YouTube - CorpUtv’s Channel
By Janet Clarey | June 25, 2008
A new find for me, maybe for you too. This is the YouTube - CorpUtv’s Channel which provides “lessons in learning for business leaders.” Searching “social media” brings me a range from…
…funny..(Social Media Addiction Rap)
…to ’serious’ (Social Media WordPress Theme - Wicket Pixie
It’s not just for social media. You should consider subscribing to this channel if you don’t already.
Topics: Brandon Hall | No Comments »
Social Media…inside, outside, upside down
By Janet Clarey | June 24, 2008
An excellent post from Leigh Blackall at Learn Online, which includes a break down of the three well-established learning theories (which, as we know, inform our instructional design), is built around the premise that social media is a product of social constructivism yet is being (mis)adopted into behaviorist practices. He argues that social media cannot be used inside behaviorist media like the LMS or LCMS). But he’s not saying we should abandon these systems but look at the bigger picture which, if I’m grasping this as he intended and applying it to workplace learning, is not to control social media through such systems but join with abandon the ‘open social space’ (for lack any better) of informal learning.
Some interesting questions are posed , argued, and I ponder:
- is social media a product of social constructivism?
- Is an LMS/LCMS behaviorist media?
- If so, can social media be used inside behaviorist media?
The way I see it (without a good nights sleep) is that if the circle of social media/informal learning is big enough the square part (the LMS “widget”) will fit inside of it along with a bunch of other widgets. As a realist, even if I agree with Leigh, I see that solution at the middle of a bridge. Many LMS vendors are there or heading there. I am seeing a lot of mashups.
Bottom line: if its good for learning (on the learner’s terms) then it’s good enough. And, as far as informal learning goes, I think there is still a huge need for the facilitator, the instructional designer, the curriculum designer, etc. to provide structure, support, feedback, and guidance that is part of a formal education.
Without that, you’ve got a bunch of people wandering aimlessly with hit-or-miss moments of critical thinking, synthesis, and deep learning. No one taught them to learn.
Have I pummeled enough metaphors and analogies at you?
There’s a lot of beef in the comments too.
- Is informal learning sufficient for cognitive development for all learners?
- How does assessment fit in with social constructivism?
One last thing…is there learning going on in Leigh’s post? Was his post not the stimulus to the responses(s)? Is that not behaviorism at its core?
(my apologies for all the links to Wikipedia…just wanted to provide a definition terms)
Topics: Brandon Hall | 4 Comments »
Janet’s stress recipe
By Janet Clarey | June 23, 2008
A 12-step recipe for irritating those around you and reaching your target heart rate without exercise:
(guaranteed to be as exciting as a days worth of my tweets)
1) Wake up too early.
2) Drink a pot of coffee before 9 AM.
3) Wake everyone else up in the household later than you said you would.
4) Have no milk in the refrigerator.
5) Sit down at the computer and note that the blue screen says “dumping physical memory.”
6) Curse. Reboot. Go make an english muffin with chocolate on it.
7) Open the document you were working on and decide which version should be ‘recovered.’
8 ) Take a shower. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
9) Get to work just as the kids get home early from school. Curse. Repeat. Curse. Repeat.
10) Make like a lioness and provide food for offspring.
11) Work for about 2 hours. Drink two diet Pepsi’s.
12) Check heart rate and blog about it.
Topics: Brandon Hall | 2 Comments »
Spoon in the road
By Janet Clarey | June 20, 2008
A quandary. A fork in the road. A spoon in the road. An insanity check. Whatev…
To return to school or not. That is the question. I’m sitting here with a reminder to register for the fall semester and I just dread the thought of returning to class so I made a pro/con list using SnagIt!
That, it seemed at the time, was a better thing to do than actually make a decision. Especially on a Friday. 
Toward the end of my Master’s program I felt the same way but when it was complete, I said, “that went kind of quick.” Now, I’m feeling “that way” at the beginning of a long, long road (it’s a Ph.D. in Education/Instructional Design, Development, & Education). I have reached a spoon in the road…and regrettably, it is not filled with delicious tomato soup but swamp water. Sigh. I will snooze the reminder until Monday of all days. Then, I’ve gotta swim or get off the spoon.
More on ID education (post and comments):
Instructional Design in Elearning
We Need a Degree in Instructional Design
Why We Need Good Instructional Design
Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations
If You Believe It’s Broken - How Do You Change Our Industry/Models/etc?
Significant Work Need to Help Instructional Designers
Topics: Brandon Hall | 14 Comments »
Net Gen Hype talk for the cloistered bunch
By Janet Clarey | June 17, 2008
I found this interesting in light of the fact that I have all but abandoned a publication on generational issues and learning. Mark Nichols, quoted in Mark Bullen’s Net Gen Nonsense blog, says:
…edubloggers and e-learning theorists have become a very cloistered bunch who believe that everything is new and are suspicious of anything published before the year 1995!
In Net Gen Nonsense: More Net Gen Hype Found in Online Learning Book, Terry Anderson’s book (The Theory and Practice of Online Learning - free download available) is the subject of discussion around the reliance on hype (Prensky) over scholarly research (Knowles, Ramsden, and Mezirow) about Net Gen.
Mark Nichols highlights the problem of not carefully critiquing the shiny, shiny ideas.
Anderson suggests that “It is all too easy to consider new innovations in a horseless-carriage manner, and attempt to develop new actions based on old adaptations to now obsolete contexts” (2008, p.46). True, but it is a matter of granularity. The principles of transport were still the same, even though its means changed. And, as the evidence comes in, we see that the context has not changed as greatly as some would have us think.
Nichols does like Anderson’s revised model of online learning however.
And, Nichols provides his own theory of e-learning…
Firstly, I attempt to place e-learning in a broad educational context. Secondly, I establish principle of consistency and contingency in theory.
I’ve struggled with the whole Net Gen thing before in prior posts, Digital Maturity & Design for Generational E-Learning and Generational Differences?. The publication I was writing about Generational Learning was looking like a ‘no significant difference’ thing or the hype about learning styles. I kept thinking…yeah, but who doesn’t like to be more engaged? Duh.
I really do think there are many conversations about innovations in education in the edublogosphere that are not scrutinized to the extent they should be. One case study or interview is not a reliable indicator. Go ahead and challenge when you’re wondering…’oh yeah, who says?’ or ‘got any proof on that?’
Regarding not trusting the “old” stuff. I have been guilty of apologizing here on this blog for using old stuff. It is, however, a staple in my research. No more apologies. What I write in 2008 will not be crap in 2012 I hope. And what was written by theorists many years ago is certainly not crap today.
I consider myself uncloistered…having just now subscribed to Mark’s blog.
Topics: Brandon Hall | 3 Comments »