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, December 19, 2006

More on Changes to ISD, ADDIE, HPT

Interesting blog discussion going on that relates back to LCB's November Big Question (you can find my earlier summation).

Part of the discussion is Where Will the Change Come From? and reading the comments on the post: If You Believe It's Broken - How Do You Change Our Industry/Models/etc? is interesting. As is Tom's post: Providing a change model. But, Tom is way off when he says:
I found that software developers have a change model in mind for the widespread
adoption of Web 2.0 tools. They think it will never happen.

Quite the contrary is true. Web 2.0 is having a fundamental effect on software development and software developers are in the same state as ID folks. Trying to cope with a rapidly changing technical landscape with all kinds of new requirements.

Even after reading what Mark, Karl and Tom had to say about the possible role of academia, I still feel like we shouldn't expect academia to lead the charge until we (a) experiment with different models, and (b) begin to identify patterns that work.

As a side note: in a world of blogs with rapid discourse, it's quite interesting that the guru's seem silent in comparison. In my earlier blog post, I mentioned Allison Rossett and Ruth Clark. My guess is that no one has heard from them. If you look at comments in Where Will the Change Come From? - I think there's some thinking that the guru's are going to be laggards.

Maybe that's why You are the Person of the Year!


Anonymous said...

Tony, I just wanted to wish you and yours a very happy Christmas and a great new year. It's hard to believe that you only began this blog in February. I look forward to you continuing to educate me, and to the conversation, over 2007.

Anonymous said...

You're right that I am "way off" from the Web 2.0 perspective you describe. I see several different perspectives in play here. There is a CIO/CLO outlook that was in control of KM, instructional designs, and the content of corporate communication until Web 2.0 tools came along. They are dealing the changes you see clearly and blog about insightfully. Web 2.0 tools reduce their control in ways that often looks like leaks, vulnerability, uncontrolled exposure, invasions of outside influences and pressures to dramatically revise their enterprise software, ID models, and communication policies. In that context, what I said is clueless.

There's an entrepreneurial, Web tool/social networking site developer perspective. They are inside the innovations, debugging the tools and changing with the times. Where CIO's oversee large corporations, these entrepreneurs start with one server and two coders. They are saying Web 2.0 is a passing phase, beta release for purposes of debugging and refining the tools. They are not dealing with the changing landscape in the same way as corporate outsiders getting changed by the innovations. They create the changes. That's where I was coming from.

There's an academic perspective that can make Web 2.0 a topic for study and research paper assignments. Academicians may also be experimenting with the use of wiki, blogs, subscribed searches, etc. in their classes.

There's a consultant perspective that can generate revenue, consulting gigs and book contracts by staying on the cutting edge of these tools. They (we) see the resistance to change, slow adoption rates and missed opportunities to make full use of these powerful, beneficial tools. It's that perspective that questions the ID models, puts blogging to awesome use and produces insightful forecasts, change models or collaborations.

Tony Karrer said...

Jim - merry Christmas as well.

Tom - if what you are saying is that some CIOs are sitting back to wait to see what will happen with Web 2.0 stuff because they don't think they should adopt "beta" ... I'd agree. CIOs are classically more Enterprise and less Emergent. They are likely going to be later to adopt (after the innovation has started at the grass roots). Thanks for clarifying it for me.

Anonymous said...

My comment on the "where will the change come from" was: change will come from learners themselves. Tony said (more or less) does that mean we just have to sit back and wait for learners to get it together?

NO. We can be proactive; we can foment the change on purpose:

Advocates of learner-made content can set up (for free) facilitating/enabling Web2.0 spaces and places for learners to DO it. Show them what the tools are. Show them what the tools can do. Let them have at it.

This is especially empowering for people who want to learn to get things done (not get a grade or a degree). As learning tools for a Community of Practice, Web2.0 does take learning out of the hands of the CIO or KM designer -- and turns learning into something truly useful to the learner.

All this learner needs to do is taste it. We can set up "learning tastings": here's the Chateaux Wiki and here's the Bordeaux Blog.

Anonymous said...

Yes to your grasp of the CIOs taking a "wait and see" approach before adopting the tools. But several other points as well:
-- CIOs are getting changed rather than creating the changes, so they are naturally defensive, espousing "Not Invented Here" arguments for stalling, questioning, and doubting the value of Web 2.0 tools
-- To the extent that CIO's are held accountable for the control of corporate information, Web 2.0 undermines their accountability. They could easily see Web 2.0 as an enemy that is out to make them look inept, irresponsible or reckless. Besides internal bloggers misrepresenting the company, internal documents, put up on wikis, could get edited and revised to be "so far off message" (but to be more accurate, current and useful) as to alarm the senior execs.
-- CIOs are in no position to anticipate how soon or how widespread the adoption of the tools will occur, since it largely depends on how quickly the Web 2.0 software becomes less buggy (not their enterprise, KM, LMS software) and how soon the entrepreneurial innovators pull off the convergence of numerous separate technologies. Thus they are in a powerless position, not a commanding role where they can act confidently, speak authoritatively and impress others.

Tony Karrer said...

Sandra - great point:

"As learning tools for a Community of Practice, Web2.0 does take learning out of the hands of the CIO or KM designer -- and turns learning into something truly useful to the learner."


Tony Karrer said...

Tom - in fairness to CIOs, their job is most often to put control in place. Security, compliance, reliability, back-up - that's their first job. Innovative solutions often are a big problem for CIOs. We can understand why they might be scared by the pattern of fast consumer adoption and change leaking into the enterprise ... remember web servers sneaking in? So, I think we agree that they are in a tough spot.

One of the implications - unreliable content - is something that continues to bug me. Is it better to have people be able to make their thoughts/content available to others even if there's a chance they are wrong? I personally think it's better than having them wrong and having them spreading it in a hidden way. How do you correct what you can't see?

I hear the argument about quality, but I especially don't buy it in a corporate context where there is consequence.