Social Learning: Are We Missing the Boat?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bill Sherman on June 2, 2009 at 3:24pm

Mike,

That's a great question. I think both learning theory and social-capital theory provide interesting (but different roads) to an answer. I think we're seeing a race to apply new technology without asking "how can we implement this in smart, productive ways?" Many people have started experiments--similar to the dawn of e-learning and Knowledge Management. Yet, there are few models for practical success.

The selection of appropriate delivery tools is a crucial element in the instructional design of any training/development program.

Social media can be another tool in a practitioner's toolbox, but without the foundation of solid instructional design or the building of a learning community by a skilled practitioner, the tool could be as clumsy as trying to use a hammer to drive in a screw. Yeah, it's doable, but clumsy--and quite possibly not the most effective tool for the job. I can imagine social learning situations that go astray- such as the over-helpful wiki-contributor who shares inaccurate information and virally spreads it (like a cold) across the organization.

"Third Generation" instructional design (social constructivism) is not intended to replace earlier models. It augments; emphasizing the recognition of unique differences in learner styles and utilizing new tools to enhance delivery.

In the first generation model (constructivism), learners assume rather passive roles, memorizing and practicing while an instructor guides, lectures and provides information.

The second generation model (cognitive constructivism), encourages action/interaction between instructors-learners, and between learners themselves, as they research, explore, experience and apply newly acquired knowledge. Teams, project groups, breakout groups, online discussions and chat rooms can be mediums for these interactions.

The "third generation" model is comprised of rich communications between instructors, other learners, mentors, colleagues, and a wide spectrum of other subject matter experts around the world to broaden the learning process. Social media can certainly play a part in this model, enabling learners to collaborate on projects, provide support and assistance via email, postings, or instant messages. Online communities such as Facebook, Twitter, or MySpace provide excellent forums in which to develop virtual work study groups.

As to practitioners being ahead or behind the ball, it depends on their input into course design and delivery -- third generation design places more, not less, emphasis on initial needs assessment and instructional design, in order to align the program with the course objectives, learners' needs, and workplace ecosystem. A skilled instructor/facilitator is even more crucial to the success of web-based or elearning programs -- social media is based on interaction, and without an instructor building a foundation of cooperation, trust and collaboration, there is no sense of community within which to interact.

There's huge difference between a social learning platform (a social network) and a functional learning environment (which possesses social capital). My blog, aha-moments.com, focuses on social capital, and you've prompted me to post a related discussion there.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Echols on June 3, 2009 at 9:04am

The exploding debate about formal vs. informal learning embraces the issue of social networking or, more accurately in corporate settings, network learning. Missing at the moment is a reference point for exploring priorities for network learning or more broadly, informal learning. What is presented here is not intended to be exhaustive, but merely a starting point for a foundation discussion.
Elements of formal learning as it has evolved in the learning profession include:
* Processes - most fundamentally instructional design. Core to instructional design is the rigorous definition of course objectives. In terms of the work we do in Bellevue University's Human Capital Lab, this is process of linking the learning activities to the desired business outcomes. The balance of the instructional design is the organization, format and sequencing (multi media for example) of the content.
* Content - Historically this has been the selection of the facts to be delivered in the learning. This includes the selection of the "WHAT" of the learning. Historically in academia, the professor had been the authority on what content is most relevant.
* Tools - Both design tools and tracking tools have been at the heart of this portion of the learning profession. Recently, the most discussed tool has been the Learning Management System (the LMS). Tools are highly valued by the learning community.
* Activities - The amount of "doing" has been a critical measurement for the learning community. Examples include: "butts in seats", average hours of delivered instruction, number of learners enrolled.
* Media - Here the most recent debate has been about the transition from instructor led training (ILT) delivered in a classroom vs. e-learning. One suggestion here is that the distinction between ILT and online or e-learning involves much more than merely the selection of media.
So for now, let me suggest that this discussion about informal learning and the tools of informal learning, including blogs, wikis, and social networks focus on what the informal learning activities do better than the key element of formal learning listed above. In the end, it is not about the tools, but about the value created by the learning, be it formal or informal.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Elizabeth Das on June 3, 2009 at 9:21am

I really enjoyed Bill's reply. It was an excellent learning tool. Thank you.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Prokopeak on June 4, 2009 at 5:49pm

Some great points. I guess I get frustrated when I'm at meetings and people start talking about social networking tools and informal learning, but they don't advance the conversation.

We all know the tools by now - let's dig in to how they fit into a learning strategy, community, culture and discuss where they can be leveraged for value. Both Bill and Mike have offered a useful lens to view social learning, informal learning, whatever you want to call it.

I think we need more debate and discussion around social learning, and less rush to adopt. Check out this blog post by Andrew Sullivan from The Atlantic, titled Why I Blog. It's a fascinating exploration of the blog as a literary form, and offers a model for the kind of thinking we should be doing about social learning.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Bill Sherman on June 4, 2009 at 7:48pm

Mike, are you familiar with Gartner's concept of the hype cycle? Wikipedia offers a good intro link, but you can find information elsewhere online too.

It sounds like you're hearing the buzz as we approach the "Peak of Inflated Expectations" where everyone rushes to adopt social learning because it's new and cool . . . and promises to solve all of our problems--even though there's no strategy in-place..

Here's my thought. We'll see course designers and companies implement social learning as the "new thing" and expect it to solve all the organization's learning needs. This approach will fail (in some cases spectacularly) and many people will form a the equally-hasty opinion that "social learning doesn't work." At that point, we'll ride down the Trough of Disillusionment.

But, some of us will ignore both the hype and the disillusionment. We'll look at the tool and say, "hey, this could be powerful. Let's figure out how to use it effectively." We'll tinker around, individually in our ID workshops and with like-minded folks until we find solutions that work.

BTW, I liked the piece from Andrew Sullivan. He keeps a rather thoughtful blog. But then again, I've also found an interesting through-line from the blog back to the Essays of Michel de Montaigne. In 16th Century France, Montaigne looked inward critically and asked 'Que sais-je?' ('What do I know?')

In many ways, that's a good motto for a blogger.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by steve case on June 6, 2009 at 11:31am

I really enjoyed all the conversation back and forth. And yes Informal Learning and Social seems to be the rage recently. However using "informal learning" and using "social learning" has been going on for quite a while. I am working with a tool that has been on the market for a number of years which incorporates Formal Training (ILT, Webinars, eLearning etc) along with Informal and Social Learning. All aspects of training are monitored, tracked and reported on. Even the aspects of the managers interactions, or the mentor's etc are all tracked and reported on.

And this is not a one size fits all tool. It is made to be "tweaked" and structured by the ISD person so that it fits the specific needs of the group of people being trained. Of course in working with them I checked their company's past history, and the results others had obtained. I was amazed at the ROI obtained. Then I stopped to realized what they had done was taken the normal processes of a person going from a state of nothing to a state of "ready to do the job", established a platform to delivered these on line, structured them and then built a monitoring and reporting tool around them. It was both simple in concept, it fit my thoughts of how one gains proficiency, yet was flexible and powerful.

So I kind of agree (I think) with others. Everyone seems to be chasing "the current shiny object", not knowing what to do when they get it. But in reality there are those who have figured it out, and are all ready doing it. If you want more information about the tool I am working with feel free to email me at scase@aleragroup.com and I will share details.. steve

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John D. Lake, Jr. on June 18, 2009 at 8:36am

As I listened to Tony Bingham’s keynote at ASTD regarding the (must-do) implementation of social networking in the training environment, several thoughts came to mind:
- “This late boomer can’t even execute a successful text message.”
- “I’m just getting used to ‘chat rooms’.”
- “My experience in Facebook was an incredible journey into the inane.”
- “Where I come from, being called a ‘twit,’ or any of its derivations, is NOT a good thing.”

So as I was preparing my “What Is Popular Is Not Always Right” diatribe, an interesting memory crashed headlong into my thought process.

It took me back to my junior year of college (a long journey for the short time it took to get back there). The class was “English Grammars.” The twelve of us students (small college) sat in a circle of desks with the professor just on the outside of the circle. She would pose the question or hypothesis for the day and we would have at it for the next 45 minutes or so (my favorite was the day we discussed the grammatical correctness of the word “ain’t” – but I digress). The professor would chime in occasionally to either keep the discussion on track, or throw us a curve-ball that would send us down some rabbit-hole (how’s that for a mixed metaphor) of a tangential discussion that furthered the debate. It wasn’t until later in life I discovered that this was a modern-day version of what is known as the “Socratic Method” – creating an educational environment by stimulating facilitated critical thought.

OK, fast forward back to today – right now – as you are reading this…

Are we not engaged in the 21st century version of the same process? Mike P. has posed a question, and the electronic classroom, composed of any of you reading and/or responding to this, has returned your thoughts to further the discussion – proving or disproving the hypothesis based on the combination of our own personal observations and experiences.

I feel like such a hypocrite – using the very methodology I was planning to come against!

But it does prove an interesting point. Mike E’s post (Process, Content, Activities, Media) sums it up very well. This (social/informal learning) is an extension of the formal classroom, not a replacement of it. In this particular media, all we have is the words themselves. Our emotional connection (through voice, face, and body) cannot be made via this technology. Real debate and discussion (and therefore education) is emotional. Yes, you experienced some emotion as you read the above words, but were they the emotions I was intending to convey? Should my posts be threads of responses or do I only have enough time for a “fire in the hole” entry? Or a combination?

I love Bill’s assessment of approaching the “Peak of Inflated Expectations” around Steve’s “current shiny object,” although – if ASTD is any indication – I don’t think we are anywhere near the peak of hyperbole yet.

Properly managed, this could be a really cool tool. Otherwise, it will be a technology destined for the trash heap right next to film and ¾-inch videotape.

OK, have at it.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jay Krupp on June 23, 2009 at 7:10pm

Bill you are dead on with the hype cycle. While the industry tries to figure out exactly how to be use this, there are a number of mavens out there that have the recipe. The use of things like virtual worlds has application immediatly, if you can be creative with the approach. I suggest you check out subquark.com . He presented at a number of eLearning Guild conferences. He has put 2.0 in action. His sessions were not all theory as many are, the explained how to do it, in detail.

Bill Sherman said:

Mike, are you familiar with Gartner's concept of the hype cycle? Wikipedia offers a good intro link, but you can find information elsewhere online too.

It sounds like you're hearing the buzz as we approach the "Peak of Inflated Expectations" where everyone rushes to adopt social learning because it's new and cool . . . and promises to solve all of our problems--even though there's no strategy in-place..

Here's my thought. We'll see course designers and companies implement social learning as the "new thing" and expect it to solve all the organization's learning needs. This approach will fail (in some cases spectacularly) and many people will form a the equally-hasty opinion that "social learning doesn't work." At that point, we'll ride down the Trough of Disillusionment.

But, some of us will ignore both the hype and the disillusionment. We'll look at the tool and say, "hey, this could be powerful. Let's figure out how to use it effectively." We'll tinker around, individually in our ID workshops and with like-minded folks until we find solutions that work.

BTW, I liked the piece from Andrew Sullivan. He keeps a rather thoughtful blog. But then again, I've also found an interesting through-line from the blog back to the Essays of Michel de Montaigne. In 16th Century France, Montaigne looked inward critically and asked 'Que sais-je?' ('What do I know?')

In many ways, that's a good motto for a blogger.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Miller on June 23, 2009 at 8:28pm

I like to keep in mind that these "social media" tools are simply forms of communication. As a past high school and college professor turned eLearning "developer", I am always a bit put off by how we "eLearning gurus" focus so heavily on these tools. To me focusing on wikis, micro-blogging, and even virtual worlds misses the only thing that has any importance (in my opinion) to education - the content.

Plato taught, arguably, some of the most significant "things" by drawing in sand with a stick. The focus of his teaching is not the technology he used in its delivery; it is his message, his content. Personally, I do not think it matters very much the delivery method. Certainly, some methods reach differently and I do not mean to discount the value of those who study these methods.

If success of the delivery method is measured in engagement and retention, then we should be delivering our content via an American Idol or The Biggest Loser format. Both of which reach millions and are the topics of conversation at water coolers the next day.

My view is that most of us have tools at our disposal that work very well and are inexpensive. Tools such as Windows MovieMaker or Mac iMovie work very well to create video podcasts (remember to offer textual options - especially since you probably have the script or text written). Second Life and OpenSim are almost free alternatives to Maya, Blender 3D, and 3D Studio Max - both in cost and time to develop.

Jay mentions Second Life which is certainly seen as a "Web 2.0" application and seemingly on the hype cycle's Slope of Enlightenment and it is a wonderful tool for collaboration and creativity. Many fine eLearning examples can be cited from Second Life. Twitter is also useful in certain forms of eLearning. I am biased towards those two methods because I am active in Second Life (owning 12 sims) and experiment with a few accounts in Twitter (one is in the top 0.7% according to Twitter Grader - for whatever that is worth).

Both those tools are simply forms of communication (like the dry erase board - which somehow missed out in being a focus of much debate in education - much like our current discussions of these social tools). Their use and effectiveness lie in dispensing your content effectively. Japan's number one novel a few years ago was completely wriitten as 140 character (or less) text messages. The story made it successful (and the delivery did influence it's feel with concise and impactful writing).

Thank you for the very good discussion and I must disclose that the reason I am in both Second Life and Twitter are as a direct result of Jay Krupp's open view to delivering content. He epitomizes the open-minded wisdom that allows and encourages developers to look at content, the tools at hand, and (hopefully) produce content that enriches lives, impacts people's happiness, and leads to greater successes on many fronts.

Jay Krupp said:

Bill you are dead on with the hype cycle. While the industry tries to figure out exactly how to be use this, there are a number of mavens out there that have the recipe. The use of things like virtual worlds has application immediatly, if you can be creative with the approach. I suggest you check out subquark.com . He presented at a number of eLearning Guild conferences. He has put 2.0 in action. His sessions were not all theory as many are, he explained how to do it, in detail.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Josh Bersin on June 23, 2009 at 8:34pm

Social learning is very real, and despite the hype of some pundits, we believe that the world of "informal learning" is really going to transform the L&D function. In fact, we believe that "social learning" fits into the framework of corporate training as one of four major elements: formal learning (designed and delivered ILT or e-learning), on-demand learning (EPSS and other forms of on-demand support), embedded learning (learning embedded in work), and social learning.

And this new world has created a need to rethink the instructional design model, focus on new disciplines in the profession, and develop a focus on learning culture.

Read more....

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Miller on June 25, 2009 at 10:00am

I reposted my response from this blog over on my blog and had a great coment:

I disagree that it’s all about the content. The way we teach is very important. If it wasn’t, we’d just chuck them a textbook or read the content out (something that happens to me without much success) and there would be no need to learn the lessons we are currently learning from Web 2.0.

Which caused me to shift my view:

Well stated and yes, my view was overly simplistic.

In my head I was seperating delivery from delivery. What I mean is that the content does need to be delivered in a suitable way. This delivery (I am going to really complicate this) is in the way it is presented by the teacher, and not the manner of delivery as in book, chalk board, or elearning.

We can read content to people in a manner that reaches them, or be monotone.

I used to read passages from geology textbooks (talk about dry material!) to my students at Miami Dade College. I would walk around the classroom (120 seat auditorium rooms), sit on desks, gesture, and be animated.

Many students were really touched by this. Because no one ever read to them as children (78% of Miami Dade students were never read to by their parents).

So indeed, you are absolutely correct, the presentation and content are key. The delivery vehicle can be in many forms. Thank you for forcing me evaluate my stance.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by martine parry on July 29, 2009 at 5:26am

Looking at this from a market and supplier perspective, I'd like your views on my observations of the market.

The advent of free (or near-free) tools online from the web 2.0 stable is changing the supply chain model of delivering training to organisations. This is happening on the back of the convergence of elearning development with communications asset development over the last 10 years, resulting in elearning development specialists being pushed out of the market .. and this also in tandem with a general move of training specialists from budget-holding positions within companies (programme managers are the key budget-holders for each programme or revenue business division).

So what is the future of the supply and value chain in this newly emerging market? Will suppliers only be valued for their consulting as tools get given for free? Is this market entering the same space as the music industry where anything digital gets given away to build support for the 'live' performance? If so, does this mean a return to workshop delivery or will specialists be able to only provide live 'coaching' to senior staff whilst the rest of the staff get the 'rapid elearning' treatment (very basic and cheap digital courseware)?

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2