eLearning Shows the Way!

A digital cinema provider from Hollywood will soon start using Raptivity for sales presentations. The owner of a Spanish humanities and technology web site has plans to use Raptivity for enhancing his web portal.

Raptivity, the e-learning tool? Yes, and no. Yes, because in essence, both will use the same Raptivity software we use in e-learning. No, because their versions of Raptivity -Raptivity Presenter and Raptivity Web Expert - are specially adapted to support presentation making and web development respectively.

What is happening here? Rapid interactivity building, which started in e-learning, is now spreading to presentations and web development. Boredom is a common problem, except e-learning professionals were the first to address it using rapid interactivity. Now presenters and web developers are realizing they too can fight the affliction this way.

The history of human innovation is full of stories where an idea took root in a niche, and soon broke out into the mainstream. For example, Nike air cushion shoes use a technology that was designed for Neil Armstrong's first expedition to the moon.

How does this process work? It all starts when several market segments begin to suffer from what could be a common pain point. However the awareness of the pain is at varying levels - some markets feel it more than others. Accordingly, the willingness to do what it takes to fix the pain also varies.

Sooner or later, one market segment can bear the pain no longer. At this point, if an innovator introduces a solution, it creates tremendous value for its users, who respond overwhelmingly in favor of the new product.

Sooner or later, this success is visible to other markets, and they realize that their risk in adopting the innovation is only incremental. With relatively little effort, they derive benefits of the new technology, and spread the buzz. Thus, it is a matter of carefully adapting the innovation to new markets, to start a virtuous circle of innovation and market response.

So much for the process. Why should this should bring cheer to e-learning professionals? Well, when rapid interactivity spreads to other applications, some innovation historian will remember e-learning's pioneering role in its development. It doesn't hurt to say we showed the way, does it?

Creating Reusable Interactions

What are Interaction Models?

An interaction model is a template which one can easily change (customize) to create interactivity. With interaction models at hand, you don't have to build interactivity from scratch. For example, a crossword puzzle where you can put new words and clues easily, to create an entirely new crossword, is an interaction model. So is a scenario simulation where you can easily change the content, learner actions and their consequences - building multiple scenarios without coding.

Pre-built vs Custom Interaction Models

A pre-built interaction model is already coded for you. When working with pre-built IMs, your focus is on selecting the right IM, customizing it using your content, and finally adding it to your course. The larger the library of pre-built IM's you have access to, the wider your choice, and the more you are likely to find one that exactly fits your need.

Sometimes, however, your needs are unique. You won't find an interaction model that quite works the way you want. Now you are in the province of custom interaction models.

But before you get ready to flex your programming muscles, I recommend three simple checks which will tell you whether you really need custom interaction models.

1. Can you get more out of the pre-built interaction models? Often, the interactive behavior you need can be accomplished relatively easily with an interaction model you already have. You need to be a bit creative, that's all. This can save you valuable time and programmming resources. For example, a survey could also double as an essay type question. Or, a path animation can easily illustrate a timeline nicely.Please convince yourself that your pre-built library does not cut it before the next step.
2. Will you ever need to create variations of this interactive behavior you are trying to build? If now is the only time you need this interactivity, you may as well write a program that does what you need, and not bother with a custom interaction model.
3. How many variations do you foresee? Writing a program has one major downside: each variation of interactivity will need a change in the program, and you will either do it yourself, or have a programmer do it. Then you end up with multiple versions of the program, and that is a nightmare when it comes to bug fixing. It is still okay to go this way if all you have in mind is a couple of variations, and if you are the one who will create them.

Once you have completed these three checks, you are clear that the library doesn't have what you need, you will need to build it yourself, and it must be a customizable interaction model. Now you are ready.

How to build custom interaction models

There are several ways you could build custom interaction models. One method is to use a tool such as myRaptivity, which allows your Flash program to be written in such a way that other users can use Raptivity to create custom variations of your IM's.

You can also develop your own Flash program with due care, so that it provides a way for other users to customize interactions. This will be tedious, but can be done using XML or other data files.

What is the payoff?

If you go the custom interaction model route, there are several benefits. You code only once, and each variation is simply a matter of customization - which a non-programmer can do. This means, you could publish a library of custom interaction models to your users, and they could use your custom IMs to build interactivity. You only maintain one version of the program file, and that is easy to maintain and bug-fix.

Where Did YawnBuster Come from?

When someone is addressing a group, a yawn serves two purposes. One, it tells the speaker - the rare one who cares to notice it - that someone is bored. Two, it produces more yawns, which in turn tell the speaker... well, you get the picture.

I was fortunate to be part of the innovation process that led to YawnBuster, and in this post I'll try to capture some of it.

When one person speaks and others listen in a moderate size group, one thing that often breaks down is two-way communication.

Suppose you are in the audience. If you let this person go on rambling, you get one-way monologue. If you interrupt too many times, the speaker may lose the thread and everyone ends up in a mess.

Now let's see this from the speaker's perspective. If I talk non-stop, I may end up getting bored of my own voice. If I encourage people to talk, someone could easily go off on a tangent.

Clearly, what is needed is a way to present, where four conditions are satisfied.

1. The speaker can control the amount of interaction
2. The interaction serves a specific purpose: energizes the audience, creates fun, provides a breather and so on
   
3. Everyone has a way to participate
   
4. The interaction is organized and guided by some kind of a structure. (Sometimes, stating it negatively is more emphatic. So let's just say: No chaos.)
   

These conditions point to a non-trivial problem. One needs a concept that helps us put our heads around this problem. One such concept is a Group Activity.

A Group Activity is initiated by the speaker: "Okay, let's play a game of Bingo!" The design of the activity is based on its purpose: "We're going to get you thinking with this brainstorming session", or "We will cool off a bit with this trivia game". Everyone can participate - directly, or indirectly : "Let's have a show of hands". The Group Activity's structure guides what happens next: "Now, it's Group B's turn." A certain order prevails, even as people participate: "Your time is up", or "Let's put together all the key takeaways now".

With the idea of Group Activity at the center, a framework for group activity facilitation evolved. The facilitation framework minimizes the speaker's workload, by doing many of the things that involve keeping the audience on track.

How do you classify myriads of Group Activities that are possible? A taxonomy of group activities fell in place: participation enhancer activities, collaboration activities, breather activities. Trainers could choose from icebreakers, activators, group exercises, energizer games and closers.

Research by eLearning Guild shows PowerPoint to be the tool most commonly used by trainers. This should surpise nobody, we all do it. It became clear then, that the best way to provide this technology was as Flash templates for PowerPoint.

In short, we had created a way to easily build and also to professionally facilitate group activities with minimal effort.

The last act was to pick a name for this software. What's in a name? A lot, one would think, especially when you stumble upon a name like YawnBuster. So we chose it, and YawnBuster was born.

Interactivity-Centric Blended Learning

We showed this graphic for the first time at DevLearn 2008 Conference & Expo at the Fairmont San Jose. The conference theme was, in keeping with its Silicon Valley venue, learning in a Web 2.0 world.

The topic of the talk was “Fostering Interactivity in the Classroom, Self-paced eLearning and Informal Learning.”

Although the graphic shows interactivity driving three learning modalities, there are important differences in the way interactivity drives these . To explore the differences, we only need to understand what is unique in each modality.

In classroom learning, learners are addressed as a group, all at once. Thus, group dynamics plays an important role. Everyone needs to keep pace with each other and the instructor. This means synchronization is critical.

In e-Learning, each learner is addressed separately, and learns at his or her own pace. Here, the key is engagement. It is easy for learner to get distracted, and e-learning designers endeavor to prevent this. Also, the instructor is absent from the scene at the time of learning, so the instructional designer carries a greater weight on his/her shoulders at the time of designing.

In informal learning, social interaction is pivotal. Peer learning thrives on people talking to each other. However, their interaction needs a learning context. If there is no context, there’s no learning.

The rest of the talk explored how these important differences manifest themselves in each modality. In classrooms, interactivity takes the form of facilitated group activities. In e-learning you will see non-trivial human-computer interactions, now popularly known as interactivities. Informal learning thrives on embedded social interactions, which make online interaction happen in a learning context.

Speaking Engagements in London and Paris

After spending two weeks in London and Paris, my interactions with elearning professionals have left me even more convinced about the need for embracing new technology to advance learning.

At the Olympia 2 Conference Center in London, the topic of my talk was “Unleash the Potential of Learning Interactions and Informal Learning.” The occasion was the Learning Technologies 2008 Conference.

Globally, eLearning occupies an increasing portion of the total learning delivered but still there are concerns about learner disengagement and non-completion. The root causes of learner boredom are traced to the lack of interactivity, learner isolation and content obsolescence. Some of the existing technology can address these concerns, but not in a scalable and economical way.

The audience participated well, and most of the discussion centered around two questions.

1. How to leverage rapid interactivity technology to create high level learning interactions
2. How to uncover the potential of social interactions as a tool for content enrichment using available technology

Next week, it was the Palais des Congrès in Paris where iLearning Forum 2008 met. Here, things were a bit different, because I don’t know French. Fortunately, the talk was fashioned as a joint presentation between myself in English and Peter Isackson of InterSmart Communication in French. Here our game plan was to:

1. Discuss some existing Web 2.0 techniques and tools for collaborative learning
2. Uncover the value that informal learning could bring to self-paced online Learning.
3. Introduce the concept of Contextual Informal Learning interactions for better learning outcomes with FlockPod
4. Illustrate the potential of social interactions as a tool for content enrichment

People are increasingly using social networking tools on the internet to share ideas, information and opinions and to connect to one another. Similar Web2.0 inspired collaborative tools could really change the face of online Learning.

An oft-quoted study by CapitalWorks revealed that over 80% of learning on the job occurs through informal means. And yet ‘informal learning’ is one key ingredient missing from self-paced online learning as we know it today.

A question then is, how can Web 2.0 inspired social interactions be introduced in the context of online learning?

Blogs, wikis, podcasts, social bookmarks, forums and other technologies may lead to learning, but they alone are not sufficient in addressing this problem. Important questions remain unanswered: How to ensure that informal learning happens ‘in the context’ of self-paced online content? How to ensure that interactions follow a structure conducive to learning? Better yet, how to ensure that interactions lead to content enrichment?

For best learning outcomes social interactions must fulfill these conditions:

1. Take place in the context of the presented course page
2. Allow learners to contribute and voice opinions
3. Provide educators the flexibility and control over interactions as well as content.

Social learning tools could have many applications such as collaborating on internal projects, threaded discussions on a topic, group assignments, peer support, hand-raising and debates, just to name some.

Dr Isackson and I addressed these issues and provided an illustration of the new exciting social interaction pod technology as a solution.

Implementing Learning Interactions Using 3D Metaphors and Ideas from Virtual Worlds

In this post, I present some thoughts on how to effectively use 3D metaphors and virtual worlds to enrich content presentation with little effort. Sounds exciting? Read on.

3D Objects for Content Navigation
This sound different from navigation based on the ubiquitous Next and Previous buttons, right? Usually, navigation in courses is linear or guided. However, when the information is non-sequential, the learner needs a choice to freely navigate through the content. Free navigation is easily provided with hyperlinks and menus, but there is a risk of the learner wandering away from the course page. Is there a way to balance freedom and context? Yes, there is. Use 3D objects.

If you have seen Google Earth, you’ll see what I mean.

Just as Google Earth does, 3D objects like a cube, a pyramid or a sphere provide non-conventional navigation metaphors to the learner. The learner can interact with these objects to explore available information and drill down visually where needed. Here, the whole content gets mapped to the 3D object and the object acts as a visual navigator.

Virtual World Ideas for Content Delivery
Have you played with Second Life? This software creates a world around you, where you live a life of your choice, make your decisions, explore what is around and just be part of a whole different experience.

Considering the complexity of development and deployment constraints, often it is not a practical idea for a trainer to create Second Life like virtual world in eLearning. However, Rapid Interactivity allows you to create smaller scale virtual worlds where learners can experience a walk-through or a journey and so on. These learning interactions provide the required immersion and a sense of simulated reality to learners.

Because of its complexity, 3D interaction development is can be expensive and time consuming. Rapid interactivity makes it easy when ready interaction models are available. Trainers simply customize the models according to their needs.

Keeping Interactivity at the Center of Rapid Development

Bryan Chapman is Chief Learning Strategist at Chapman Alliance. Formerly he was the Director of Research and Strategy for independent research and consulting firm Brandon Hall Research.

What we DON'T need in the industry, Bryan argued at a recent webinar, is a
faster way to create page-turning courseware! Yet, in many cases, the phrase “rapid development” has become synonymous with cranking out content that resembles an online book format.

Does it have to be that way? According to Bryan, the answer is an emphatic “No.” Forward-thinking organizations have figured out how to balance learning development, much in the same way we’ve figured out how to create blended learning. The key is using the right, best-of-breed tools for specific, desired learning outcomes.

The webinar, sponsored by Harbinger Knowledge Products, focused on these objectives:

• How and when to use the right interactive tools for the right instructional needs
• How to mix interactive exercises and other modalities to create dynamic, engaging course content
• How to infuse rapid development without sacrificing interactivity

Bryan opened his presentation with a Rapid Development Feud game, which aimed at discovering why we don’t use interactivity during rapid development. In his quintessential enthusiastic and energetic way, he then went on to make several key points.

Blended Learning and Interactivity
IBM blended learning model arranges various learning modalities in three concentric circles.

1. Classroom in the center - the culminating experience
2. Exercises, practice, games and simulations in the middle ring
3. Whitepapers, guides, documents, presentations and other reference material in the outer ring

Rapid authoring tools address the "outer ring" learning experience, whereas rapid simulation and game development tools such as Raptivity target the "middle ring".

Interactivity and Instructional Design
Dont wait till too late in the course development cycle to apply interactivity. In the ADDIE model, you need to think of interactivity as you prepare a variety of intermediate deliverables, including design documents, storyboards and prototypes, not just the final course.

Interactivity should meet instructional goals: An example was shown how Raptivity does this with a labeling exercise.

Tips and Suggestions - Using Interactivity for Rapid Development

• Create an interactivity “sampler” to show to internal customers, SME’s, etc. Review before design activities.
• Don’t create navigation controls at the page level. It’s a waste of time.
• Page turning isn’t bad if used in moderation. Add a healthy mix of interactivity.
• When prototyping, create a prototype for each interaction, not just a single lesson or module.
• Consider using multiple tools to meet the need.
• One caution: make sure interactivity choices don’t overshadow the instruction. It is possible to use too much of a good thing.

All in all it was a very useful session for rapid development practitioners. Bryan also shared his research on the cost of development per finished hour of learning, and how it varies with the level of interactivity.

You can view a recording of this event here. You can also download the presentation.

Delivering an Interactive Webinar

eLearning Guild’s online symposium is a great way for people to meet at a conference without the need to travel. The symposium for May 17 and 18, 2007 was titled 'New Techniques for Designing and Developing e-Learning Interactions' and would be keynoted by Patty Shank.

My topic was 'Rapid Interactivity Building for True Learning Outcomes'. This being my first experience of addressing several hundred people in an online webinar, I was thrilled to experiment with this new medium. E-learning Guild’s Karen Hyder was most helpful in getting me familiar with Acrobat Connect Professional, the web conferencing system.

We went online, Karen made introductions, and asked me where I was. Right then, a plane took off from San Jose airport, next to the building from where I was presenting. As I tried hard to ignore all distractions, all along I’d been thinking – how am I going to draw people in, how will I get them to participate? The agenda slide had been a bit of a monologue, really. Would the next slide do the trick?

I flipped to next slide, and two things happened. A poll came up, where the audience was to assess their level of familiarity with interactivity technology. I also asked a question in chat panel – Anybody heard of Silverlight? In a flash of a second, votes started appearing in the poll, and answers and questions started popping on chat. Then, for the next hour and a quarter, there was no looking back.

Interactivity in online webinars has its own distinct flavor. More people can talk back to you than you would ever hope for in a face-to-face session. There is little inhibition, no noise and no interruption when someone raises a question. Besides, there is a great opportunity to help each other. Someone asked where to get more information on Silverlight, and before I could answer, another participant had provided a web site link. The way this back channel worked was amazing. It's nearly impossible to do that in a classroom without a lot of distraction.

Thanks to eLearning Guild, the entire online symposium has been recorded and is available. If you are curious to know about rapid interactivity for true learning outcomes, here is the link.

What is Rapid Interactivity?

Course creators know of Rapid Authoring, and Programmers are aware of Rapid Application Development. The general idea is the same: waste less time and effort, get more bang for the buck. For those people who need to build interactive content, there has been a need for something on those lines. Rapid Interactivity is a new paradigm, which answers this unmet need.

Rapid interactivity involves a process using which people can quickly and easily create non-trivial interactions. This is done not by programming, but by customizing interaction models, templates where someone has already done the programming for you.

Interaction Models
Rapid interactivity is based on interaction models. An interaction model is a template which one can easily change (customize) to create interactivity. With interaction models at hand, you don't have to build interactivity from scratch. For example, a labeling exercise which allows you to change the diagram to be labeled, label locations and contents is an interaction model. Using this interaction model, you can make the changes and deploy several labeling exercises quickly, and without programming.

Estimating the Payoff
The value rapid interactivity can bring to your e-learning initiative depends on many factors. If you do not create interactive content, and do not plan to, then obviously you don't need rapid interactivity. This was the case in one situation where the requirement was simply to create learning guides which would be printed and circulated.

On the other hand, if you do foresee the need for greater interactivity especially on an ongoing basis, you should consider rapid interactivity.

Your payoff will depend on the number, variety and suitability of interaction models you have in your library. The larger your library, the greater choice you will have in selecting interaction models suited to your instructional goals.

Best Practices
From a productivity perspective, it helps to group interaction models into categories, so that it is easy to locate and compare them. So you can have all your interactive diagrams in one category, games in another, simulations in a third, brainteasers in yet another and so forth.

It also helps to tag the models with the instructional goal they serve. Conversely, you may map an instructional goal with several models that are designed for it. Thus, an instructional goal such as "memorizing" may map to several models, including "labeling exercise", "recall and pair game" etc.

Raptivity
Harbinger Knowledge Products has recently announced the release of Raptivity, the world’s first and only rapid interactivity builder. Raptivity is based on Harbinger's patent-pending technology for rapid interactivity building. With Raptivity, users can rapidly add interactivity to their eLearning content. Users can continue to use their existing authoring environment, and use Raptivity to add zest to their content. The Raptivity-generated learning experiences are instructionally sound, easily embeddable, and professionally designed.

Trainers, educators and subject matter experts prefer an easy tool for content development and therefore rapid authoring tools become their obvious choice. However, they have had to turn to complex tools for adding interactivity. Raptivity promises to change that.