Stephen Lahanas recently started a new topic on the Learning Circuits Blog Discussion Wiki. His topic is Capability-Based Content which he describes as:Capability based content is developed specifically with capability assimilation as its primary expectation outcome. This directly contradicts the majority of learning content developed today using traditional assessment-based outcome paradigms. Capability-based content represents both a pedagogy as well as methodology for content development.Not only would Stephen like to discuss this topic with others on the LCB Discussion Wiki, he's looking to get some help in building out a model and examples which can be operationalized to drive the development of capability-based content. If you're curious and/or would like to help Stephen with this project, check out the capability-based content page on the LCB Discussion Wiki.Remember, the LCB Discussion Wiki is available to any member of the LCB community who wishes to us it to raise a topic for discussion with the community. Just create a page, add your topic and you're off and running. Please also drop me a note using the form on the FAQ page so I can help you make sure your page is formatted correctly and a notice, like this one, gets posted to LCB to let everyone know your page exists.

As compared to ten years ago when there were roughly four major authoring tools, today there are a large number of different tools and different approaches to creating content. You can use standard authoring tools, rapid development tools, LCMS, simulation development tools, HTML editors, Wikis, and many others including a vast array of media creation solutions. And to make matters more difficult seems to be a constant flood of new tools. We literally have 100s of choices.So, this month, The Big Question is...Choosing Tools?Please answer this question by posting to your own blog or commenting on this post.(For further help in how to participate via blog posts, see the side bar.)Points to Consider:How does the eLearning design process need to change to accomodate such a wide variety of tools?How does the tool selection process need to change? What should learning professionals do to stay up-to-speed? Do they need to learn new tools constantly? Can they stick with a few tools?Will this trend continue? If so, then what does that imply for us?Cathy MooreMaking ChangeElearning examples are here!Jeff CobbMission to LearnE-learning Tools and StrategyClaudia EscribanoLifeLongLearningLabToo Many Tools?Karl KappKapp NotesDesign Day and the ASTD Big Question for JulyJanet ClareyJanet Clarey, Brandon Hall ResearchChoosing ToolsQuintus JouberteLearning BlogeLearning tool selection !

We are all faced with a hobbling paradox. Most agree that employees make or break an enterprise, but the HR team often seems to be constantly catching up. Business leaders complain that they have to "break in" new HR people, and that individuals with HR degrees in college are not overly useful. Finally, when business leaders do praise HR, it is an individual person who gets praised, not the department. Obviously, this impacts Training and Development efforts directly. Any real effort to develop Big Skills requires a trust on the sponsor's part and a competency on the deliverer's part that too often are just not there. And any T+D efforts not around Big Skills is just treading water for the training group.As I work with global organizations, I have recently been aware of a staggering truth. Most HR groups have no succession planning for themselves. This is true even when HR works hard to create succession planning for every other part of the enterprise.If this is true, it both provides an explanation and a surprisingly easy remedy for the Hobbled HR group. And best of all, HR is already good at it: they know the tools of identification, rotational assignments, fast tracking, retention for strategic talent, partnering with business groups on critical projects, and global exposure.We have all heard the jokes about the lawyer who died without leaving a will, or the shoemaker's children going barefoot. So maybe it is time for the doctor to heal thyself.

I was doing some benchmarking the other day between a few different organizations. One question that was asked was, what are the "no-brainer" groups of employees to train? (And there may be a second question, what are the no-brainer topics to train, like leadership, ethics, sexual harassment, etc).To me, the obvious groups are:new employees;high potential people;call center employees;sales people; andanyone who has to have certification or compliance;anyone who has to demonstrate a mastery level (like a pilot, although this differs from organization to organization).What are other obvious classes of people that should be part of a formal learning program?

This question was sent to me a few weeks ago and I think it's great. The basic question is what are the best places to work. I'm sure we've all thought a bit about the different trade-offs with internal vs. external, different size/shape companies, types of industries, etc. And, I'm sure you'd love to know what other people think about this. So, this month's big questions is...So, this month, The Big Question is...Where to Work?Please answer this question by posting to your own blog or commenting on this post.(For further help in how to participate via blog posts, see the side bar.)Points to Consider:What should be considered such as innovative work, interesting projects, real impact, pay, life style, etc.?What types of companies make sense in different situations?What resources exist to help make sense of this?How does this differ for different roles such as Manager, Instructional Designer, Trainer and Authors?Does this apply in the US, UK, India, etc. equally?If you aren't at a "best place to work", how might you make a transition?Alternatively, feel free to tell us what's good and bad about your current job and what you are considering and why. I'm sure that everyone will be interested in these varied perspectives.Participating Blogs: Once you’ve posted your answer on your blog, please report your post using the form below. Your post will be added to the list within the next 24 hours (hopefully sooner) that will appear below the entry form.NOTE: If the forms do not appear below, please hit your browser’s refresh button. If the forms still do not appear, please use the Dear Blogmeister form which can be linked to from the top of the sidebar.This list can also be viewed by clicking here.We have created a del.icio.us tag for The Big Question. Please feel free to bookmark your participating post, your comment rss for your post, other web-based resources you feel relate to the June 2007 Big Question to del.icio.us using the tagtbq-september07 You can go to the del.icio.us page for this tag by clicking on the image to the left.ENJOY THE CONVERSATIONS!

I periodically get feedback from people on the value of having the varied perspectives that come in through the Big Questions. I'm sure that participants have seen that value as well (although it likely differs from month to month).I also wanted to point out that a recent T+D article Learning and Networking with a Blog used perspectives from the October 2006 Big Question - Should All Learning Professionals Be Blogging?You can see a bit more of the article that got deleted at: Learning and Networking with a Blog (Deleted Scenes).

Can one create a great educational simulation around ethics?One should be able to in theory. One point of Sim is to make an experience that allows people to see the consequences of their Actions in a safe environment. If you made a pure "ethics" sim, however, then of course students would just always "do the right thing." It would be as useful as the official Enron Ethics Handbook.Rather, my own thinking goes, one would build a life sim, or a business sim. One would challenge students to some realistic activity, and then toss in some ethical problems along the way.But then what? Would it be a challenge to recognize ethical problems, or would they be obvious? If they were obvious, is the best game play thing to always do the right thing, to accept an "ethics" friction? Or would they somehow represent interesting choices?Would you ever make people go bankrupt for making ethical decisions? Would you ever create a situation where people made some ethical compromises and were better off for it? Would the ideal strategy to be a little immoral? What is the role of realism vs. learning objectives? Can karma have the properties of an accumulator, where one might be able to work off debts? Can this moral ambiguity exist in an environment supported by corporations, for whom ethics have to be black and white?Can one's negative actions create indestructible demons waiting to spring upon one, perhaps visualized in a heads up display (HUD)? (In WILL Interactive's branching story on Sexually Transmitted Diseases, drinking too much eliminates options for getting out of a high pressure situation; in Tropico, where you are the president of an island-state, you can put off elections, but that increases discontent of your people that might rise up in arms.)And, would you want to seduce people into becoming bad? Would you engage in moral entrapment? Would you want to pull people to the dark side, and then surprise people with a mirror of themselves? Is this a matter of aligning strategies and tactics? One's degree of morality becomes a strategy that has to work into a larger context? Cheat, but only in certain industries?Would the ethical problem really be just a single solution puzzle, like the beer game? Would students go through it once, be tricked, and then never be fooled again? Would older students tell younger students "the solution?"Likewise, how might one deal with ethical violations in others? What if a great salesperson committed slight moral breaches? Do ethical violations spread in a chain reaction if not stopped? Are ethical violations contagions to be caught and spread? Or is there a balancing loop? Might one set up a containment strategy around a necessarily or incurably corrupt group? And how do you even find ethical violations? Does it require an act of probing? And if you were a manager, would you be concerened if an employee playing the sim engaged in highly unethical behavior? Aren't sims supposed to be safe places?All of this talk is academic, to some degree. The most important design consideration is that corporate sponsors can't even acknowledge that breaches of morality might have anything but bad consequences. It might be a paradox of this industry that in areas where sims could do the most good, they might not be able to do anything at all.See selective enforcement or breaking of rules: the critical skill that no school or training group will even admit exists.

There is a new field emerging, dealing with interactive content. I have created examples of it and written books about it, as have many others. But there is no universal name for the space (as in, "For our next program, we will use a ___ approach, or I am going to a conference to learn more about ____").Here are the top ten: 10. Virtual Experiences: Pros: Captures the essence of the value proposition. Cons: Overlaps with Social Networking (see below).9. Games: Pros: Unambiguous; unapologetic; makes the core point of learning by playing. Computer games (a subsection of all games) are a 10 billion dollar industry, therefore computer games should be in classrooms (other people say it more convincingly than I do). Cons: People play lots of games anyway - what is the value of forcing them to play more; too diverse; would you want your doctor to have learned from a game? 8. Simulations: Pros: Scientific; accurate; really serious. Cons: Includes many approaches that are not instructional (weather simulations) nor engageable; implies one hundred percent predictive accuracy.7. Social Impact Games: Pros: Convey the nobleness of the cause. Differentiates from the default notion of games as not having a (or having a negative) social impact. Cons: Still emphasizes the tricky word of "games;" doesn't fit in corporate or military cultures; has any social impact game actually had a social impact?6. Practiceware: Pros: Emphasizes the core of practicing to learn skills. Recalls model of batting cage and driving ranges. Cons: Franken-word; doesn't include a lot of puzzles and more awareness-raising activities; sounds vocational.5. Game-based learning/digital game based learning: Pros: Spells everything out - game AND learning - any questions? Cons: Sounds dated and academic. Serious Games? In e-Learning Guild's landmark (and live/ongoing) [survey] of 1,785 corporate, military, and academic practioners, most suggested not using the "serious games" name.4. Immersive Learning Simulations: Pros: Hits all of the key points. Cons: Doesn't roll of the tongue. Name sounds a bit redundant (wouldn't any two of the three words work just as well?).3. Educational Simulations: Pros: Sponsors like it. Cons: Sounds hard and perhaps too rigorous for casual students.2. Serious Games: Pros: Nicely ironic; students like it; press loves it - loves it (I mean NY Times and Serious Games should get a room); researchers use it as a way to get foundation grants; most popular handle (see unscientific but anecdotally consistent poll results above). Cons: Sponsors hate it; instructors from academics, corporate, and military hate it; emphasizes the most controversial part of the experience - the "fun" part (i.e. the game elements); often too conceptual (you would never call a flight simulator a "serious game."). Most examples of serious games are neither very serious nor very good examples of games; For better and worse, the successor to edutainment.1. Sims: Pros: Attractive to both students and sponsors; captures essence; fun. Cons: Also includes computer games in general, as well as one very famous franchise.Some of the other names include: action learning simulations, performance simulations, interactive strategies, and activities based training.Social Networking?And then there is the question of to includes Social Networks or not? Pros: Most people lump Second Life and World of Warcraft into this area on their own. Con: Social networking and simulations should be used very differently and have different value propositions (see Top Ten Missing Features of Second Life). But including social networking adds words such as world, life, or environment, and sometimes virtual.

There is a pact between corporate students and corporate trainers (and, I think, IT, budget holders, the lawyers, and middle management) that essentially says, "We all know that training does almost nothing. Given that, let's all agree to make it as frictionless as possible so that we can all check off that necessary corporate requirement and get on with our 'real' work."This was the motivation for "e-learning" back in 1999. "Given that training was useless, let's make it cheap and convenient." The biggest sponsors of e-learning were the corporate managers who most opposed learning programs. The vendors who did well offered the most titles as cheaply as possible. Today, most organizations only bother with level one analysis of training. "Question one: did we make the program as convenient and easy as possible? There is no question two." And stunningly, in a recent eLearning Guild's report, managers of educational programs from both academics and corporate, when asked about relative importance in a learning program, ranked ease of deployment (57.4% said it was very important and 37.2 said it was important) over every other category, including provides a strong return on investment (34.6% very important/ 41.4% important) and fun and exciting for participants (50.2%/28.4%).The newest attempt to reduce the friction of learning to all stakeholders may be epitomized by the informal learning movement (which is happening if we choose to label it or not). "People learn what they need on the Internet. Who needs an LMS when you have Google?"Simulation people disrupt that pact at all points. Students actually have to put some skin in the game, and experience intellectual awkwardness (which they hate). Trainers have content that does literally change behavior, so now they have to be extra careful it is the right content, and they actually have to learn how to measure the impact of formal learning, something they have never really figured out. IT, in some cases, has to now justify why some employees have old browsers, bad connections, and no sound. Middle managers have to free up the participants to actually learn (which means offloading work and not just letting it pile up in their absence). Any new program can be killed by any member of the pact who feels that the deal is changing. We may be at a point where real formal learning is the enemy of everyone (but the organization's shareholders).There are exceptions, of course. There are environments that truly value formal development programs. These are the groups that say (in a riff on the more famous phrase) "train hard, manage easy." That seems better than, "if you pretend to teach me, I will pretend to learn."

We've somewhat lost our fearless Blogmeister, Dave Lee, so we've not been doing the Big Questions the past few months. I'll be doing the moderating. But, we are starting again ...The Big Question for December is:What did you learn about learning in 2007?To help you get started, you might want to look back at some discussions going on last year at this time with a similar kind of question:December 2006: Past experiences. Present Challenge. Future Predictions.I personally am going to be looking back at some of my blog posts and look for those "aha moments." There were quite a few, but it's always good to go back and look.January's Topic:Predictions for learning in 2008How to Respond:We are going old-school on this, no forms.Please post on your blog or put thoughts in a comment.If you post on a blog, please include a link to this post. Ideally, you would also include the Big Question logo. After you post on your blog, leave a comment on this post with a link to your blog post. Periodically during the month, I will add you to the list below.By the way, if you can make it as easy as copy and paste for me, that would be great. Otherwise, the links may not look great, but everyone can still get there.Good stuff already coming in!Posts So Far:eLearning 2.0 for Law Firms - What did you learn about learning?RÉCIT de la Pointe-de-l'Île - Question difficile - (I only understand the title of the post - someone let me know if this is okay to link to).Karyn RomeisIgnatia WebsHamilton NotesWendy Wickham (an Edublog Nominee) - My cursory, simplistic responseClive Sheppard (another Edublog Nominee) - Most of ItTony Karrer (another Edublog Nominee) - My Aha Moments in 2007The big question: what did you learn about learning in 2007?René Meijer - The Echo of TeachingClark QuinnKapp Notes: ASTD's Big Question for December: New LearningHow to leverage a Network: What I Learned in 2007Mark FrankHarold JarcheStephanie Sandifer - well done I might add!Jack PierceTom HaskinsMarianne - new blog for me, but really enjoyed the thoughts!Marcel de Leeuwe - Pecha Kucha answerWhat Did I Learn in 2007?Kerry McGuireJoel Adkins Malinka IvanovaNicolaNorman Lamonte-Learning JourneyJay CrossGeetha Krishnane-Learning JourneyCammy BeanWill to LearnAnil MammenChristy TuckerG-Cube SolutionsJan Van BelleDan McCarthyASTD CascadiaMary Hillis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This month's question comes out of something that Catherine Lombardozzi wrote pointed me to:Jim Collins, in an essay in Learning Journeys, wrote, "A true learning person also has a "to-learn" list, and the items on that list carry at least as much weight in how one organizes his or her time as the to-do list."Thus, for September we are exploring:To-Learn ListsI personally, do not have a formal to-learn list. Instead, my exploration via work, blogging, speaking, I seem to find ample learning opportunities. But it does seem like a very good idea to be a bit more directed. So, more specifically, I'd like to hear:If you have a to-learn list and are willing to share, and willing to share how you work with that list, that would likely be helpful information.As Knowledge Workers, work and learning are the same, so how does a to-learn list really differ from a to-do list? How are they different than undirected learning through work, blogging, conferences, etc.?Are to-learn lists really important to have? Are they as important as what Jim Collins tells us?Should they be captured? Is so how?How does a to-learn list impact something like a Learning Management System (LMS) in a Workplace or Educational setting?What skills, practices, behaviors do modern knowledge workers need around to-learn lists?This has been discussed a bit out there, but I'm not that familiar with good sources on this topic, so feel free to provide links to sources. I look forward to seeing responses. How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below. This may be hard given the complexity of the topic.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Designor you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - Safety Training Design : eLearning TechnologyPosts so far (and read comments as well):Manish Mohan - Here's my To-Learn list that I created after reading this post.The Learning Leaders Blog ResponseTo-learn list: The Big QuestionTo Learn Lists: The Big QustionKaryn Romeis: The Big Question: To-learn listMy To learn listThe E-learning Curve Blog - To-Learn Lists indicate some potentially useful approaches on how to engage others in continuous learning...Clark Quinn - To-Learn Lists?Bill Brantley - To Learn Lists - What My Grandfather Taught MeJay Cross: To-learn lists, unlearning.Ignatia - my to-learn list blogpostClive Shepherd: http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.com/2008/09/to-learn-lists.htmlKerry - my listNorman Lamont - http://normanlamont.typepad.com/eellearning/2008/09/the-big-questio.htmlKarl Kapp - Kapp Notes: List to Learn, Learn to List#linksLorretta J Davis -http://ljdavis.biz/blog/?p=19Emanuele Siracusa - 5 Things to Learn before a Round the World TripHugh GreenwayTaruna Goel - My views hereAdventures in Corporate Education: What’s a "To Learn" List?Claudia Escribano @ The LifeLongLearning Lab: Personal Responsibility for Learning

This month's question comes from a series of questions I've received recently on my blog all asking some form of, "I'm interested in eLearning. What should I do first?"Thus, for October we are exploring:First e-LearningAn example is shown in my post - First Authoring Tool.I am an educator in Arizona about to graduate with my Masters in Instructional Design. I wish to apply my experience designing courses for online learning; however I've searched and don't know where to begin to actually learn how to use the LMS and course design software available. I came across your blog and thought you might be able to offer some suggestions.I have great computer skills but am not experienced in creating web courses. I've seen all sorts of elearning software- Dreamweaver, Lectora, Captivate, Flash etc etc mentioned in job ads, but don't really know which ones to choose in order to get a well rounded working knowledge of how to build a course. Do you have any suggestions where to start? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.Now, several people took the opportunity to politely bash their masters program for not giving them this experience as part of their education. Let's avoid this here. Instead, let's focus on the real point of the question.So, what advice would you give to someone new to the field. Where do you start?Particular tools you should explore?Resources you should read? Videos/screencasts you should watch?What would your To Learn List look like? How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below. This may be hard given the complexity of the topic.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0or you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0 : eLearningTechnologyPosts so far (and read comments as well):Getting Started With Instructional Design.Kapp Notes: Help, I have an Instructional Design Master's Degree and I Can't Create E-Learning (read some of the comments on Karl's post for addl ideas)Learnlets - First eLearningKen Allan - The Elearning ApprenticeClive Shepherd - http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.com/2008/10/big-question-making-start-in-e-learning.htmlBrandon Hall Research: Janet Clarey, E-Learning for NewbiesVinnie - How To Get Started in E-learning- The Big QuestionBLP - Lessons on LearningWendy - My thoughtsGina Minks - Learning Circuits Blog Big Question: E-LearningKevin - Learn to eLearn

This month's question comes out of part of the dialog that occur during the recent Work Literacy course. While discussing social networking for personal learning, the question came up around being able to reach out and get help from people or find expertise in the form of a person / conversation.Thus, for November we are exploring:Network FeedbackIn Getting Help, I discussed some aspects of the central question being raised. I've got a question about a work task and would like to get feedback from someone (a person, hopefully with some level of experience and expertise on the topic). Or paraphrasing Colin in Blogging to ask for Help:If you need input from people, where's the best place to ask?My larger claim is that this is one of the most important, fundamental shifts in New Workand new work skills that include being able to:How to reach out and find expertiseHow to use Social Media to Find Answers to QuestionsHow to Learn through Conversation However, the question overly simplifies the problem. Different situations will require different answers. There's no "best place". And the landscape is shifting all the time. And while I discussed a couple examples this recently in LinkedIn for Finding Expertise and Searching for Expertise - LinkedIn Answers, my belief is that it is really hard right now to know enough about enough places to make good choices about:Where to go in what cases?What works and doesn't work?How do you effectively work within a given context?What do you need to have done to effectively get help ahead of time?Are there places you can go if you are relatively new and needing to ask questions?In addition to your thoughts on the above, it would be really great if people who answer this could provide specific examples.What was the question you were facing?What did you consider using?What were the steps you took? How did things evolve?What was the outcome?What could you have done differently? Better?I'm also certain there are lots of resources out there that could help someone learn about this. I'd appreciate pointers to any of those. How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below. This may be a good question to leave a comment.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0or you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0 : eLearningTechnologyPosts so far (and read comments as well):Karyn Romeis - November's Big Question: getting feedbackManish Mohan - Email as best input source - here.Colin - Opportunity Knocks - Input NeededJeffery Goldman - http://minutebio.com/blog/?p=70Gina Minks - Adventures in Corporate Education: Learning Circuit Blog’s Big Question for November: Network FeedbackKapp Notes: The Right Place to Find Help: ASTDs Big QuestionExample Inquiry - Find Speaker for Local ASTD ChapterGet Help - Spam?

We are going to continue a tradition in the Big Question ...The Big Question for December is:What did you learn about learning in 2008?If you are a blogger, I would highly recommend taking this as an opportunity to go back through your blog posts over the year and looking for any "aha moments" or highlight the posts that you think were the best/most interesting.You might want to look back at some discussions going on during the last two yearly recaps:2007 - What Did You Learn about Learning?2006 - Past experiences. Present Challenge. Future Predictions.January's Topic:Predictions for learning in 2009How to Respond:Option 1 - Simply put your thoughts in a comment below.Option 2 -Step 1 - Post in your blog (please link to this post).Step 2 - Put a comment in this blog with an HTML ready link that I can simply copy and paste (an HTML anchor tag). I will only copy and past, thus, I would also recommend you include your NAME immediately before your link. So, it should look like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0or you could also include your blog name with something like:Tony Karrer - e-Learning 2.0 : eLearningTechnologyPosts so far (and read comments as well):Jeff Goldman - What I have LearnedMichael Hanley - A Year in E-Learning: One Blog’s Progresshttp://learningjournal.wordpress.com/2008/11/29/musings-toward-new-years-resolutions/Tony Karrer - 2008 2009Clark Quinn - What did I learn about learning in 2008?Ken Allan - The Baby, The Bath and The BathwaterKaryn Romeis - Oh dear, the dread annual question!Jason Allen - Nurtured ChaosKen Allan - Having Saved the BabyIgnatia/Inge de Waard - My two cents of learning during the last year. Rupa - http://blog.thewritersgateway.com/2008/12/08/what-i-learnt-in-2008/Katie Christo - What have I learned about learning in 2008?Virginia Yonkers: Connecting 2 the World Erin Murphy - What did I learn about learning in 2008Adventures in Corporate Education - Big Question: What did you learn in 2008John Zurovchak - Long Tail Learning:The Big Question December 2008Ellen at the aLearning BlogTaruna Goel - Learning About Learning in 2008Kevin Marsh - http://storycurve.blogspot.com/2008/12/what-i-learned-in-2008.htmlKevin Thorn - 5 Things I learned in 2008Kerry... what I've learnedManish Mohan - What I learned in 2008Karl Kapp - New LearningClive ShepherdChristy Tucker: What I Learned This YearGeetha Krishnan: 2008: Low on LearningIngrid O'Sullivan - What did I learn in 2008? Lots..