RavingLEARNatics

The capacity to innovate

The article Need a Job? Invent It by Thomas Friedman is fantastic, very Learning Democracy relevant and a must read. Some excerpts . . . 

“because knowledge is available on every Internet-connected device, what you know matters far less than what you can do with what you know. The capacity to innovate — the ability to solve problems creatively or bring new possibilities to life — and skills like critical thinking, communication and collaboration are far more important than academic knowledge. As one executive told me, ‘We can teach new hires the content, and we will have to because it continues to change, but we can’t teach them how to think — to ask the right questions — and to take initiative.’ ”

“We teach and test things most students have no interest in and will never need, and facts that they can Google and will forget as soon as the test is over, . . .”

“Every young person will continue to need basic knowledge, of course,” he said. “But they will need skills and motivation even more. Of these three education goals, motivation is the most critical. Young people who are intrinsically motivated — curious, persistent, and willing to take risks — will learn new knowledge and skills continuously. They will be able to find new opportunities or create their own — a disposition that will be increasingly important as many traditional careers disappear.”

“Finland is one of the most innovative economies in the world,” he said, “and it is the only country where students leave high school ‘innovation-ready.’  They learn concepts and creativity more than facts, and have a choice of many electives — all with a shorter school day, little homework, and almost no testing. 

Google - Rapid learning

What makes a workplace innovative? That's a question that NPR's All Tech Considered asked. This is something that companies like Google and Facebook have spent a lot of time studying. According to Fortune magazine, Google attracts some of the best minds, is ranked by as the best place to work in the country, and earns close to $1 million in revenue for each person it employs. Google uses a data-driven approach to manage its workplace and so does Facebook. According to John Sullivan, a management professor at San Francisco State University and workplace consultant "Google and Facebook are metrics machines. So if you ask them what's the average time for a promotion, what's the percentage of women being promoted, they have it to a dime."

Sullivan lists three factors to that set innovative companies apart:

1. Rapid learning - not structured classroom but self learning by casual interaction. 
2. Collaborations 
3. Fun 

"Most people just don't get that," Sullivan says. Below is the NPR piece . . . 

 

 

MOOCs

Below is a link to a great column by Thomas Friedman on massive open online courses (MOOCs) and how they are changing education . . .

"Institutions of higher learning must move, as the historian Walter Russell Mead puts it, from a model of “time served” to a model of “stuff learned.” Because increasingly the world does not care what you know. Everything is on Google. The world only cares, and will only pay for, what you can do with what you know."

"Therefore, we have to get beyond the current system of information and delivery — the professorial “sage on the stage” and students taking notes, followed by a superficial assessment, to one in which students are asked and empowered to master more basic material online at their own pace, and the classroom becomes a place where the application of that knowledge can be honed through lab experiments and discussions with the professor." 

Check it out at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/opinion/friedman-the-professors-big-stage.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0

 

fun + fast = How to tie a bow tie

Here is a funny, brief video lesson on how to tie a bow tie, with of course a bigger message. The instructor is Jesse tyler Ferguson from Modern Family. How many times have you seen content like this turned into a 20 minute lesson? For so many topics fun + fast is a great formula. 

 

 

12 Cognitive Processes of Learning

I've followed Roger Schank (retired professor, consultant, education revolutionary) for many years and have read a couple of his books Coloring Outside the Lines and Lessons in Learning, e-Learning, and Training, along with countless articles, blog posts, etc. His recent blog post Teaching Minds: How cognitive science can save our schools inspired my latest cartoon the 12 Cognitive Processes of Learning . . . Click on the image to see a larger version of the cartoon. 

70:20:10 by Charles Jennings

Super-Sized Learning

Free & open learning

More ammunition for the Learning Democracy revolution . . . a very interesting video based on Anya Kamenetz's book DIY U . . .

Games, stories, learning

Computer games is the fastest growing form of media. Games have the ability to motivate, compel and engage us. There are a number of lessons learned from the gaming industry that fit perfectly with the concept of the Learning Democracy and should be applied to the learning programs we create.

"The fundamental premise behind most gaming experiences is the journey that participants are taken on - a journey through levels of increasing difficulty toward the eventual mastery of the game. During this journey, players can remain engaged for hours, days, and even weeks at a time." The previous excerpt was from an article in the May issue of Training + Development magazine by Ben Betts, CEO of HTC, titled The Path to Engagement: Lessons From Game Designers. There are some great takeaways from that article as well as a fantastic TED talk by Tom Chatfield: 7 ways games reward the brain:

1. "Define a starting point and objective, but not the path to be taken" Betts suggests. Give the audience choices and the ability to make decisions that will impact the path they take. We're not talking multiple choice options or the ability to continue by clicking the next button, but real choices. We are all different. We process information differently, we learn differently, we have different personality types. Then why do we have to all follow the same path in a course to achieve the learning objective? Because it is most convenient to build it that way. The reality is that it's, much more effective and efficient to simply give the learner a "starting point, an objective, and a method for assessing when they have reached that objective . . . " as Betts says. When we specify the path the audience needs to take, it makes it an unpleasant experience for many, and it's just not necessary. An unspecified path adds an element of uncertainty. According to Tom Chatfield, a known reward excites people, but what really gets them going is the uncertain reward - not knowing if or when they would get it. When we can't quite predict something with certainty we want to go back and learn more. All of this makes a great case for giving the audience autonomy (remember the Learning Democracy).  Give them multiple long and short terms aims/tasks. By accomplishing these long and short term tasks, the audience makes decisions that force the story to evolve in different ways. This also builds confidence - games make players braver. The user becomes more willing to take risks, to try things. It becomes harder to discourage them. So let them make decisions and influence the direction, allowing the experience to evolve in different ways.
2. "Stop measuring page numbers and start measuring experience" - Page numbers and progress indicators . . . blah. According to Betts, this only "gives the illusion of progress and is an example of measuring the wrong thing . . . the learner believes that if she clicks the next button x more times, she will have completed the learning." Games use a more valuable and realistic way of measuring progress by giving feedback, rewarding effort every time you do something and allowing the audience to reflect on the journey and compare their progress against that of their peers. It's hard to learn if you can't link consequences to actions and feedback and results do this. According to Chatfield, "games offer intense emotional rewards to users, individually and collectively."  Because games can measure every single thing a user does, it allows us to determine the rate, nature, type and intensity of rewards that most effectively keep users engaged. Also, in games users get more "experience points" for digging deeper, uncovering more, spending more time perfecting a particular skill. You get more points for more important actions. As Betts says, the audience is rewarded for "learning the secrets to success and the tactics to win. They know how they did something the first time, and they adapt their strategy to do it better the next time." 
3. "Play with people, not computers" - Chatfield says that "collaboration really excites humans. People want to work with other people to solve problems and achieve things. "Most games, like courses, are designed for the audience to go through it once. Adding a social dimension can change that. It shifts the focus from the scripted part of the course or game and adds the element of other people and their experience into the mix. It lets them influence the content and the learning experience, again from the Learning Democracy. 

 

 

 

Break some rules

As the US moves into a phase where being innovative and entrepreneurial is becoming more and more critical in the face of the leveling field of worldwide competition, we look to two key elements that will help drive us there:

• creativity
• willingness to break rules

In the article Rebellion of an Innovation Mom, by Anne-Marie Slaughter, we learn about creativity and innovation and how we may be stifling it as parents if we aren't careful. This can also be transfered to the corporate learning environment.

Looking at creativity, Slaughter tells us that what is critical for nurturing creativity is "random association and connection" and down time that allows the brain to "run and turn over seemingly disconnected bits of information, images, and ideas." Experts suggest that allowing for periods of randomness to our lives allows this to happen. Too many of our e-learning courses are built to hold the hand of the audience and force feed them information. We rarely allow the audience to try and make sense of disconnected information and reflect on how things fit together. Shame on us. And by the way, an added benefit is that reflection is an important element of retention.  

Being entrepreneurial means developing something that doesn't already exist, whether creating something completely new, or transferring an idea that works in one space to another. Often this requires the entrepreneur to defy conventional wisdom. Slaughter says that to nurture the willingness to "persevere in the face of deep skepticism or outright opposition" it is critical that people are in some way "rewarded for breaking the rules, not meeting our expectations by jumping through an endless series of hoops." Tying this to the corporate learning experience means allowing more autonomy in learning. Holding the audience to certain required performance standards, but allowing them to break the learning rules sometimes and explore. 

Slaughter also touches on competition and cooperation. Competition "is important for later success of any kind, conventional or entrepreneurial," but cooperation and collaboration are what drives a key part of the creative process called the verification or revision stage. Verification and revision often comes from "tossing ideas around among members of a trusted group, as does the courage to launch something new."

Creativity, willingness to break rules, cooperation . . . The new competitive business world requires a workforce that can make quick, creative, effective decisions at the edges of the enterprise. Nurturing creativity, a willingness to break rules, and collaboration are three steps to achieving this. After all, this is the age of the Learning Democracy.