I've been having fabulous conversations about using SharePoint.
Update Dec. 2009 - We are in the process of getting learning professionals to discuss the use of SharePoint for Learning. Please see SharePoint for Learning Professionals and connect with me around it.
SharePoint is so flexible and the documentation for it is so big and diverse, that a big part of my goals have been to understand the different ways that training organizations are using SharePoint. In my post SharePoint Examples there are some great examples in the comments. I've had conversations with several of these folks in more detail and with a few others.
In this post, I wanted to capture some of the patterns of use of SharePoint that seem to be emerging. This is a bit crude, but I thought that folks might find these interesting.
Using SharePoint before, during and after courses
This typically takes the form of sharing best practices, code examples, templates, links; posting announcements; having discussions; showing calendar items; supporting student profiles; supporting student project work; sharing notes, documents; providing course content. The reality is that what we did on the Work Literacy course or what I did for my Collaborative Learning Course could easily be supported by the various types of web parts within SharePoint.
Using SharePoint for Work Team or Communities of Practice (CoP) Collaboration
Outside of any particular formal learning, many training organizations are using SharePoint to support work teams. Typically this involves many of the same aspects as above: document sharing, calendar, discussion, resources, links, profiles, contacts, etc.
Using SharePoint to Publish to Work Teams or Communities of Practice (CoP)
Another common model is more of a publishing model where the training organization wants to provide on-going communication to the work teams or CoP. They focus more on information push and it's less intended to have user-contributed content. Obviously, there is a spectrum of using SharePoint to support collaboration and using it to publish. But in discussions there were often distinctions based on what the work team or CoP expected.
Using SharePoint to Publish to Content to the Web
Several training organizations were using SharePoint as a means of publishing web pages for public consumption. These would be external consituents. In some cases, login was provided to allow the third party to more actively participate.
Using SharePoint as Project System for Training Organization
Quite a few people talked about how they were using SharePoint as a collaborative tool to work on projects. They would share course materials, project plans, documents. They had profiles, directories, blogs to help foster sharing between spread out teams. Some used it to track bugs. Some with Subject Matter experts.
Using SharePoint for Event Planning & Organizing
Just like we used a Wiki one year and Ning another to support the online conference LearnTrends, SharePoint can be used to manage all types of events, especially internal events. This is similar to support for courses and much of the web parts used, follow-up techniques, etc. were similar.
Using SharePoint for Software Support Site / Help Desk
Another common use of SharePoint was as a reference site, especially software support site. This provides an easy way to have easy access to support materials. It also makes it easy for the Help Desk to be actively involved in on-going support.
Quick Thoughts on eLearning 2.0 and SharePoint
The reality with SharePoint is that when you go back and look at the great list of eLearning 2.0 Examples, most all of these could have been supported through SharePoint. There are some definite challenges to getting SharePoint set up right, rolling it out in smart ways, helping people the right way, etc. In some ways then, SharePoint is well suited to supporting eLearning 2.0.
However, one thing that was very interesting to find in the discussions is that I feel there is a gap between these patterns for using SharePoint and the idea of helping concept workers address the Knowledge Worker Skill Gap and begin to be able to work and learner better. A lot of what eLearning 2.0 is about is helping the individual to self-serve. They should be at the core.
In SharePoint, there are MySite which is more like a portal page showing RSS feeds, list of SharePoint sites, shared documents. Possibly its smarter use of Outlook that's the intent from a Microsoft vision of supporting the knowledge worker. But it was clear from the conversations that we've not quite made the shift to thinking about personal work and learning environments (PWLE) - see: PWLE Not PLE - Knowledge Work Not Separate from Learning, Personal Work and Learning Environments (PWLE) - More Discussion and Personal Work and Learning Environments.
In looking back at the discussion in Training Design, the suggestion is that there's a new piece here that has to do with on-going support. As part of this look at using SharePoint, I'm realizing that it's something a bit more. It's personal. I don't quite have the picture yet.
I welcome other patterns that I've missed and I welcome people chiming in with how they view the personal work and learning aspect.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Audience Member
On ICT in Early Learning someone (not sure their name) has responded to my Conversation Topics post (see them via eLearning Learning - 100 Conversations). The basic focus was on their audience - who they see as the typical audience member. This may be quite interesting as one of the first comments was:
I enjoyed reading this post and it relates to both New Blog and No Trust. It is a great discussion of the process they used to understand their audience and really to find their blogging voice.
It was interesting to see in the post -
One thing I'm finding in responding to these conversations is whether I'm writing for the one person who initiated the conversation or to my prototype audience member. It's actually causing me a bit of grief. I'm sure I'll find the right pattern as I do more.
I look forward to further conversation. And if you have thoughts on whether this works as a model for my blog, please let me know.
I have set up a draft post behind the scenes of the 25 of the 100 conversations that I feel inspired to participate in.Wow! I'm curious to see what results.
I enjoyed reading this post and it relates to both New Blog and No Trust. It is a great discussion of the process they used to understand their audience and really to find their blogging voice.
I noticed most was that there is a huge audience out there looking for information about technology and learning for young children. By observing readers search queries I have begun to target my post to address some of the queries educators have about technology in education.It makes me realize that I've probably assumed a lot about who an audience member of my blog really is. It's a bit tough since there are people who come through search and there are a fair number of subscribers. I'm not sure I can accurately identify either kind of audience members. Instead, I tend to think about individual people I know (in vague terms) and write for them as an audience member.
It was interesting to see in the post -
Perhaps just the one, though I know of two others.The definition is also in terms of a prototype audience member. It's so much easier when you feel you are talking to one person - or a vague idea of a single audience member.
One thing I'm finding in responding to these conversations is whether I'm writing for the one person who initiated the conversation or to my prototype audience member. It's actually causing me a bit of grief. I'm sure I'll find the right pattern as I do more.
I look forward to further conversation. And if you have thoughts on whether this works as a model for my blog, please let me know.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Training Standards
Bill Sawyer posted in response to my Conversation Topics post. You can find posts aggregated via eLearning Learning - 100 Conversations. I've not met Bill before, and this was a great way to start. He is definitely challenged and thinking a lot about training standards.
Bill has quite a few questions in his post:
Instead, I'd like to focus on what Bill asks about the challenges around training standards and eLearning 2.0:
When he asks what do we use as the front-end technology and in which case?
In terms of SCORM, Almost always the answer is yes, authoring tools need to support it. Do you ever plan to track it in an LMS? Then yes. But don't most tools support SCORM at this point?I completely understand why Bill feels the way he does. The amount of innovation and change and number of choices definitely makes it harder to decide how to approach things. At the same time, asking for standards is likely to be asking a lot. It's doubtful we are going to see enough coming from standards except in narrow areas like SCORM.
Bill, I hear you. Certainly, there's a lot to try to figure out. And it's not getting any easier. I'm not sure I buy asking for help from training standards, but there seems to be a need to have some ways to get through the clutter to understand how to structure things.
In a prior post, Bill tells us that:
At the same time, this happens to be an area where likely there will be high expectations about providing more than just training. Programmers are very much used to accessing code examples, reference libraries, seeking and getting help, etc. I'm going to guess that Oracle does quite a bit of this for this exact audience. I have no idea if/how this ties to training standards, but it may be the case that elements of eLearning 2.0 already exist in this world.
Bill, I look forward to any further thoughts on this.
Bill has quite a few questions in his post:
eLearning is suffering from the Beta/VHS or Blu-ray/HD-DVD challenge. In fact, it is probably even more systemic. For example, it is elearning? eLearning? e-Learning? or E-Learning? Heck, if something doesn’t even have a standard for what to call itself, is it really ready for a rev. 2.0?I'm not really going to address this much. See some thoughts at: eLearning or e-Learning vs. learning, but I somewhat agree with Jay Cross (who coined the term eLearning) that it's not worth a whole lot of time trying to define it too closely.
Instead, I'd like to focus on what Bill asks about the challenges around training standards and eLearning 2.0:
What is happening with the eLearning world is that we lack standardization. Should we support Flash? Where does PowerPoint fit into the standards? Should we be supporting OpenOffice? Where does SCORM fit into the picture? Should we demand that our product support SCORM? What about Adobe products vs. Articulate vs. Qarbon?When I talked about Training Design one of the things I didn't discuss is how we've gone through waves of innovation along with each innovation cycle. When CBT (CD-ROM based multimedia training) came out, there were a lot of different authoring tools and approaches that came along with it. It was hard to choose a tool because you didn't know quite what you were eventually going to do with it. However, it all settled down to roughly Toolbook, Authorware and IconAuthor. I used to love these tools. Each allowed us to do some pretty incredible things. But then along came the web and WBT (web-based training), again huge innovation, lots of tools. This made us uncomfortable with our choices. But, I actually think things in the world of traditional online courseware development have become much easier. There are a few leading elearning authoring tools that work in most situations. That said, the cycle of innovation is happening so fast now that one cycle doesn't settle completely before the next cycle starts. That's why it feels so uncomfortable all the time ...
Until eLearning vendors bite the bullet, come to real standards on formats, and then the tools and structure can build up to support those standards, eLearning is never going to be what it can be.
When he asks what do we use as the front-end technology and in which case?
- HTML + simple JavaScript
- AJAX
- Flash
In terms of SCORM, Almost always the answer is yes, authoring tools need to support it. Do you ever plan to track it in an LMS? Then yes. But don't most tools support SCORM at this point?I completely understand why Bill feels the way he does. The amount of innovation and change and number of choices definitely makes it harder to decide how to approach things. At the same time, asking for standards is likely to be asking a lot. It's doubtful we are going to see enough coming from standards except in narrow areas like SCORM.
Bill, I hear you. Certainly, there's a lot to try to figure out. And it's not getting any easier. I'm not sure I buy asking for help from training standards, but there seems to be a need to have some ways to get through the clutter to understand how to structure things.
In a prior post, Bill tells us that:
I train Oracle programmers, primarily internal employees in the E-Business Suite (EBS) line of business, how to write J2EE-based applications for Oracle’s EBS product using our framework called Oracle Applications Framework (FWK).Given this context, I think I can understand a bit more about why Bill would have expectation that there would be more in the way of training standards. In the world of J2EE app development, there are incredible standards being worked on all the time. These allow all sorts of interoperability. I'm not sure I even know what the standards would be in the world of eLearning.
At the same time, this happens to be an area where likely there will be high expectations about providing more than just training. Programmers are very much used to accessing code examples, reference libraries, seeking and getting help, etc. I'm going to guess that Oracle does quite a bit of this for this exact audience. I have no idea if/how this ties to training standards, but it may be the case that elements of eLearning 2.0 already exist in this world.
Bill, I look forward to any further thoughts on this.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Related Terms
The recent addition of related terms (relationship factors) in eLearning Learning that show what how related terms are to a given result set provides some interesting insights. I already pointed to some of the Interesting Information that we could see as we compare what different bloggers write about. I can also do a query (which is not available through the interface) to see what terms are related to what's being discussed right now.
Here are some terms that are getting more attention the first couple weeks this month (December 2008) include Social Media, eLearning Activity, Mobile Learning, Yugma , Slideshare , SharePoint , Twitter , 100 Conversations, Mzinga , and GeoLearning. Some of these are no surprise, but others such as Yugma made me notice that version 4 is out, hence people are talking about it more than usual.
It's also interesting to me to drill down another level on a couple of the companies to see what pops for them. For example, I see GeoLearning relates to Learning Portals, Community of Practice, Mentoring, IntraLearn, Learnframe, ViewCentral, GeoMaestro, WBT Manager, WBT Systems, KnowledgeNet, Generation 21, and GeoConnect. Mzinga is shown related to Personal Learning, Social Software, Learning 2.0, Storyboards, PLEs, CollectiveX, Firefly, Tomoye, KnowledgePlanet, Element K, Awareness Networks. Not too bad and it's definitely useful to have the ability to drill down on the GeoLearning Mentoring page to try to understand why those two terms were linked.
Oh and I don't know if I mentioned it, but you can also use text search to see what related terms come up as related to arbitrary search terms.
Let me know if you find interesting related terms as you go.
Here are some terms that are getting more attention the first couple weeks this month (December 2008) include Social Media, eLearning Activity, Mobile Learning, Yugma , Slideshare , SharePoint , Twitter , 100 Conversations, Mzinga , and GeoLearning. Some of these are no surprise, but others such as Yugma made me notice that version 4 is out, hence people are talking about it more than usual.
It's also interesting to me to drill down another level on a couple of the companies to see what pops for them. For example, I see GeoLearning relates to Learning Portals, Community of Practice, Mentoring, IntraLearn, Learnframe, ViewCentral, GeoMaestro, WBT Manager, WBT Systems, KnowledgeNet, Generation 21, and GeoConnect. Mzinga is shown related to Personal Learning, Social Software, Learning 2.0, Storyboards, PLEs, CollectiveX, Firefly, Tomoye, KnowledgePlanet, Element K, Awareness Networks. Not too bad and it's definitely useful to have the ability to drill down on the GeoLearning Mentoring page to try to understand why those two terms were linked.
Oh and I don't know if I mentioned it, but you can also use text search to see what related terms come up as related to arbitrary search terms.
Let me know if you find interesting related terms as you go.
No Trust
I've been reading various mentions of the new report by Forrester, that provides the following information on the sources that people trust. Or basically they show that there's no trust for blogs.
I held back on posting about this because I thought I was just being defensive. Surely there's more trust than that. Having just seen posts by Ken Allan and Manish Mohan about this issue, it got me thinking some more about this issue of No Trust of blogs as sources of information. So a couple of thoughts ...
Do you see what's at the top of the list? Email from people you know. The bottom line is that for most of us, we believe people we know (and likely already trust). I certainly feel that way. I ask people I know about things and that's what often gets me to finally act. This is why I talk about the importance of new skills for Leveraging Networks, Network Feedback, Finding Expertise, Using Social Media to Find Answers to Questions, Learning through Conversation.
But what's interesting about the survey is that there is a built in assumption that you don't know the blogger. If you asked me whether I would trust information provided by a blogger I didn't know, I likely would respond the same way. However, what I've found through blogging is that I get to know lots of people including maybe especially other bloggers. Thus, when I see them post, there's not this issue of no trust. It is someone I know. No the communication is not through email - but it's very similar. It acts just like that category. When Brent, Mark, Michele, etc. (wow, these folks are like Madonna and Sting - they only need one name) say in their blog - here's this great new tool and here is how it's working for me - that fits into the top category. It gets me to believe and possibly act. If I read it from a well known blogger who I don't have that relationship with, I don't trust it the same way. Funny thing, probably not very smart, but that's true.
This does mean that as a person who blogs you must be extra careful of the trust you are given. You have to be honest. You can't shill. Because most blogs are personal and real human relationships form - you must act in a way that never engenders the no trust factor.
That said, there are a quite a lot of people who come to my blog and who don't really know me, they don't have a personal relationship, we've not exchanges around 100 Conversations yet, ... And it's a bit depressing to realize that you rank behind direct mail and online classifieds in terms of trust. That they think of what they find here the same way I think about other bloggers who I don't know. It's another data point that I will eventually validate through people I do know. A little depressing, but at least it's a data point.
One last thought, how can people respond that they trust portals and search engines? Don't these often find blog posts? How can that be trusted? To me, a set of search results are the least trustworthy. Sure, I use them, but do I "trust the results" - no way - no trust here for those sources. Give me a fellow blogger (who I know) any day.
Am I being too defensive here?
I held back on posting about this because I thought I was just being defensive. Surely there's more trust than that. Having just seen posts by Ken Allan and Manish Mohan about this issue, it got me thinking some more about this issue of No Trust of blogs as sources of information. So a couple of thoughts ...
Do you see what's at the top of the list? Email from people you know. The bottom line is that for most of us, we believe people we know (and likely already trust). I certainly feel that way. I ask people I know about things and that's what often gets me to finally act. This is why I talk about the importance of new skills for Leveraging Networks, Network Feedback, Finding Expertise, Using Social Media to Find Answers to Questions, Learning through Conversation.
But what's interesting about the survey is that there is a built in assumption that you don't know the blogger. If you asked me whether I would trust information provided by a blogger I didn't know, I likely would respond the same way. However, what I've found through blogging is that I get to know lots of people including maybe especially other bloggers. Thus, when I see them post, there's not this issue of no trust. It is someone I know. No the communication is not through email - but it's very similar. It acts just like that category. When Brent, Mark, Michele, etc. (wow, these folks are like Madonna and Sting - they only need one name) say in their blog - here's this great new tool and here is how it's working for me - that fits into the top category. It gets me to believe and possibly act. If I read it from a well known blogger who I don't have that relationship with, I don't trust it the same way. Funny thing, probably not very smart, but that's true.
This does mean that as a person who blogs you must be extra careful of the trust you are given. You have to be honest. You can't shill. Because most blogs are personal and real human relationships form - you must act in a way that never engenders the no trust factor.
That said, there are a quite a lot of people who come to my blog and who don't really know me, they don't have a personal relationship, we've not exchanges around 100 Conversations yet, ... And it's a bit depressing to realize that you rank behind direct mail and online classifieds in terms of trust. That they think of what they find here the same way I think about other bloggers who I don't know. It's another data point that I will eventually validate through people I do know. A little depressing, but at least it's a data point.
One last thought, how can people respond that they trust portals and search engines? Don't these often find blog posts? How can that be trusted? To me, a set of search results are the least trustworthy. Sure, I use them, but do I "trust the results" - no way - no trust here for those sources. Give me a fellow blogger (who I know) any day.
Am I being too defensive here?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)