what they want to do. Failure is KEY!  You have to be failing and failing again. Big companies are always trying to hire people who were in the top 10% at Harvard, under the assumption that they are good.  What Harvard graduates are good at is... Harvard. You want someone original from Harvard?  Try the BOTTOM 10%.  Those kids are smart enough to get it, then decided they weren't playin' the game. BINGO! The connection here (among others) is that we need to be willing to experiment and fail in order to break the mold of "what everyone else is doing" or "how it's always been done".  If we aren't willing to reach out beyond what's known and assured, then we'll just get more of what we've got. Failure has such an unfairly bad rep - companies (generally) hate it, employees (mostly) avoid it, recruiters rarely ask about it.  Yet it's the home zip code of where learning occurs.  If you do something and succeed, all that tells you is that what you already know works - it provides confirmation, but no growth/learning.  The primary time real learning occurs is when we do X, expecting Y, and Z occurs instead.  BOOM!  Discomfort and surprise result!  Motivation to find out what the hell happened arises!  A new case for your storehouse of experiences is added to your wetware!  And a few new synapses are connected! - Learning has occurred! It's exactly this kind of semi-contrarian stance that has made Roger who he is.  Love him or hate him, it's tough to ignore him and the points he makes. Do yourself a favor and do a quick Google on "Roger Schank" and read what he's written/said, as well as the responses he's generated (pro AND con).  I guarantee you will find yourself shifting in your seat and thinking more deeply about some "common/accepted knowledge" than you probably have recently. Here are a few to get you started: His blog on District Administrator, an online magazine for K-12 Education Leaders His (occasional) Educational Outrage column His Student Bill of Rights His Maxims for Learning (Jon Revelos is Director - Story Based Learning at TATA Interactive Systems)

This month’s Big Question at The Learning Circuits Blog is "What Would You Do to Support New Managers?" I ask: What is it that you would like from your new managers? Are there some improvements you would like to see in the way things are managed in your company? What management skills are critical for your organization’s success? These and perhaps other related questions must be asked before a strategy is worked out to fulfill a new manager’s coaching needs. And this brings me to my point that coaching - more than the medium or the narrow view of ‘training’ - is an indispensable instrument in preparing your new managers to respond to the big challenges you’ve set up for them. You’ve probably realized that the one-time individual "doer" has now transitioned to the role of an "influencer", who will shape the productivity and success of large teams. Are there good examples and best practices that your new managers can follow to start delivering the goods from Day One? Here’s a list of what I’ve found useful: Institute a ‘Buddy’ system: At the point of transitioning into managerial roles, can you get respected senior managers to buddy your new managers to educate and develop them? Make use of the mentors’ experience to create a culture of success, and personalized ‘care’. Get them to flock together: Often new managers feel like they’re operating in isolation. Helping new managers to learn from each other and developing an environment of peer support goes a long way in addressing concerns that would otherwise have to wait for formal training to come by. Encourage inter-departmental flocking: Getting to know how other departments in the organization function, what they do, their staff, etc. helps build a shared vision and the much-touted big picture. Promote experiential learning: Get your managers to feedback to the system of the outcomes of experiential learning, e.g. key learning points from a major screw up, a client save, a major deal. What did the team do or not do to become successful? These need to become inspirational corporate stories that people - new managers or not - would like to know or read about. This is just a start. With strategic objectives clearly in focus, and the tools to deliver coaching in the classroom, on the Web, or face-to-face, you will only increase the likelihood of success with a team of high-performing managers. (Rohan Kohli is Senior Consultant, Instructional Design)

The title of this entry was inspired by a passage from Craig Wortmann’s terrific book, "What’s Your Story?" It speaks to both how communication has shifted in recent years and the ineffective nature of the way we often attempt to teach.Just as lengthy memos were replaced by brief emails, which were, in turn, overtaken by IMing and SMS (thanks to increasingly powerful mobile phones/devices), the way we converse and communicate is becoming more and more staccato’d . Increasingly, we are speaking to each other in fragmented facts and bullets instead of descriptive and nuanced narratives. In pursuit of speed, we have traded away "rich/engaging/compelling" for "fast/efficient/familiar". In many ways, this is a fool’s bargain, and it’s beginning to show.Q: What is the longest standing, most tried-and-true, and instinctually natural way of passing knowledge from expert to novice?A: Leave your laptops, Powerpoints, and Blackberries behind… Forget about books, manuals, and job aids… It’s the ancient art of storytelling.I’m planning to post a series of entries about the power of Story in Instructional Design in the coming weeks/months, but I figured this observation regarding bullet points was a good place to begin the journey. It speaks to the importance of context and the way we process, store, and recall information.When you tell someone a set of facts and figures, it can make a temporary impact, but it’s usually quickly forgotten as decontextualized white noise. What’s lacking is meaning and relevance to the listener - in order for something to be understood at a deep level and retained for more than a few days (hours?... minutes!?...), there has to be a personal connection made. Something that relates the new information to old, personal, previously understood information. Something that refines, extends, contradicts, augments, or otherwise changes the existing set of cases and rules that exist in the learner’s mind. Without this comparative review and adjustment, any ‘learning’ that may occur will ultimately be fleeting.So, we need to move away from the expedient habit of disseminating data in meaningless bullets and rediscover the importance of context, which can be created in the form of stories.Here's a short and simple example to illustrate the difference.Consider the following bulleted fact: "Corporate earnings were 3.2 billion (dollars/yen/euros/pounds/rupees) in 2006." What does this data point tell you? What image do you have in your head about this company’s standing? What do you understand now that you didn’t understand before? What meaning has this information given you?OK - now review the following 12 charts (with the red "dot" marking 3.2 billion):  Instantly, and without conscious effort, you probably told yourself a "mini story" to process and comprehend the data represented in each chart. You couldn’t help yourself. Is 3.2 billion a good thing? A bad thing? Status quo? For each chart above, you easily created a plausible tale of "what’s going on" that is grounded in your previous experiences (firsthand and vicarious). This instinctual tendency is part of who we are, at a fundamental level. It provides a compelling insight into how our brains work, and suggests ideas for leveraging this cognitive habit to our instructional advantage.Imagine the final step in this example chain - instead of being given a bulleted fact, or even a graphical chart, you are provided a compelling narrative of the events that influenced a company's fiscal performance Maybe a story of how a small oil and gas company played a role in one of the largest bankruptcies in US history? How recognizible and well-understood are terms like "securities fraud" in the post Enron/Worldcom era? Why?  Because stories were told - stories of greed, arrogance, fraud, trust, loss, and ruin - that brought obscure accounting terms and practices out of the textbooks and into the personally relevant world of everyday people.Stories help to add meaning to new data. Meaning is a critical element in increasing retention. Without retention, there's no hope for application. (Jon Revelos is Director - Story Based Learning at TATA Interactive Systems)

I've noticed a slowly growing trend in the marketplace, and I think it's time it's questioned. It has become quite in vogue to bad-mouth and shun the use of Powerpoint in presentations. I was first exposed to this stance in a presentation by Edward Tufte (author of several fantastic books on information visualization and communication).  He made a mark for himself by declaring that "Powerpoint is Evil", both in a WIRED article and in a longer whitepaper. More recently, Elliot Masie dubbed his newly minted "Learning 200X" conferences to be "PPT-free Zones", instructing presenters to leave their slides at home in hopes that it would foster greater discussion and interaction amongst attendees (and this underlying objective may have been accomplished, as the sessions *did* move from being lectures to conversations). Just last week I spent a terrific day in Washington DC talking about Stories and Conversations at an event hosted by the Smithsonian Associates.  One of the great speakers that presented was Larry Prusak of IBM KM fame.  I really enjoyed his talk, which was PPT-free, but instead of simply quietly adopting that presentation stance and moving ahead, he made a pointed announcement of his disdain of Powerpoint.  He even went so far as to say that he uninstalled the app from the MS Office Suite on his computer. Finally (and completely serendipitously), this month's 'Big Question' on the Learning Curcuits Blog is precisely on this topic - the What/When/Why of PPT.  The BQ seems to have been prompted by an Austrailian press article that uses Dr. John Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory to explain why most PPTs are so head-droppingly awful (and the link makes terrific sense to me). In all of these cases (and the dozens I haven't mentioned, some of which are here), I can't help but think that the primary flag-wavers of the Anti-Powerpoint movement are projecting their disgust and anger in the wrong direction.  Powerpoint is simply a tool, like a hammer, or a lawnmower.  In and of itself, it's not really something that can be deemed "evil".  It is the way the tool is leveraged that gives it "value" (good or bad). Don't get me wrong - I've been the victim (and... umm... the perpetrator) of more than a few AWFUL powerpoint presentations.  You know the ones - where the audience is given a live (often monotone) narration of (text-laden) slides that are linearly displayed.  I am in no way defending this embarrassment of communication - I'm simply pointing out that the fault sits with the *presenter*, not the tool (despite the fact that the tool may make it easy for the lazy to use it in bone-headed ways). Just because a hammer can be used to both frame a house for the victims of a natural disaster and murder someone, that doesn't make it inherently "evil" or "good".  Those value-laden terms can only be reasonably used to describe the users of the tool based on what they chose to do with it.  When Larry said he had removed Powerpoint from his computer, for its nature of promoting one-way communication, I wanted to ask him if he had also removed Word?  According to the logic of his argument for uninstalling Powerpoint, any word processor should also be shunned - after all, documents are monologues, not dialogs, right?I'm reminded of a email exchange I recently had with Geetha Krishnan, a colleague at TIS. In our exchange, I was reminded of an old argument Socrates made against the adoption of books:Socrates: ….If men learn this, it will implant forgetfulness in their souls; they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks. What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for reminder. And it is not true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only its semblance, for by telling them of many things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for the most part they know nothing, and as men filled, not with wisdom, but with the conceit of wisdom, they will be a burden to their fellows." Phaedrus: . . . I agree that the man of Thebes is right in what he said about writing. Socrates: Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise anyone who takes it over from him, on the supposition that such writing will provide something reliable and permanent, must be exceedingly simple-minded; he must really be ignorant of Ammon's utterance, if he imagines that written words can do anything more than remind one who knows that which the writing is concerned with. Phaedrus: Very true. Socrates: You know, Phaedrus, that's the strange thing about writing, which makes it truly analogous to painting. The painter's products stand before us as though they were alive, but if you question them, they maintain a most majestic silence. It is the same with written words; they seem to talk to you as though they were intelligent, but if you ask them anything about what they say, from a desire to be instructed, they go on telling you just the same thing forever. And once a thing is put in writing, the composition, whatever it may be, drifts all over the place, getting into the hands not only of those who understand it, but equally of those who have no business with it; it doesn't know how to address the right people, and not address the wrong. And when it is ill-treated and unfairly abused it always needs its parent to come to its help, being unable to defend or help itself. Phaedrus: Once again you are perfectly right. (from The Collected Dialogues of Plato. Eds. Edith Hamilton and H. Cairns. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1963. pp. 520-21. 274D-276B.)A presentation can be given effectively or ineffectively using the same tool (or without a tool at all). It's time to focus on the actual source of the problem and stop making simple-minded arguments against red herring causes. Those who create and deliver Powerpoint presentations with packed paragraphs of 10-point text, meaningless clip-art, and irritating spinning and flashing animations should be sent to a class on effective presentations. Simply taking the (abused) tools away leaves these culprits none-the-wiser to the error of their ways, and discounts the communicative power that Powerpoint can render when placed in the right hands. Just as Socrates threw the baby out with the bathwater regarding the power and benefit of the written word, I think those who argue that Powerpoint should be nuked are making a similar error. This suggestion is analogous to saying that duiring your next presentation, you should require the audience to close their eyes as you speak - to turn off one of the primary means of informational reception.  Visuals play a powerful role in communications, so why would anyone make a broad-brush suggestion that there's benefit in prohibiting them?  Can you imagine speaking about Art without visuals?  How about good User Interface Design?  How about long-horizon trends in any one of a variety of domains?  Images often instantly 'say' more than is able to be easily enunciated in words or text. "A picture is worth a thousand words" isn't just a meaningless phrase, you know... (Jon Revelos is Director - Story Based Learning at TATA Interactive Systems)