Monday, June 01, 2009

#ASTD09 Day 2 thoughts

A few random thoughts:

- I don't know about anyone else, but did you sense the fear in the room during the keynote? I saw lots of people around me with slumped shoulders shaking their heads. Though the details may still be up for argument, the point that we need to get past the whole "a course is the solution" is valid.

- Also noticed at the Allen Interactive session that there were 2 types of people in the room. Those of us who have developed eLearning for awhile and recognized the power of the research prototype Scott demonstrated and those who were angry because they "didn't get any information on developing eLearning on a budget."

- I'm going to try to get a bit more information on that Allen Interactive research prototype (I think they are calling it Zebra). There are a couple of really powerful things in there that will make those of us who want to create super-complex branching scenarios very happy.

- This is the same section that triggered my comment about linear vs. branching. I see it in my organization when I try to show them something past the expected multiple choice or drag and drop. Or if I talk about scoring using time and tries. Or if I show them more randomized paths through content. I talked to lots of vendors who were proud that you could "make them go through the content" with their tool. How do we get some of our fellow IDs to think in terms of branches....options...free choice.....

Note to my blogger friends. We are spoiled. We are early adopters. We are the converted.
Time to start getting some information about the resistance.

2 comments:

John said...

Thanks for the daily reflections on ASTD09. It's a great help to those of us who can't make it there.

I can relate to your comments regarding the different types of audience members you are encountering. I see the same in much of my interaction with 'peers,' and have read similar observations from many people I follow on a regular basis.

The one thing I want to challenge, however, is your assertion that we are early adopters. Are we really? I feel like I've been an early adopter my entire career (approaching 20 years now). While the technology has changed dramatically in that time, it doesn't appear that the profession has moved much at all. We still have discussions about getting a seat at the table, or moving beyond reporting of butts-in-seats to show the value of organizational learning. So few of us have actually gotten beyond these fundamental issues.

I believe it was David Merrill who said instruction designed today is less effective than what was created 40 years ago. We seem so much more interested in efficiency (i.e. rapid elearning development) than effectiveness. Why is that? Why is it so difficult for our profession to move forward?

I don't necessarily have any answers, but the anecdotal evidence is that if we continue down this path we will no longer exist - the business' we support are moving on without us.

Wendy said...

John - I know my "we" is somewhat generic in the post. I was thinking of some of my fellow bloggers. Harold Jarche, Tony Karrer, Jay Cross, Cammy Bean, Janet Clary and a whole mess of other peoople.

You bring up a good point. Hope you don't mind - but I will be bubbling this one up over the next couple of days.