Last year, we hosted a highly successful event: Corporate Learning: Trends and Innovation.

This year, Jay Cross, Tony Karrer, and I are again organizing as week-long online conference: Corporate Learning: Trends and Innovations 2008. The conference runs November 17-2008. It's online. And it's free. If you've been involved in conferences we've organized before, you know the routine: if you want to be kept informed on developments, sign up. Or follow our conference blog: LearnTrends.

I'll take a brief respite from my usual dismissal of all things 2.0 to highlight a nice article by Thomas Vander Wal: Tale of Two Tunnels: "the difference between Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 is like the difference building a tunnel through rock and tunnel under water...The Enterprise 2.0 tunnel is built under water. This takes more engineering understanding, but it also requires more fault testing and assurances. A crack or crumbling of a tool inside an organization is not seen kindly and raises doubts around the viability of the tool...Web 2.0 does not work well in enterprise, but the approaches and understandings of Web 2.0 modified for enterprise work really well."

There is value in this for educators. I frequently hear reasons about why we can't implement blogs, wikis, Second Life, and social networking services in education...security, we can't control it, they're just playing (instead of learning), and so on. I've been emphasizing a shift similar to Vander Wal's: don't focus on the tools and the direct application of the tools. Focus on what the tools allow us to do better and then find a way to implement that functionality in an organization. Should all grade 3 students have a blog on blogspot? Or videos on youtube? No. But all students in grade 3 should be communicating with others (preferably from around the world), expressing themselves in creative ways, co-creating with peers, and interacting with media and technology. Don't let the tools be used as a scapegoat for inertia.

The best place to be an author or consultant these days has to be the field of personal productivity. Who isn't overwhelmed these days? Information Overload: Time for a data diet? looks at the problem: "The river of content is turning into a flood, and my instinct is to get to higher ground." Two main solutions are presented: turn to technology (relying on RSS/web feeds to bring info together)...and stepping away from the internet. The first solution makes sense. The second...I don't know...it seems like we are getting more tethered to the internet through smart phones. The solution to overload is twofold: 1) new tools and techniques for managing what we want to track, 2) a new mindset - one that accepts always being behind, always learning, always missing something. And that's the way everyone else is. And that's ok.

Sure, China gets all the attention for having the largest internet population. But don't overlook the internet population in Europe, with countries like Russia, France, Spain, and Denmark reporting double digit growth. Netherlands has 82% of the population connected to the internet. In spite of significant growth of internet access, online learning is still poorly utilized. In several recent discussions, the aversion to the internet as a teaching/learning tool have been highlighted. The question for me is no longer "is online learning as effective as classroom learning". Rather, I'm asking "what better option do we have to meet current learning needs at a reasonable expense (of time and money)?"

Open educational resources (OER) continue to gain significant popularity. It's an exciting space. Lots happening: pen text book publishers, OER wikis, handbooks and tutorials, etc. Just came across this: OER Handbook. It is a useful starter resource for academics that are new to the space. It was an interesting experience reading the book. Perhaps because I read it online, I didn't see any mention of authors (until the end). I assumed that the book was written via a wiki. And I found it distracting. I like reading the work of individuals, not organizations. I wonder why...
The book widely references many of the key developments (Downes is reference about a dozen times, which is good to see). I was disappointed to not encounter any reference to mine and Downes' work on open education from about five or six years ago. While the project fizzled, I think it was one of the first attempts to pull together numerous projects, educators, and set some type of path forward collaboratively (rather than the current top-down direction from foundations and governments). At least give us a footnote :).

Most often, I don't finalize a presentation until just before the conference. The world has a habit of changing frequently. For an upcoming conference in Portugal, however, I was asked to submit a paper in advance. If you're interested: New spaces and structures of learning: the systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning (MS Word file). In this article, I suggest that the developments of technology and social learning theory are creating a sequence of change pressures that will alter traditional education. In particular, I try and answer: what will education look like in the future?

If you're reading this in an RSS aggregator like Google Reader, this post will be redundant. But, if you're reading this on the site or newsletter, take a look at this one minute presentation on Google Reader. It's a great overview to RSS (or web feeds) in general.

Last November, Chris Lott and I had a somewhat energetic chat on the whole concept of digital natives. I felt (and still do) that the term is not useful. Chris argued that the term is useful as a means of dialoguing about change and awakening educators to the impact of technology. It's a good argument. The term is not valuable in what it describes, but is important in how it permits us to interact with each other and talk about changes. Apophenia's discussion of digital natives is aligned with Chris' argument: "Academics tend to err on the side of nuance and precision, eschewing generalizations and coarse labels. This is great for documenting cultural dynamics, but not so great for making interventions. Creating an impression, an image in the minds of those who are fearful requires more than accurate data. It requires a compelling story and a framework that can replace the boogie monster...Combatting pre-existing images requires more than accuracy, more than nuance. It requires either a new more-sticky image or a reworking of the original image."

We (as in humanity) often view ourselves as being logical. We spend much time in philosophy classes debating the nature of logic, playing with logic tables, and generally convincing ourselves that what defines us as humans is our ability to explore concepts and ideas through a framework of logic. After, isn't the scientific method a testament to the power of a logical framework to banish myth and superstition? While logic certainly is a large part of who we are, most of us are moved more by stories than by logic. Bambi, for example, did more to raise awareness about hunting than did studies and logical arguments. Political leaders aren't elected because they are the best or most competent, but rather because of their ability to translate a meaningful world view (through narrative and story) that resonates with what we aspire to be. And advertisers, well, let's not get into the latest Axe or Budweiser commercials. Regardless of how far-fetched and at times comical an advertising message is, something in a story stirs us. The Secrets of Storytelling: Why We Love a Good Yarn tackles why stories have such power over people: "Psychologists and neuroscientists have recently become fascinated by the human predilection for storytelling. Why does our brain seem to be wired to enjoy stories? And how do the emotional and cognitive effects of a narrative influence our beliefs and real-world decisions?
The answers to these questions seem to be rooted in our history as a social animal. We tell stories about other people and for other people. Stories help us to keep tabs on what is happening in our communities. The safe, imaginary world of a story may be a kind of training ground, where we can practice interacting with others and learn the customs and rules of society. And stories have a unique power to persuade and motivate, because they appeal to our emotions and capacity for empathy."

Jay Cross digs through training and development's closet and asks: Whatever happened to performance support? He explores the roots of performance support, its rapid rise, and then apparent disappearance. It's a good, quick read into one of the concepts within training and development that holds much promise and, on the surface at least, appears to have failed to reach its potential.

Earlier this week, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Robin Good of MasterNewMedia. The video of our discussion is now available. The conversation was somewhat diverse in topics, ranging from learning, trends, and the role of schools. Robin asked a series of excellent questions on the role of schools - at the secondary level - that I did a particularly poor job of addressing coherently. But I enjoyed the conversation...Robin's passion and energy come through very clearly in the interview!

I haven't read all of the ebooks listed...but this is a useful listing of 20 free ebooks on social media. The list includes resources on podcasting, blogging, usability and related subjects. I'm not entirely convinced I like the term social media anymore. In the sense that all media (whether creation/production, transmission, reception...and even when media is treated as storage, it still aspires to be viewed) require a producer and consumer, doesn't the notion of media have an inherent social trait?

Ray Schroeder provides a link to a great resource: NSF and the Birth of the Internet. The site includes a mix of timelines, images, videos, interviews, etc. As prominent as the internet is in our lives, it's worth having at least a functional understanding of the stages of development as well as future directions. We need something similar for the development of educational technology...

Howard Rheingold has been working on a project called Social Media Classroom to incorporate emerging technologies into classrooms. An instantiation of his platform is can be seen here for an upcoming course he is teaching. The software - SMC - pulls together wikis, blogs, tagging, media sharing, and other tools familiar to the read/write web crowd. This type of centralized tool set is important for introducing the next wave of adopters to distributed social media. I'm unsure at this stage whether Rheingold's software allows for incorporation of learners blogs that exist outside of the software - i.e. if I have an existing blog, can I post there? Or do I have to use the course software exclusively? I'm of the mindset that developers of software, such as LMS', need to design for two groups: the majority who are just starting to adopt social media and the minority who are well on the journey and want to keep their existing space and identity. Rheingold provides a short introduction to the software in this 8 minute presentation. Key quote: don't worry about keeping up with the technologies so much as keeping up with the literacies the technologies enable.

I've been trying to gain a better sense of the role universities will play in society in the future. At one point, we thought content was the value point of universities. Wrong. MIT's OpenCourseWare initiative changed that. Ok, then the interaction with faculty is the value point. And wrong again. Open communication and collaboration in online environments with networks of peers and experts gave us control over our interactions. Fine. Then the value point is accreditation. Yes, for now. Our ability to rate, review, comment, and provide feedback has increased with the development of the read/write web. I'm not sure how long we can build education's value on the concept of accreditation. As I've frequently suggested, we can glean much insight from a field that has spent more time journeying down the path of shifting value from content to something else: the news/journalism/media industry.

Jay Rosen, in National Explainer, advocates a new role for journalists. Instead of presenting information, the objective is to assist readers and viewers in making sense of complex subject areas. The ability to do this rests on the journalists ability to provide coherent, memorable explanations. In my presentation at Madison a few weeks ago, I emphasized that the role of university may well become one of being a coherence-maker, helping learners make sense of information abundance and change. Sure, universities have always done this...but they have done so from a perspective of authority rather than engagement.

I was interviewed by a radio program today on the role of Facebook in education. My view: very little research has been conducted on whether the high communicative value of Facebook translates into academic value. Do students want educators to integrate Facebook into instructional activities? Or do students prefer to use these tools for more social purposes? As educators we are often drawn to tools in popular use, assuming we can co-opt them for academic purposes. "Oh look, everyone has a mobile phone/Facebook account/Second Life avatar...let's use that for educational purposes". InsideHigher Ed asks the key question: Will Colleges Friend Facebook?
In a related vein - the term creepy treehouse has acquired a fair bit of traction to draw attention to differences of intention in the use of popular technologies and processes for teaching/learning.

One of my favorite past times is to whine about the term web 2.0. I don't like it. It turns what is inherently a process in to a product. It's a marketers dream. It smacks of hype. And so on. Yet the term appears with increasing frequency in books, articles, and conference themes. Don Hinchcliffe states that web 2.0 is the more popular "new internet" term. He then provides a good overview of how the term evolved, how Gartner presents it in their hype cycle, and how "2.0" is impacting the development of concepts such as enterprise 2.0.

For some reason, we like to do certain things in certain places. It's not as comical a statement as it first appears. Consider work: we go to work, sit at a desk, or lecture in a classroom. We have a habit of eating dinner at the table (well, for some, in front of the TV). We have a "go to" mentality. Why? I haven't a clue. But that mentality is changing in a few areas. Consider business - many workplaces are moving away from the traditional "go to work" mentality. Distributed workforces, increased travel, and internet connectivity leave many professionals with only a limited presence at a particular physical location. Consider another perspective: "we go to classrooms to learn". It may have been more valuable at one time, but with meetups and internet connectivity, I wonder if classrooms are going to go the way of business offices: distributed, open, mobile.

I often encounter this type of question with regards to education: Are social networking sites good for business? The question assumes that SNS possess some intrinsic value in themselves. Simply put, social networking services are good for communicating and connecting with others. If that's your aim - in education, business, or whatever - then, yes, these tools can be useful. Outside of an aim, in keeping with Gibson's concept of the need of an agent to perceive affordances or action potential of a tool, SNS have no value.

I delivered a presentation to ABEL at York University this morning: Designing new learning landscapes. While preparing for the session, I was looking back at what kinds of questions we are asking today as compared to questions we were asking only ten years ago. The types of questions we are asking obviously provide and indication of what we are seeking...i.e. questions reveal a mindset or goal-orientation. Many of us have moved from asking "is technology effective" to "how can we use technology as a lever for transformation". The new orientation makes an enormous difference in where we'll end up in the next decade...