Learning Power Laws

Great post by Dion Hinchcliffe - Twenty-two power laws of the emerging social economy where he discusses what Steve Balmer calls “the new normal”. Balmer talks about how a reset of economic expectations during the downturn has created an environment that is putting pressure on business to do more with less.  Some of the specifics of this transformation are captured in the following graphic:

This is lines up really well with a lot of what I discuss in Business of Learning and Trends in Learning.  The primary shifts he talks about are:

• New resource constraints. Requiring that we find ways to accomplish our goals using fewer resources.
• Value shifting from transactions to relationships.
• Business flux.
• Moving from change as the exception to change as the norm.
• A shift of control to the edge of organizations.

Dion then goes through his 22 laws that are useful to understand what is going on with all of this shift.  Several of them I regularly talk about:

• Amara’s Law (backstory) states that "we tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run." – I cite this in Work Skills Keeping Up? and Adoption of Web 2.0 and eLearning 2.0 Revisited and often use this during presentations.  It's easy to look at any one technology and go through a hype cycle.  We first think, wow this will really change things.  Then we realize go through a cycle where we think, it's not that big a deal.  But over time it often has pretty incredible effects that sneak up on us.  This describes a lot of what we see around web 2.0 tools.
• Jakob’s Law roughly tells us that "users spend most of their time on other sites", and so you must be there too.  This has big impact on us as it forces us to think about being in the flow of where the work and learning will occur.  See eLearning Portal Integration as one example of this.
• The The Long Tail which tells us moving from providing best selling products to a wider spectrum of offerings gives an opportunity for larger, potentially more lucrative market overall, if you can service it cost effectively.  This is a common theme in my posts:  Long Tail Learning - Size and Shape  and Corporate Learning Long Tail and Attention Crisis.
• Principle of Least Effort notes that they will tend to use the most convenient method, in the least exacting way available, with interaction stopping as soon as minimally acceptable results are achieved.  This is important for things like Social Software Adoption.

Overall, Dion's post is a great source for helping to think through what's really going on at a macro level with learning.

Presentation Backchannel Multitasking

Some great responses to this month's big question New Presenter and Learner Methods and Skills.  I'm learning a lot from the posts.  A few random reactions and a few of the nuggets I've pulled out from the discussion.

Caveats to Multitasking is Generally Bad for Work and Learning

See my post on Multitasking for a summary of this.  Or better, take a look at Ken Allan - Binge Thinking.   Or Clive Shepherd's How should presenters address multitasking? simple statement:

Multitasking is an illusion – we are simply not capable of doing it.

But some caveats to this general rule.

Multitasking

Doodling and Notetaking are good.

Binge Thinking

I have learnt to take notes while giving nearly full attention to a presentation. It’s one multitasking practice that I’m good at.

Better Presentations = Less Multitasking

A log of the responses point out that a distracted audience is first a symptom of the presenter's ability to engage the audience. 

Kristine Howard October Big Question

If you are going to present online or in person, do what it takes to do it well.

Clive Shepherd - How should presenters address multitasking?

• The very best presenters will always hold attention.
• Presenters tackling issues which are highly relevant to the participants will always hold attention.

Be Aware of What the Audience / Learner is Doing

Multitasking learners? Opportunity, not threat

I may very well be back channelling, bookmarking, googling, or even writing notes in my blog a a draft.

I like learning through dialogue. I enjoy the conversation around what that sage on the stage is talking about.  My “multitasking” devices are a way to have that without being disruptive, so I’m not convinced they are a bad thing, just a reflective tool.

[but]

If a presentation is not engaging me, I will multitask in a less presenter pleasing manner, and by that I mean I may do some admin, catch up on what’s been going on.

Claudia Escribano: Presentations Re-Imagined

Why do people multi-task?

• They’re distracted by other obligations.
• They’re bored.
• They’re sharing your presentation with their network.
• They feel they learn better when they’re flitting between several activities.

Which several of these lead into the following.

Plan Better and Communicate Expectation with the Audience

I think Max Bezzina What presenters could do when the audience multi-tasks says it well:

Embrace the fact that people will be tempted to multi-task. If this is an issue for you and/or for the success of the presentation, tell them about it in the beginning of the presentation.

Kristine Howard October Big Question has some great specific suggestions:

• If you can’t handle the constant laptop action while you are speaking, say so. 
• Don’t dictate, but negotiate a reasonable solution with your audience of adults.
• If the backchannel doesn’t bother you as long as it stays in the back—for instance, you’d love a transcript for the evaluation aspect but can’t be involved with it while you are presenting–say so. 
• Suggest a hashtag for tweets right at the beginning and then move on and let it take care of itself. 
• Ask for a show of hands whether anyone is going to publicly share a summary or comprehensive notes via a blog (just like you share whether you will be providing copies of your materials). 

Rani Gill: Social norms, expectations, attention, a game?  also has some great suggestions:

• Establish a new norm in your learning environment – via ground rules or other means. Discuss and create the norm up front.
• Discuss how the backchannel can be used. What appropriate to say and not.
• Expect the back-channel conversation – bring it to to the foreground occasionally during the presentation or have someone moderating it and bring it up.
• Give the audience the #hashtag so you can let them know that you  know and so that you can follow.

Claudia Escribano in Presentations Re-Imagined really provides an interesting way to handle this including asking people to volunteer to be distracted.  Interesting thought.  See her post for more detail than I'm providing.  But I really like the thought and a good way to help establish the norm along the lines of Rani's post.

Tell participants upfront that your presentation is a little different from what they may be used to. It’s not just you talking to them; it’s a total participatory event in which everyone plays a role. Then present the roles and ask them to identify what role they’d like to play:

• Listeners
• Sharers
• Note-Takers
• Questioners
• Activity Leaders
• Distracted People

You could ask for a show of hands for each role. Or you could set aside parts of the room for each role and have people select their role as they come in and sit down.

This idea is somewhat echoed by Geoff Cain 

You are still thinking of this as a problem instead of an opportunity - you have to learn how to harness the Google jockeys and tweeters.

Clayn suggests:

Each class period I randomly select a student to be the back channel moderator for that day. I see the moderator as filling the same role as an assistant sitting on the phone during an auction. They act as a proxy, voicing the bids of individuals over the phone. The back channel moderator will strive to respond to comments made, if they can, or voice the question -when appropriate - for general class consumption. Not only does this free me from trying to do this myself, it forces students into a more active role in the classroom.

Great idea to assign moderator to someone else during the session.  This is maybe a role to add to the list the Claudia gives.  And directly addresses the concern raised in Multitasking learners? Opportunity, not threat

I have presented online without a moderator before, and after a reasonable amount of experience, still find it hard to listen and read a backchannel, or talk and read a backchannel.

Which is how I feel.  In fact, that's often my recommendation to anyone presenting at an online event.  Of course, I'm moderating in most of those cases for people.  When I myself am presenting, I know to ignore the back channel for periods of time and then tune back in.  But having assigned a moderator, I can quickly ask them for help with what I should address.

Disrespectful?

My general sense is that people are split on whether "bad" multitasking is disrespectful. 

Multitasking learners? Opportunity, not threat

I’ve heard many trainers complain online that it’s disrespectful to them when people multitask. I counter that it’s disrespectful to learners to present something that does not meet their needs, not wonder why they are not paying attention, then get offended when they don’t listen.  If people aren’t paying attention, or multitasking in a bad way, it shows you that something isn’t working, and if handled well, can perhaps highlight some areas for improvement, whether they be with you, the content, the venue etc.  It may also highlight that sometimes life just takes over and it’s got nothing to do with you as a presenter.

Clive Shepherd - How should presenters address multitasking?

I don’t mind this as long as they are polite about it: show some interest when the presenter starts up; look up and smile once in a while; try not to look as if the presenter has somehow intruded on your personal office space. Personally, if I’m paid to speak, I’ll put up with a lack of politeness; if I’m not, I’m quite prepared to walk off. Life’s too short.

What I recently saw was the audience being much more upset than the presenters about backchannel discussions that are straying being rude.  I prefer an active audience myself.  Of course, there are boundaries such as being offensive to the presenter in any backchannel.

Changes in Knowledge Work and Implications for Workplace Learning – The Keynote That Wasn't

I was supposed to be in Vancouver right now for the eLearn Conference.  The conference has a diverse attendee list and I was very much looking forward to my keynote presentation: Changes in Knowledge Work and Implications for Workplace Learning.

Unfortunately, some very sad news in my family as my wife's father, a man beloved by everyone who met him, passed away on Thursday.  So, I won't be able to go and make my keynote presentation.  I do want to thank the conference organizer, Gary Marks, for being incredibly understanding.  And if you've been a long-time reader, you know that I'm not particularly adept at things like What to Say When a Colleagues' Family Member Dies.  So, I'm not sure what to say or do in this situation either.

But I had to do something because I had scheduled a series of tweets to coincide with my keynote presentation time slot.  This is something I did before and it was both great as a planning tool and received great feedback from the audience (see Twitter Conference Ideas).  So what do I do with the tweets?

At first, I just planned to delete the tweets, but it seemed like a waste of the time I had spent.  But I also realized that if I didn't do anything then right during the replacement keynote, I would be sending out competing tweets – which would compound the problem I created for the conference.

So, with my mind admittedly operating at less than full capacity this Sunday morning, I decided to just choose a particular time on Monday and have the tweets come out at that point.  So, Monday, Oct. 26 at 12:30PM Pacific Time, all the tweets will fire off.  Each points to content that's relevant to what I'd be talking about during the presentation.  No idea if they will make sense without the context of the presentation.

I would very much welcome any thoughts or feedback on the content that is being referenced and the general themes.  Feel free to do it via twitter or comments or whatever is easiest for you.

I'll try later in the week to pull together any feedback and some more thoughts.

Twitter Contest Winner

The first round of the Digital Habitats Twitter Contest had 94 entries and the winner was:

@ChristyATucker

Congrats Christy!  I'm now a bit jealous as you are getting a book that's going to be sitting by your desk for many years and it's signed by John and Nancy.

I think that the contest has already been successful, but there's still another chance to win. 

Go here: http://bit.ly/MYIw to find out how you can still win.

By the way, even if you don't win a copy of the book, you can still come hear Nancy and John at LearnTrends 2009.  In fact, John is doing two sessions.

Defending 2.0

I saw an interesting post by Mark Oehlert "Learning 2.0" and why that name suddenly is torquing me off...  Mark's main complaint and one that I've seen voiced before is that people are not really learning differently:

I really don't believe that humans are learning differently - meaning, I think we are constituting memories, adapting behavior, practicing new skills - those activities that typically make up learning from the human standpoint - in much the same way as we have for hundreds if not thousands of years. I'm talking about our internal processes.

This is pretty much what was discussed in New Way of Learning and the general answer was that it's doubtful that there's really a new way of learning, but there certainly are many related metacognitive tools and methods that have changed and that we need to adapt.

Still, I believe the crux of Mark's concern and where the disagreement comes …

So there is no "Learning 2.0" from the learners' view - there could well be "Instruction 2.0" or "Teaching 2.0" but think about what is really different there - those last two (and you could throw in Government 2.0, Education 2.0) address organizations and not learners and this gets to my second bothersome point about "Learning 2.0."

Let's put the burden on us and not on the learner.

That's exactly it.  We aren't really talking about the learning itself, but rather the way in which we support learning within an organization.  What is the role of the Learning Professional?  And I would claim that there's a fairly substantial change when you go from eLearning 1.0 to eLearning 2.0 solutions.

The reason you can't call it "Instruction 2.0" or "Teaching 2.0" is that the very point of eLearning 2.0 is that it's learner driven.  We are no longer in charge.  We take a supportive role.  We create an environment.  We foster.  We coach.

To do this, it requires a considerably different mindset.  It makes sense for us to discuss this as 2.0 just to indicate that there's this substantial shift.

Certainly this has been debated quite a bit (see Is eLearning 2.0 Meaningful? - You Vote and 2.0 and Interesting Times).  But I think the discussion is over.  We've come to accept that we'll use the 2.0 moniker.

Mark – how about if we agree that if your Oregon State Beavers go down to defeat this weekend, we'll just agree that it's okay to use the terms Learning 2.0 and eLearning 2.0?