The Great E-Learning Debate is On(line)

On 30th September 2009, an invited audience of over 300 leading thinkers from HR, skills, training and education joined eight eminent speakers at the inaugural E-learning Debate at the Oxford Union.

The motion for the debate was:

"This house believes that the e-learning of today is essential for the important skills of tomorrow."

Eight speakers took to the floor:

Debating For The Motion:

• Prof. Diana Laurillard
• Maj Gen Tim Inshaw
• Andy McGovern, Reuters
• Kirstie Donnelly, learndirect

Arguing Against The Motion:

• Dr Marc Rosenberg
• Claire Little, SHL Group
• Wendy Cartwright, Olympic Development Authority
• David Wilson, Elearnity

Clive Shepherd summarizes the pro and contra speakers' arguments here. In my view, Clive’s post is essential reading for anyone professionally interested in training, technology in education, HR, and organizational development.

I like Clive's closing blog post remarks:

I agreed with every speaker, which was quite possible given the different ways in which the motion could be interpreted. I changed my mind eight times but ended up voting for the motion.

At the end, the motion was defeated: the participants voted 90 FOR and 144 AGAINST.

However, this is not the end of the debate, only the beginning. Whether you attended or not, there is still an opportunity to contribute. From 1st October 2009 the E-learning Debate continues online, and you can read a summary of the arguments, view the highlights on Flickr and YouTube, add your comments, and vote.

Click here to navigate to the Great E-Learning Debate website, and to add your contribution.

--

The Impact of the Current Economic Crisis on E-Learning: February ‘09 LCBBQ

This month’s Learning Circuits Blog Big Question asks

What is the impact of the economy on you and your organization? What are you doing as a result?

In response, I returned to a post I wrote about a year ago. While reflecting on the LCBBQ I formed the view that the argument I outlined then bears repeating now. Where appropriate I have updated the article to reflect recent developments as the Recession turned into Depression.

The dialectic I am presenting here can be summarized in the following manner: will the positive economic, organizational, and social value of e-learning outweigh traditional human responses an economic crisis? What strategies can we use to ensure the survival of and even the growth of e-learning as an industry in these changing times?

So what's changed in the e-learning industry since the last recession in 2001? I've outlined some discussion points below:

1. First of all: Traditional business practice
2. Developments in Infrastructure & Hardware
3. The E-learning Hype curve
4. Refinements in Content Development Methodologies
5. The Rise if the Read/Write Web
6. The PlayStation Generation - Digital Natives in the workplace

Scroll down to find out more about each of these points.
--
Traditional business practice
Historically, when a slowdown or company rationalization occurs, the first against the wall are the folks in the PR, marketing, and training departments. Typically, individuals and organizations revert to previously-learned behaviors in tough times; this usually means going through the process of carrying out tried-and-tested, though not necessarily logical responses to the problems put in front of them. The rationale is as follows:

• Profits are down
• Revenue projections aren't great for the next 12/18 months
• We need to cut our costs
• We need to keep the guys that make the widgets (we need to have product to sell)
• We need to keep the managers of these people (or productivity will go down)
• We need to keep Human Resources in place to manage everyone obviously (it's just a coincidence that I - that is the decision-maker - work in HR!)

• What about those training people? High travel costs for the ILT guys, they pull people out of work for 3 days to go on courses. Large budgets spent on implementing and maintaining an LMS/LCMS, third-party e-learning libraries, custom courseware etc, but they do seem to add value to the organization. And let's face it, they don't really improve the quality of our product, because they never convince us with their ROI metrics...
• Outcome: tea and sympathetic chat, and the Training team get their pink slips / P45s.

Sadly, I reckon that this will be strategy undertaken by a significant number of organizations over the next year or so. However....

...and it's a big however.

Let's look at the evidence for factors that have changed in the e-learning industry since 2001 and the recession following the Dot-Com Crash.

Infrastructure & Hardware
More-or-less general availability of high-speed internet access just wasn't there in 2001. To take the example of the company I worked for at the time, our high-quality courseware was developed in Authorware and Director and delivered to customers on CD-ROM for distribution via their intranet or accessed directly from the disk. Our on-line courseware was a 'lite' version of the CD material - not out of choice, but because of the limited functionality that could be provided to a user via a 56k connection.

Over-compressed images, poor animation, and very poor audio - hardly the immersive learning solution that e-learning flattered to promise at the time. Assuming the learner could access the content successfully, the chances were that the PC (for it was always a PC) that they were using to view their content was processing and displaying the date at a rate that we wouldn't find acceptable on a PDA now (screen-size excluded). Pentium or pre-Pentium processors, 8-bit sound cards, 16 colors, 800x600 pixel displays. And so on.

In short, we could see the potential, but our imaginations exceeded the available technology.

The e-learning hype curve
This brings me neatly to the e-learning hype curve (see Figure 1). Kevin Kruse described 2001 as the year that

...brought the harsh, steep slope of unfulfilled promises. Several high-profile providers shut their doors while many more announced large-scale layoffs in the face of missed revenue targets and crashing stock prices. E-learning advocates retreated to the more defensible ground of "blended learning. This year [went] down as the Trough of Despair.

Figure 1. The E-learning Hype Cycle

I would suggest through familiarization and use, learners expectations are more reasonable about what can be achieved (and perhaps more importantly how it can be achieved through digitally mediated delivery). Given this environment, organizations are now more willing to invest in e-learning as part of their overall training strategy. But is it perceived as a necessity or a luxury?

A year ago I wrote that:

I can't answer that question right now. I suspect that I will be able to answer it 12 months from now, because there will be evidence as to whether decision makers consider e-learning to be a core requirement that effectively meets organizations' training needs.

In light of recent research by Bersin & Associates among others, it seems that The Powers That Be in organizations have judged online training to be found wanting, and are responding by cutting budgets and reassessing learning & development strategies, apparently by beginning to disintermediate training by using non-formal and informal knowledge transfer methods in place of ‘e-training,’ LMSs, and VLEs.

Content development methodologies
I would assert that there is a real opportunity for e-learning here (if L&D professionals are in a to position stand their ground). Without going into the history of this too much, the development of (relatively) easy-to-use authoring tools like Captivate, Articulate (and a whole raft of others), Rapid E-Learning development methodology and the disintermediation principle means that e-learning has fewer up-front costs associated with it than at the turn of the century.

Similarly, if it's done correctly it can be argued that ongoing maintenance and support costs are lower than they ever have been. By developing content with smaller, more flexible teams, the value proposition of e-learning has been enhanced, and the total cost of ownership has been significantly reduced. Outside of e-learning, the take-up of podcasting and streamed media on sites like Blogger and YouTube demonstrates that this ease-of-use of tools and technologies has extended into the community at large.

The Read/Write Web
Who would have thought in 2000 that blogging, social networking, wikis and podcasts would be as big a part of life as they are now? At the start of the century, the Web (and e-learning) could at best be described as a half-duplex medium; it was pretty much all one-way traffic. The development of information platforms has facilitated knowledge-sharing, folksonomies, social interaction, and, key to all this, reciprocity.

We now live in a multiplex world of many voices and ideas, mediated by the internet. At the forefront in using these web technologies is the e-learning industry. By using these tools to develop content I feel we can demonstrate quite effectively that e-learning has a value now that it did not have a decade ago. I would assert that this is particularly true if you take a social-constructivist approach to learning. By the way, I'm happy to entertain debates about the role of formal as opposed to non-formal and informal learning in this environment.

The PlayStation Generation
Concomitant with the read/write web is the PlayStation generation that have grown up over the last number of years. In his seminal essay Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants (2001), Marc Prensky declares:

...students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach.
Today’s students have not just changed incrementally from those of the past, nor simply changed their slang, clothes, body adornments, or styles, as has happened between generations previously. A really big discontinuity has taken place. One might even call it a “singularity” – an event which changes things so fundamentally that there is absolutely no going back. This so-called “singularity” is the arrival and rapid dissemination of digital technology in the last decades of the 20th century.

Today’s students – K through college – represent the first generations to grow up with this new technology. They have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age. Today’s average college graduates have spent less than 5,000 hours of their lives reading, but over 10,000 hours playing video games (not to mention 20,000 hours watching TV). Computer games, email, the Internet, cell phones and instant messaging are integral parts of their lives.

Extending from this, there is a generation of workers who are comfortable with and practiced in the concepts and use of e-learning - take a look at the resources available on www.skoool.ie, an initiative for second-level students in Ireland. I was involved in the development of the first iteration of this site, and it's changed a lot (for the better) since we took those first steps creating it 8 years ago. Similarly in third-level education, there have been significant developments in on-line learning, and I think that it's fair to say that it has become quite embedded in the pedagogy employed by universities: tools like Moodle enable students to upload coursework, take tests, build their own knowledgebases and wikis, and have on-line discussions through a single point of access.

This generation is in the workplace right now. It will expect to learn new skills as their careers develop using the tools that they have always learned on in the past: that is, by using e-learning.

Conclusion
This is a blog entry, not an essay. But consider other factors including transport costs and training in the era of $100 a barrel oil and the value of virtual classrooms; the ROI of e-learning as opposed to traditional methods; even the impact of traditional ways of teaching on the environment ("e-learning" becomes "eco-learning" anyone or even ‘economical-learning’?). I think that if they are in a position to do so, learning professionals are repositioning themselves to re-use the skills they’ve acquired in different contexts – perhaps undertaking their activities from a different platform, or through working in a different domain of expertise.

Ultimately, I would say that all anyone can do at the moment is keep their powder dry and hope for the best in the short term, while preparing for what may be a completely different business environment when the green shoots of recovery finally emerge.

--

Capture that E-learning Demo 2: Captivate

As I’m doing a lot of demos at the moment, I thought that it would be apposite to discuss demo capturing and authoring tools. Yesterday, it was the turn of Camtasia, today, it’s Adobe Captivate.

Adobe Captivate is an e-learning tool (for Microsoft Windows) which can be used to author software demonstrations, software simulations, branched scenarios, and quizzes for distribution online or via CD-ROM.

Recording
Even before the term 'Rapid E-Learning' was coined (and Captivate was RoboDemo), this app was designed to be an e-learning authoring tool. As such, once opened, the author is presented with three recording modes (Software Simulation, Scenario Simulation, Other), depending on the activity you want to undertake. To capture content, the author carries out each step in the demonstration, in sequence. As with Camtasia, it's possible to cycle between applications without interrupting the recording process. The author can pause or stop recording (at which point the software renders the media that has been captured) at any point. When the recording (or a section of a larger recording) is complete, Captivate opens in editing mode.

Post-production
Once the presentation has been captured, the content is displayed as a number of discrete slide, representing each interaction of the recording. A timeline is available to integrate audio, onscreen text, and other enhancements. Similar to Camtasia, the author can record audio while screen-capturing is in progress. In edit mode, the author can import, record and edit a voice-over narration and other audio elements into the presentation.

Deployment
Captivate saves files in a proprietary *.CP format, which is only readable by Captivate. Content is generated as ShockWave Flash (*>SWF), which can be played on most computers via a browser with the (nearly) ubiquitous Flash Player plug-in.

Uses
Once exported, content is easily distributed to a wide audience; as well a online delivery, content can also be distributed via CD-ROM or DVD, by e-mail, and on Adobe Connect. Learners can easily access Captivate content through learning management systems (LMSs) and content management systems (CMSs). Captivate is both AICC and SCORM conformant, facilitating learner usage tracking, as well as through scored quizzes and other interactions.

Instructional Uses
Captivate enables learning professionals to create new content and transform existing learning collateral in a (relatively) easy-to-use "one-stop" media creating environment. It's unified API means that very little programming experience is needed to generate attractive, immersive e-learning content.

Criticisms
As well as the positives, Captivate has some deficiencies; integrating, editing audio can be tricky, as can estimating slide duration; it's a bit of a memory hog on long presentations, or content containing a range of media assets; it can take a LONG time to generate content. In terms of rendered files, it's reliance on the SWF format, rather than, say Flash Video *.FLV) can make download times quite long when compared to its competitors. Finally, in an increasingly mobile world, devices like the iPhone cannot be used for playback.

Tomorrow:

~~~~~

Captivate vs. Camtasia - Head-to-head in a Fight for the Byte – It’s an E-Learning Authoring Tool Deathmatch!

~~~~~

By The Way: I’m toying with the idea of using Articulate: any experiences / war stories / opinions?

--

Capture that E-learning Demo 1: Camtasia

Getting right back to basics here, but what a good way to start the new year! So, if you’re new to e-learning courseware development, read on…

Ever wondered how to capture demos for delivery online ?

I generally use two pieces of software to capture high-quality, post-produced demos. In this blog entry, I'll give you a bit of background on Camtasia Studio, and in the next blog post I'll discuss Adobe Captivate.

Camtasia Studio is a screen video capture program for Microsoft Windows, published by TechSmith. It is a screen-recording application that allows users to record almost anything on a computer screen, including application demonstrations and PowerPoint presentations. Users are able to use their own computers to demonstrate some aspect of motion-based content.

The presenter defines the area of the screen or the window to be captured before recording begins; it is also possible to capture the entire screen area.

Recording
Once Camtasia's recording mode is activated, the presenter carries out all steps of the demonstration, in sequence. It is possible to move between applications without interrupting the recording process. The presenter can pause or stop recording at any time - at which point the software renders the input that has been captured - as well as apply user-defined settings, such as when and how to display the cursor.

Post-production
Once the presentation has been captured, the presenter is able to revise it by integrating multiple recordings, if required (and this is typically the case on longer-form demos and course learning objects). In addition, the presenter can dub in a voice-over narration, sound effects, as well as music onto the presentation. Camtasia also allows audio recording while screen-capturing is in progress, so the presenter can narrate the demonstration as it is carried out. Most presenters, however, prefer to wait until they have finished the screen capture, and then record the narration from a script as the application is playing back the recorded capture.

Deployment
The application allows files to be stored in its own proprietary *.CAMREC format, which is only readable by Camtasia itself; this format allows for quite small file sizes, even for longer presentations. Much more useful is that Camtasia also allows the generated video stream to be exported to common video formats which can be read by most computers, even if the Camtasia software is not installed, such as Flash FLV & SWF, Windows WMV and MPEG-4. MP3 audio and podcast files may also be generated.

Uses
Once exported, content is easily distributed to a wide audience; highly compressed files, such as files encoded in the FLV format are especially suitable for distribution online via platforms like Adobe Connect.

Instructional Uses

Camtasia is popular among instructors and learners because presentations are easy to produce and distribute, saving instructors the time to repeat presentations many times, especially in courses that teach a certain application or computing environment. Many learners appreciate the ease with which Camtasia-produced presentations can be viewed, especially presentations that are embedded into a web page and are shown in the client browser window.

Criticisms
One of Camtasia's primary shortcomings is its long rendering times and excessive consumption of system resources during production. Output file generation times can be improved by using newer hardware, such as a dual processor system, as well as an increased amount of RAM.

Next Time: Captivate

--

Can we re-invent e-learning?

Somebody once said:

Although e-learning began as a new way to deliver training, it cannot remain that way because it is no longer able to adequately support all the learning needs of individuals and organizations by itself - if it every was. E-learning has moved in a new, somewhat unanticipated direction that is not always reminiscent of an instructional framework. To be more influential, e-learning must be reinvented. While continuing to provide a viable instructional option in a formal learning setting, it must also move toward informational and collaborative solutions that focus more prominently on the specific jobs people do. It must move beyond courseware and classrooms and into work. To reinvent e-learning is, in many ways, to reinvent learning itself.

(Marc J. Rosenberg, Beyond E-learning)

In essence, this means transforming learning, so that learning activities and resources are situated around

1. the learner
2. their environment
3. their tasks

enabling learners to construct their own knowledge in the context of what resources they need to carry out their activities effectively.

David Jonassen says:

In constructivist learning environments, technologies are used to situate learning tasks in a variety of contexts. With video, very rich and engaging contexts can be created.

He asserts that in the traditional organizational approach that

[u]nfortunately, most e-learning replicates the worst features of face-to-face instruction. So, it may be cheaper to "deliver" knowledge over the Internet, but it will not be more effective.

In the context of organizational development and workplace learning, this is commonly known as the systems-based approach to instructional design & development (ISD). A system is a set of elements or components that must integrate to perform a specific function. Every job in an organization is used by the organizational ecosystem to produce a product or output. The product or output is the means by which a organization generates its assets and remains self-supporting. In theory, this leads to the creation of a virtuous circle of continuous growth and development.

In learning and development, this systems-based approach is epitomized by the ADDIE conceptual framework, most notably refined by Dick & Carey in The Systematic Design of Instruction (1996).

The ADDIE approach has been one of the core tenets of instructional design for the best part of two decades.

I think ADDIE is a myth.

And I'm not alone in reaching this conclusion. In his article In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model (2003), Michael Molenda undertook a Livingstonian attempt to discover the source for the original reference to the ADDIE model. Molenda’s research uncovered no original reference for the ADDIE model. This lack of an original reference led Molenda to write,

I am satisfied at this point to conclude that the ADDIE Model is merely a colloquial term used to describe a systematic approach to instructional development, virtually synonymous with instructional systems development (ISD). The label seems not to have a single author, but rather to have evolved informally through oral tradition. There is no original, fully elaborated model, just an umbrella term that refers to a family of models that share a common underlying structure.

(p.1)

My view is that ADDIE emerged from the principles of project management, and resemble the philosophy and practice to this discipline's methodology more than a pedagogy. Treating learning like a project leads to "training outcomes" equivalent to project deliverables.

While these training deliverables may have value in and of themselves, they have limited value for learners in the longer term. We could even say that the training outputs are valid; some of the objectives of the learning intervention designed according to the precepts of ADDIE may be met but

Our field of educational communications is founded on the premise that communicating content to students will result in learning. In educational communications, information or intelligence (in many different forms) is encoded visually or verbally in the symbols systems employed by each technology. During the "instructional" process, learners perceive the messages encoded in the medium and sometimes "interact" with the technology. Interaction is normally operationalized in terms of student input to the technology, which triggers some form of answer judging and response from the technology in the form of some previously encoded (canned) message. Technologies as conveyors of information have been used for centuries to "teach" students by presenting prescribed information to them which they are obligated to "learn."

(Jonassen, 2001)

So, can we re-invent e-learning?

___________________

References:
Dick, W. & Carey, L. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction (4th Ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.

Exclusive Interview with Professor David Jonassen (2001) IN: elearningpost [Internet] Available from: http://www.elearningpost.com/articles/archives/
exclusive_interview_with_professor_david_jonassen [Accessed 12th January 2007]

Molenda, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model. [Internet] Available from: http://www.indiana.edu/~molpage/
In%20Search%20of%20Elusive%20ADDIE.pdf Accessed 12 May 2008

Rosenberg, M.J. (2001) What Lies Beyond E-Learning? learningcircuits.org e-zine [Internet] Available from: http://www.learningcircuits.org/2006/March/rosenberg.htm Accessed 14th April 2007

Recession, the challenge to e-learning, and HMH in Ireland

I'll start this post by issuing a mixed metaphor alert: today, we're going to talk about an elephant in the room, which also happens to be an 800lb gorilla.

Intrigued? Now read on...

Back in February this year, I wrote the first of my occasional series on Recession and the challenge to e-learning; in that first piece, I concluded by suggesting that

in the era of $100 a barrel oil and the value of virtual classrooms; the ROI of e-learning as opposed to traditional methods; even the impact of traditional ways of teaching on the environment ("e-learning" becomes "eco-learning" anyone?).

Based on an announcement made last Thursday 10th September 2008, I can now assert that we are beginning to see that there is validity in this conclusion. Based on the level of investment one e-learning enterprise has committed to developing the industry in the medium- to long term, the market in now in a place to support the proposition that the ROI on e-learning makes sense, and generates profit.

E-learning giant Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (HMH) – formerly known as Riverdeep – is to create 450 jobs at a new R&D headquarters in Dublin. Riverdeep had its origins in Dublin in 1995 and under the leadership of Barry O’Callaghan became a global name in the e-learning K-12 market space. As an educational publisher, HMH has over 100,000 customers, generating approximately US$2.5bn in annual revenues, profits in the region of US$1bn, and 50 per cent market share of the US K-12 market, the world’s largest education market.

HMH is to establish its global e-learning R&D centre in the greater Dublin area, creating 450 "high-value" jobs over the next five years.

Fiona O’Carroll, senior vice-president, Digital Products R&D at HMH confirmed the Irish Government’s vision to create a knowledge economy by investing in people, research and innovation was a key factor in the company’s decision.

The new R&D centre will be a focal point for e-learning and educational innovation. Employees, partner companies and collaborating universities will be attracted by the quality of research, people, innovation and commercialisation activity in the centre.

The Centre will involve establishing a globally networked team in Ireland with team members and innovation partners based in the US and around the globe. The company said these jobs should be very attractive to seasoned technology professionals, engineering and technology graduates, highly creative thinkers and innovators in the e-learning space.

As I've said in the past, Ireland has a vibrant technology and knowledge-based industrial economy, and one of the domains we excel in, is in e-learning - I guess most people in the industry have heard of SmartForce and Electric Paper, for example. These large companies notwithstanding, there are over fifty 'other' e-learning development houses in the country. Not bad for a country with a population of under 5 million people.

In my view, this investment will prove to be a game-changer. As it is, you could say that HMH are the only game in (e-learning) town - if they manage the innovations and outputs afforded by this R&D centre correctly, HMH will grow to become the Google of e-learning. Indeed, the Google approach (especially the famed "20 per cent time") is a perfect model for any knowledge-based organization that wants to stimulate growth through innovative new products invented and developed by their own subject matter experts. Similarly, this R&D centre will provide the organization with the potential benefits of having an audience for life: if HMH products have the skill and facility to instil the joy of learning in the kids that they currently provide e-learning solutions for, they will have an audience for life, given that these Digital Natives (click on the link for Marc Prensky's seminal article) will grow up associating the brand with discovering knowledge and the fun of learning. In essence, we can say that the company has the potential to mould a whole generation of learners, which is an extraordinary business opportunity, but also a huge responsibility.

Do I now hear the distant trumpet of an approaching elephant?

I do...

Just an observation really. Rumours of this investment have on the jungle telegraph here in Ireland for some time now, and I was originally going to post on this topic last Thursday (the day of the announcement).

An African elephant (sans room)

I held back, because I wanted to see what reaction would come for the Irish L&D and e-learning blogosphere. I'm disappointed to say that no-one has posted a reaction to the largest investment in their industry, ever.

I'm sure people are still formulating their thoughts - I for one want to read how others in the e-learning industry here in Ireland are responding to this investment.

_____________

References:

HMH to Create 450 Jobs and Base Global R&D Headquarters in Dublin. Enterprise Ireland Press Release. [Internet] Available from: http://www.enterprise-ireland.com/eicms/interiorpage.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2FNews%2FPress%2BReleases%2F2008%2FPressSep102008.htm&NRNODEGUID={077DB63F-4925-4D96-BEB3-364BF11C8EB1}&NRCACHEHINT=Guest

[Accessed 10th September 2008]

Ireland wins €350m HMH deal after tough worldwide battle. Irish Independent. [Internet] Available from: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ireland-wins-8364350m-hmh-deal--after-tough-worldwide-battle-1473370.html

[Accessed 10th September 2008]

--