How Will the iPad Change Interactive Learning?

One of the things that has always bothered me about m-learning is the small form factor of a smartphone device. The key idea of e-learning is engagement, and the more you can immerse the learner in an online experience the better. The optimal balance of screen size and handling convenience has long been elusive. Now the iPad shows a ray of hope. You get a good size screen that you can hold and carry around easily - just like the Kindle. And it seems capable of doing much more than the Kindle - although it lacks the glare-free e-ink of Kindle.

Sporting a 9.7 inch multi-touch screen, the iPad is supposed to revolutionize the way we surf the internet, watch television and movies, read books and newspapers. Can it revolutionize the way we learn?

As learning professionals we will need to design learning applications that effectively exploit the new capabilities iPad offers. We will have a lot to learn from app developers. It will be interesting to see how app developers render richer applications for iPad - it is almost certain that they will be different from laptop browser apps and smartphone apps. There is a new unlearning and learning curve waiting here for app developers. They need to take advantage of the larger size and touch capabilities while reducing the dependence on keyboard.

With devices like iPad and its competition, which will soon follow, I see the potential for a sea change in interactive learning. If these devices are affordable and ubiquitous, you get a cruicial new property to host learning experiences. The handling experience mimics a book - something learners are familiar with. Two or more learners can easily work together with such devices - with better off-angle display capabilities. Intuitive touchscreens and accelerometers make it easy to allow interaction. Being connected at all times will mean the opportunity to embed social learning experiences in structured learning.

Nearly all advantages of m-learning will be available to users of these devices. No need to be near a laptop, greater mobility, easier access to learning at the point of performace, to name a few. All this without the limitations of screen size. What a blessing.

A Podcast for Training Magazine

Here is a summary of the podcast I recently did with Training magazine Senior Writer Margery Weinstein about a better way to learn.

Margery Weinstein: When you say "interactivity in training," what are you referring to?
VJ: Learners are better engaged when their trainer establishes a two-way dialog. Monolog, as we know, is boring. This is true regardless of the learning modality – be it classroom instruction or e-learning. By “interactivity” I mean an artifact (such as a piece of software) that allows for a two-way dialog that is non-trivial. I would say a button-click is too trivial to qualify being called interactivity. A multiple-choice question isn’t a whole lot more interactive either. On the other hand, a jeopardy game, or a sales simulation are examples of interactivity. Here the learner is fully engaged in a dialog with the computer, or the teacher or another learner.

Margery Weinstein: How can technology be used to enhance, rather than hinder, interactivity during training?
VJ: That’s a great question. Contrary to common intuition, the initial use of technology in any form of dialog can actually hinder, rather than enhance, interactivity. Consider PowerPoint presentations – many of them are simply quite boring. Or consider a variety of e-learning courses that are online page flippers at-best. Why does this happen? The problem is not the technology, but the way we use it. By introducing technology, we eliminate some of the direct interaction. However, we don’t always provide equivalent technology-based interaction in its place. What we do provide is menus and buttons. Meaningful interactions go beyond mindless button clicking. They provide a context that is sufficiently engrossing and invite action from the learner. Once the learner acts, they provide a response and build a two-way dialog. When technology is used to build such experiences, you will see it enhancing, rather than hindering interactivity.

Margery Weinstein: What is the biggest mistake trainers make when it comes to interactivity, and what's the best way for them to avoid making this mistake?
VJ: We see trainers approaching interactivity in a couple of different ways, and both have their problems. Some trainers confuse slide transitions and bullets and special effects and navigation buttons with meaningful interactivity. They implicitly assume these mere interface elements will somehow deliver interactivity. No wonder, learners are disappointed with the results. On the other hand, some training professionals flex their programming muscles and build highly interactive experiences from scratch. This delivers highly engaging courses, but only at considerable cost, time and maintenance overhead. The best way to enhance training with interactivity is to re-use interactive templates that are customizable. Rapid interactivity is a great paradigm for trainers that want to get ahead with interactivity quickly and easily. You pick a template, fill in the content, customize the look, tweak the behavior and publish the interactive object and include it in your course. So you build a learning game in minutes rather than days! That is the power of rapid interactivity.

See You at Olympia 2, London

I look forward to opening this year's speaking calendar in London, at Learning Technologies 2010, Europe's leading organisational learning and learning technology conference. The topic is Emerging trends in interactivity: what every learning professional must know and why. This session will give the audience an overview of the state-of-the art in interactive technology as well as specific insights into how you can utilize emerging new tools and approaches like rapid interactivity and embeddable social interactions for developing effective learning materials.

Interactivity is no more the exclusive province of bespoke suppliers. Every learning professional - whether a teacher, trainer, course developer, subject matter expert or instructional designer - must think about building interactive experiences for learners. Clearly, technology is advancing rapidly to help make this happen.

In my recent blog post on trends in interactivity, I have outlined the general direction technology is taking to facilitate two-way interactive communication. In the upcoming session, I plan to help build a perspective that will help learning professionals make sense of new trends in the months to come, and help them stay on top of them, as they steer their learning ecosystem into the future. A synopsis of the talk is available online.

I am looking forward to meeting several users of Harbinger Knowledge Products as well as partners and industry peers at the Olympia 2 London venue. It's a relief to know that there is a wired 1Mb internet connection in each seminar theatre.

More Teachers Trading in Textbooks and Lectures For Interactive E-Learning Software to Engage Students

Today Business Week's website carries an article on how more teachers are trading in textbooks and lectures for interactive learning software to engage students. The article cites Kaplan University, San Francisco State University and Philips Children's Medical Ventures - all reporting tremendous student satisfaction resulting from interactive eLearning. To read the news, click here.

A Common Platform for Several Interactions: Good Idea?

For several years, I have been speaking at the eLearning Guild conferences and online forums on the topic of interactive learning. It is fascinating to see how training professionals' understanding of interactivity has evolved over the years. From the old days of minimal interactivity-literacy, we have come a long way, and now the question on everyone's mind is "interactive courses - of course yes, but how?"

In answering the "how" question, one interesting trend that has gained momentum is a common platform approach for interactivity development, which cuts costs, saves time and enhances effectiveness of online courses. Click here to see a synopsis of my upcoming talk on the common platform approach to interactivity development at DevLearn 2009 conference at The Fairmont in San Jose.

And of course, I welcome your ideas, suggestions, comments and questions ahead of the talk, so we can have a good interactive discussion.

Computer-based Games in Classrooms: Leveraging the Instructor

Game-based learning is gaining wide acceptance in corporate and academic e-learning. The use of games in classrooms, however, is still limited and follows traditional game formats.

One reason for the lack of momentum in classroom game usage could be the dependence of traditional classroom games on the instructor for successful facilitation.

Computer-based games, on the other hand, are designed primarily for self-paced e-learning, and largely leave out the instructor when used in a classroom. This means the instructor can neither control the flow of the game nor monitor the learning outcomes directly. Nor can the instructor leverage group dynamics, because mostly the games are played singly.

Is it possible to combine the best of both the worlds? Is it possible to use computer-based games in a classroom in such a way that the instructor has a meaningful role in their facilitation, control and monitoring?

Fortunately, the answer is yes. A new paradigm which makes this leap forward for classroom instruction is called Facilitated Group Activities.

Facilitated Group Activities are computer-based templates that are implemented using platforms such as Flash and PowerPoint. An instructor can quickly and easily create and facilitate custom activities such as games using these templates.

Using this approach is a two step process. In the first step, the instructor customizes the game template and includes it in the presentation slide. In the second step, while presenting, the instructor uses facilitation tools to configure groups, rotate turns, time the learners, score them and so forth - while the class plays the game.

Advantages of games conducted as facilitated group activities over other approaches are easy to see.

1. Ability for teachers to customize games by themselves
2. Ease of controlling the game flow
3. Preservation of group dynamics while the class is together
4. Leveraging the instructor's presence
5. Monitoring learners while they are playing the game

As an example, consider Bingo, the popular party game. This game can be easily adapted to learning use, to generate excitement as participants answer questions to win a house. A sure hit with all audiences, this is a great game format that ensures reinforcement of knowledge conveyed, and particulary works great as an energizer in the later part of your class session.

Let us see how the Bingo game works. Before the class begins, the instructor inputs several questions in the game and saves it. Once in the classroom, the game allows the instructor to form competing groups of students, and rotate turns among them to answer questions within a fixed time limit, in an attempt to win a house. The instructor has the ability to look up correct answers, provide helpful hints and mark right or wrong answers. The game maintains a score for each group and ends with a cool animation celebrating the winner.

What are the applications of this approach? Where do you think you could use this approach? Do you think there will be additional advantages if learners can use clicking devices to participate in such games?

Template Based Rapid Interactions: Overcome the Myths

"Are you shopping for a ginger bread cookie or a wedding cake?"

That was the question Seema Chaudhary posed, to highlight the difference between template-based rapid interactions and traditional custom interactions.

Seema Chaudhary, President at Harbinger Knowledge Products, was speaking at the 2009 Online Learning Conference held in New York on Sept 23-24, 2009 in a session on Optimizing Rapid Development co-presented with Bryan Chapman.

Traditional custom interactions meet unique needs by offering full programming freedom. Template based interactions, on the other hand, are pre-coded, so you need no additional programming to customize them using your own content.

Seema stated five misconceptions about template-based interactions. Template-based interactions, according to these misconceptions -

1. Are hard to customize
2. Offer limited selection
3. Cannot fit in multiple authoring systems
4. Might at best be a canned solution
5. Look tacky


Then she went about busting these myths one by one, by showcasing examples drawn from a large library of cool looking interactions that are easy to customize and easily embedded in several authoring tools. The examples, drawn mostly from Raptivity, did all the talking.

A link to this session is available here.

Learning Events vs Environments: A Case for Putting the Learner in the Center

Malcolm Gladwell, the bestselling author of TheTipping Point, has come up with another book that has created plenty of buzz. Outliers is a fascinating exploration of the factors driving outstanding success, presented in a nice storytelling fashion.

Among other things, the book mentions a study on learning effectiveness by Johns Hopkins University sociologist Karl Alexander. It has some very useful insights for professionals involved in learning initiatives in organizations.

According to Gladwell, Alexander tracked the progress of 650 first graders from Baltimore public school system, looking at how they scored on a widely used math and reading skills exam called the California Achievement Test. These are reading scores for the first five years of elementary school, broken down by socioeconomic class – low, middle and high.



As you can see, the differences in first graders across income groups are meaningful, but not overwhelming. This modest gap, however, widens as you go from year 1 to year 5. What causes this achievement gap? Is it because the disadvantaged kids aren’t as smart? Or is it because somehow the schools do a better job with kids already in a position of advantage?

To answer this, Gladwell provides another interesting data set. Kids took these tests not just at the end of every academic year. They also took them at the beginning of the school year. Which means you could calculate school-year gains.


This gets interesting. Now, all income levels are making comparable gains during school years. So, we can safely absolve the schools. But then, why was the achievement gap widening? Obviously, we need to also tabulate the summer vacation gains.


The gains show dramatic differences here. Some kids are gaining in summers, others are losing what they learnt in school.

What is going on? Presumably, the affluent kids get to engage in useful activities in summer, including reading at home, summer camps and what have you. They not only hold on to their gains, they even go further. Poorer kids don’t get to do those things.

Clearly, when you put the school in the center, every school year is going great, and schools are doing a good job. When you put the learner in center, you can see that the some learner groups are missing out.

Indeed, this rings true beyond K-12, for a broader range of learning initiatives. Time and again, focusing on formal learning events alone turns out to be myopic. A more complete goal is to improve the whole learning environment – pre-class, in-class and post-class - through a variety of modalities, such as online self-study, virtual classes, reference materials and social informal learning. Only then will all learners have a shot at holding on to – and furthering - their gains made during discrete learning events. Otherwise, end-results will vary depending on who has the most opportunities outside of formal classes.

Interactive learning cannot possibly limit itself to making learning events more exciting. That is part of the game. The architecture of a learning initiative should encompass what happens beyond formal learning events, to get consistent outcomes.

Stop Hovering over Learners

Helicopter Parents: Image courtesy The Telegraph, UK

Helicopter parents, as we know, hover over kids, micromanaging every aspect of their lives.

Unfortunately, like many other well-meaning actions, helicoptering can deliver more harm than good. It has been argued that too much hovering sometimes backfires, because kids learn their values backwards: they feel entitled to things that they must earn, they lack empathy where it is needed.

How does a parent instill a sense of personal responsibility in children? What will help teens develop decision-making skills? One school of thought says, stop hovering. Don't go nuts with worry.

Excessive hovering is not unique to parenting. Such excesses have their parallels in the learning world.

Take e-learning design, for example. Often we design courses that spoon-feed learners. When we do everything for learners, they end up thinking they in fact cannot do it themselves. Excessive guidance and tracking can actually shut down communication, depriving us of a key goal of interactivity.

Are you a helicopter instructional designer? Take this simple quiz.

1. I don't always provide immediate feedback - sometimes I delay it so the learner can observe the consequences of mistakes. (Yes/No)


2. My learners have a choice to navigate a course relatively freely - they can jump ahead or drop several levels back based on how they are doing. (Yes/No)


3. I allow some means for learners to self-assess, and reflect on their accomplishments (Yes/No)


4. My games and simulations carry an element of risk to learners, so they must weigh their decisions carefully (Yes/no)


5. I use pre-test or other methods to establish a learner's current level and maintain an element of stretch throughout the course. (Yes/No)


6. Assessments I design have multi-level hints: I do not give it all away at once. (Yes/No)


7. I mix informal learning experiences in the structured learning path. (Yes/no)
   

Please grade yourself. Here is a suggested grading scheme based on the number of affirmative replies:

6-7: The chopper has landed. Your learners will breathe easy.

4-5: The Hovering Bird. We know you enjoy flying, but with some persuasion, you can land the helicopter.

2-3: The Black Hawk. You have the approach of a military helicopter. The target will never be out of sight. At times you hover at close range.

0-1: The Lawnmower. You believe in mowing down the learner's path clean of all obstacles.

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?