Tony Karrer's eLearning Blog on e-Learning Trends eLearning 2.0 Personal Learning Informal Learning eLearning Design Authoring Tools Rapid e-Learning Tools Blended e-Learning e-Learning Tools Learning Management Systems (LMS) e-Learning ROI and Metrics

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Session Hopping – A Practical Guide

I just saw a link by Christy Tucker to a wonderfully funny, but a little too true: On the High Art of Getting Grades Without Learning Anything.

It caused me to remember that last year while attending a session at ASTD 2007, a few random people and I were discussing session hopping (prior to a session). I think the term is probably self-explanatory – but in case you don’t know what this is –
A session hopper moves between sessions at a conference that are scheduled at the same time in order to find the session that they feel provides the most value.
At any large conference, there generally are several sessions that sound interesting offered at the same time. As a session hopper, you identify several sessions for each time slot and then may choose to move around.

This is something I’ve been observing for years … and yes, I’m a session hopper. Interestingly, at ASTD 2007, I found several other kindred session hoppers. And, here are three guidelines around this practice …

Session Hopping Guidelines

First, as a session hopper, it is important to choose the right location – and that location is easy – it’s near the door on an aisle. That’s where we all sit. Notice that those are almost always the seats first taken in any session. Obviously, this marks you as a session hopper. So if you are not one, then please don't take those seats.

Second, know the right times to leave. The first opportunity is before the session starts after you’ve looked at the handouts - but don't take a copy of the handouts - that's just mean. Someone else who has the fortitude to actually sit through the whole session needs those handouts. The second opportunity is when the speaker goes through what they are going to cover – their outline. At either of these points, if it doesn’t look like they are going to cover something of value, then it makes sense to leave. Of course, during the session at various points there are opportunities to hop - maybe the speaker is either not all that great or has covered everything you care about.

What's interesting is that there are many speakers who seem not to understand us session hoppers. Through the whole presentation, they will continue to promise to show you something really interesting. Maybe it's the demo or its what they concluded. As a hopper, this is extremely frustrating. Cmon already. Get to the good stuff. And in many cases, it turns out not to be worth the 45 minutes investment. It seems that the speaker intentionally tried to get you to stay the whole time. You really feel cheated.

Third, know how to leave. I prefer to wait for the speaker to pause and look down – so they might not see me leave. Note: it’s hard to get out unseen when you are 6’6” (2m) tall and a fair number of people know you. It’s impossible to get out unseen if you have a middle seat. Thus, you sit on an aisle near the door. The other good time to leave is when a question or discussion with the audience breaks out. That way the speaker may think I’m leaving because the person asked a bad question or somehow it was the fault of the audience. I’ve been tempted but have never tried this – wait for the speaker to be in the middle of something. Get up. Give the speaker a big thumbs-up preferably with both hands. Smile. And then leave. They’d have to think I was being forced to leave for some other reason, right?

If you are really concerned about the perception of the presenter, you can always go up ahead of the session and tell the presenter that you might be getting a call in the middle and have to step out and take the call. I’ve used this technique. But the acting like I got the call part is more uncomfortable than sneaking out.

Speaker Perspective

Obviously, part of my strategy is due to worrying about the perception of the presenter. So, let's shift this a bit and talk from my perspective as a presenter:

I used to be pretty self-conscious about people leaving a session. I would worry what I had done wrong to cause them to leave. I’ve become somewhat less sensitive, but I doubt that any presenter doesn’t feel a slight worry when people leave. And as a moderator of panel, I definitely notice when people leave when one of the panelists is speaking.

A big part of why people leave is that you simply aren’t talking about what they expected based on the description. I try really hard to make my session description accurate to minimize people leaving. Along those same lines, a session hop (or leave) early in the session when it’s obvious that the content is not a good fit for them doesn’t bother me much. It clearly wasn’t a good fit. So, early hopping is okay. One caveat that I mentioned above, I’m not a big fan of people who come in to grab a copy of the slides and then go to a different session, especially when there aren’t enough copies for people who come and stay. A better practice is to come up and hand me a business card with your email and ask me to mail you a copy of the slides. I’m happy to do that.

Despite a lot of self-counseling, I’m still a bit self-conscious about people who leave in the middle. I’ve had enough discussions with people who tell me that they were upset that they needed to leave in the middle because they had to catch a flight or meet someone or do a conference call, that I’m not quite as worried about it. Of course, they may be using my suggestions above around session hopping. Still you would always rather have people coming in half-way through (from another session) than having them leave half-way through.

Also perception is heavily based on the number of people in the audience. If 10% of your audience leaves, that feels like a lot. 10% of 200 is 20. 10% of 40 is 4. So in a small room if a few people start leaving half-way through – it really makes you wonder.

Other Random Thoughts

As long as I’m on the topic of perception as a presenter, the best sessions always seem to be when I get scheduled into a small room and people are literally sitting on the floor, standing along the walls, looking through the door. There’s a funny energy in the room created by everyone feeling like – “hey I got into this session – other people can’t – I’m lucky – this must be good stuff.” Of course, at ASTD 2007, there were a bunch of sessions that were overfull at the same time (they had too many attendees for the size of the rooms). That's not a good thing. And I realize it’s not really a good thing for people who are coming. It's nice to have a bit of personal space. And people who couldn’t get in are likely not happy about it. Still anytime you present to an overfull room, it seems like people are more engaged, want to talk more, throw ideas out, challenge me, ask great questions. It’s fun.

On the flip side, probably the worst session I ever did was in November 2001 at the LA Convention Center. I was a featured speaker on Trends in eLearning. The conference almost didn’t happen because of the terrorist attacks a month and a half earlier. The conference was very much under attended and my session had room for about 600 in a large auditorium. I had maybe 100 people scattered around the seats, and the energy was not there. How could we care that much about eLearning Trends when the world as we knew it had changed?

On the other hand, Bill Clinton was a speaker at the conference and drew a standing room only audience. And I was very glad I attended his presentation. He truly is an impressive speaker. And it was good to hear his perspective on the attacks.

Friday, January 18, 2008

eLearning Course Development

BJ Schone asks a good question in his post - How do you build eLearning courses?
I have built our courses using a custom template created using HTML and JavaScript. They couldn’t believe I wasn’t using Lectora or another similar authoring product. They stressed that my courses would be difficult to maintain over time (in case I leave the company). My point of view was a little different: I chose this method because I have greater ability to customize courses as I please, and I can control every little detail of the course. I can easily embed Captivate movies, Flash movies, and anything else I please. I have a background in web development, so it was very easy for me to lean in this direction, too. And I think it’ll be just as easy to find somebody with HTML and JavaScript experience compared to Lectora or other authoring tools. But that’s just my opinion - I could be wrong.

So, here’s my question: How do you build your eLearning courses? Do you build them from scratch (ex. HTML, JavaScript, etc.)? Do you use an authoring tool for the whole course structure? I’m anxious to hear your response!

A long time ago we used to build our courses / eLearning from scratch as well, and we sometimes still do on some occasions, but generally it is better for everyone if you use an eLearning course authoring tool. Lectora gives quite a bit of flexibility and acts somewhat like an HTML / JavaScript course shell. You can still add custom HTML / JavaScript. You can embed Flash interactions. Unless you are trying to do something where you are automatically generating the pages based off of a CMS or database, then I'm not sure I get why you would use a standard tool.

My conclusion - without additional knowledge - the consultants in this case are right. It likely would be better for your company and your clients to use an authoring tool.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Wiki Course Authoring

In my Ten Predictions for eLearning for 2008, I said -
Wiki + SCORM + Add-ins will become more common for easy authoring.
Not sure if he saw my post, but I was just reminded by Tim Seager from Xerceo about their Prescribe tool that provides:
Full Wiki, RSS functionality that is SCORM conformant for tracking and managing competencies.
He also pointed me to a video that shows the tool in action. However, this video may be the worst video I've ever seen in terms of making me want to use something. It's horribly cryptic, you can't tell what's happening and it defeats the whole point that I see in using a Wiki for authoring...
A Wiki should make course authoring extremely easy and even easier to make updates. It also could allow learner contributions in some kinds of controlled scenarios.
Their video makes it look really complicated. My guess is that it's not that bad and would make a lot more sense if I knew the tool. Tim, you may want to get help on better presenting your tool.

The other thing that they aren't currently talking about is using various add-ins to provide additional functionality within the course. This is something I described a long time ago in: Authoring in eLearning 2.0 / Add-ins & Mash-ups.


Monday, January 14, 2008

2007 Traffic Stats - Hopefully a Meme

I've seen a couple of posts (Matt Cutts, Dave Taylor) talking about their relative web statistics for 2007. While my stats are very low in comparison to theirs, I was hoping that I could entice fellow bloggers to post some stats about their traffic in 2007. I thought it might be interesting to share with each other and I'm guessing there will be a few surprises.



Some thoughts / comments...
  1. You can get more detail on my Top eLearning Posts.
  2. You can see that Search Engines generate more than half the traffic. Referral traffic is generally from other blogs. Direct traffic is generally from RSS readers.
  3. This somewhat understands reach of the blog since I provide full feeds and many people never leave their reader to come to the web site.
  4. I would guess that these percentages are similar on other blogs, but I don't know.
  5. You can see that traffic is pretty steady and growing. Weekends and holidays are very slow compared to weekdays.
  6. As compared to many of my clients, my percentage of new visitors is very high. In fact, I would tell most of my clients that they should be doing a lot more to capture and keep those visitors. But, my guess is that these numbers are similar to other bloggers and I shouldn't worry too much about keeping them.
  7. The two pages per visit has been astonishingly consistent over the past few years. I'm curious how that compares as well.
Will anyone else share similar stats?

I'm especially curious about folks in the worlds of learning / eLearning and KM.and maybe the related world of KM.

I'm hoping some of the following folks would be willing to reciprocate with some stats.

Andrew McAfee
Are you game?

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Test SCORM Courses with an LMS

I was just asked by someone about how they could test a course they were creating against a particular Learning Management System (LMS) (in this case Docent 6.5). This is something we run into fairly often. We are developing a SCORM or AICC compliant course either custom or using an authoring tool. And we run into the same tough situation each time:
  • If there's an integration issue, like the score or completion is not getting set appropriately, we want to be able to make changes to the course to try to fix it.
  • We don't have direct access to a version of the LMS to test on.
  • The client's staff won't give us direct access to the LMS to run tests.
  • The client's staff is too busy to run a series of tests and they have no patience for problems.
  • The client has not set up a version of the LMS just for this purpose.
This happens both to external and internal developers. Likely this sounds familiar to many of you. The question is what to do about it. Here are some ideas -

SCORM Test Suite

One of the best things about SCORM (ADL's Sharable Content Reference Model) is that it is pretty easy to test and diagnose problems. In fact, it comes with a do-it-yourself test suite. The test suite was created to try to help get implementations to work together better. The problem is that there is no guarantee that two SCORM implementations that pass the self-test suite will integrate okay. The test suite can be downloaded here.

My first piece of advice for anyone developing a course is to make sure it runs with the ADL's test suite because that gives you cover in case there are issues. If it doesn't work out, then you can say - "Well it works with the SCORM test suite. We'll have to figure out what this LMS does different than the SCORM test suite."

SCORM Technical Test Version

At the start of each project where integration with an LMS is required, we create an early technical test version of the course. This is created using whatever authoring tool we will be using and it will contain no content. Rather, it simply allows us to quickly set particular variable values, e.g., test scores. Most often we put this in a SCORM wrapper to be able to diagnose what issues there are. This can show you what works and doesn't work long before you author the course.

The late Claude Ostyn created one test wrapper and also a diagnostic SCO. There is another called SCORM Test Tracker. We use our own so I can't vouch for these tools.

Note: there have been cases where we needed to go to HTTP stream tracking software to figure out what was wrong. This is less common these days, but it's good to know that there are tools at this level.

LMS Specific Testing

I would love to tell you that there was an easy way to take this technical test version and/or your course itself and load it under the LMS to test it before you hand it to your client. My experience has been that it's rare to have this happen.

Does anyone else have a different experience?

Do any LMS vendors provide test beds for people to test their course?

For the person who wants to test on Docent 6.5, what should they do other than what I suggest above?