9-11

This post has taken me 8 years to write. Yesterday, as I was walking to class on a campus I haven't taught at for 5 years, the day reminded me eerily of a day 8 years ago. That day, 8 years ago, I arrived on campus early to prepare for an 11:30 class. Ironically, it was a beautiful fall day, without a cloud in the sky.

As I sat in my office, someone came down the hall from the faculty lounge and announced the an airplane had crashed into the world trade center. I thought, "oh, that's awful," but went on with my class prep. I figured I'd hear more as the morning went on. When the second crash happened moments later, faculty began to stream out to the lounge where the TV was on. We watched in horror as the building burned. It wasn't until a young colleague of mine gasped and said, "It's falling!" that we really understood the impact. She and I both left to go to our offices, not able to see the whole thing play out. Both of us were in tears.

This was only the beginning of a long day, however, as we did not realize the impact it would have on our campus, families, and communities. A while later, not able to work, I went to the faculty lounge where were wondering what we should do with our classes. One of the professors came in looking very upset. He had told the class that given the nature of the tragedy of the World Trade Center, he would understand if students wanted to leave and watch what was going on. When a female student, looking stricken, asked what had happened, he explained and proceeded to watch her become hysterical. Her father worked in the WTC.

It soon became evident that this was something that was going to affect many of students as we pull a large number from the New York City area. Should we cancel class? How could we think of teaching after the impact it was having on our campus?

Added to this was the worry whether this would be it or if there would be other areas in our region impacted. Many of us had children in school and because the impact on the region, many of the schools were closing early (ours included). However, the school decided to continue classes as scheduled. It was weeks later that we were told the reasoning for this: many of the students with families in the NYC areas wanted to go home. However, it was deemed that the saftest thing was to have them stay on campus in safe, secure areas when 1) there was no public transportation available to the area as everything had been shut down, 2)there were major traffic jams in the area as people fled and others tried to get in to help, and 3) many of the parents were in a state of shock and wanted to make sure their children were away from ground 0. I taught my two classes, picked up my kids and went home.

My children had to be picked up by my in-laws as my husband's job was one designated as a vital job (there were many, as a computer programmer we couldn't figure out how his could be so vital, but they wouldn't let him leave). Both of us, though, had a moment of panic after the initial crash. What if they decided to target other land marks in the Northeast or New York state? We were on the opposite side of the river from where my children were and we would have had a problem if the bridge closed. We appreciated having family nearby to help.

Of course, not all my family was nearby. My husband's sister and brother-in-law were Las Vegas as the transportation system was halted for a week. My mother was at her summer home off the cost of Long Island. When the twin towers were taken out, so were most of the equipment used to broadcast news reports. She had to hear from my sister in Chicago, who called when she saw the first news report, what had happened. By the end of the day, however, she was hearing first hand accounts as many of our neighbors fled the city to stay at their summer homes until it was safe to go back. In some cases, this was a year later (including a neighbor I grew up with who lived across the street from the WTC).

That evening, we (as I think most people) went out to eat as a family, just to grab some pizza. As we drove home, there was a sense of peace and community as people sat outside (it had turned warm during the day) and lit candles for those killed in the attack. There were some people from our town killed; many friends, relatives, alumni, and colleagues from our campus killed; new neighbors that relocated from the city; and many volunteers that spent months (and who are feeling the health effects from it) down on ground zero. For me, the strangest thing was the silence that settled over the community. I remember jumping the first time I heard a plane go over our house a week after 9-11, normally hearing planes a common occurance. I wondered if I had heard the hijacked plane from Boston that morning as I went to school, as they determined the flight went over our community.

A couple of years later, my nieces were visiting from Michigan. We brought them to the New York State Museum, where there is a great exhibit on 9-11. I was surprised at how moved they were by the exhibit. Anyone that might come to the Albany, NY region should definiately visit it. They said that while they had seen the images (over and over), the exhibit gave it more reality, the shock, horror, and humanity of the tragedy.

While I was fortunate not to know anyone personnally who was killed, I knew many who had loved ones killed. It changed our community. And for one day, the grief of what happened on 9-11 brought us together and made our region eerily peaceful.

I AM a subject matter expert

In the Learning Circuit's Big Question, Tony Karrer poses the following questions:

Working effectively with subject matter experts

There's a lot to this topic, and certainly it's an on-going challenge. Some specific questions that are raised in this area:

* What should all IDs know about working with a SME?
* What can you and can't you expect a SME to do?
* Does it work to have SMEs create rapid eLearning?
* How does social and informal learning impact how you engage with SMEs?
* What's your favorite instructive story of working with a SME?

I'm going to approach this from the point of view of the SME as I either do my own ID or have worked in groups in which I was the SME.

I am perhaps unique in that as a SME (in my case, I was the SME for courses in Marketing Research and Foreign Language-French and Spanish), I do know about Instructional Design in the context of online learning. However, I think many ID's underestimate (or overestimate) the instructional understanding of a SME. Many times they have their own understanding of how students learn and will give information based on that understanding.

For example, when developing the courses on Foreign Language, many of the SME's had a strong belief in the drill and repeat way of learning the foreign language. The ID had a different view of language learning. The discussions often was around the pedagogy of language learning rather than the content itself as the content came out of the pedagogy. Interestingly enough, many of the SME's weren't even aware of their pedagogy until they began to share their expertise in terms of what should or should not go into the curriculum.

Personally, I believe all learning should be in context. Rapid elearning is possible as long as it is tailored for a certain population. The SME needs to know and understand their target population before they can contribute to any elearning. For example, I used to develop curriculum for short term training in English Language to prepare groups going to the US for training. I needed to know why the group was going, what type of training they would need in the US, and how much time they had to prepare. Even now, I could develop a curriculum and text for any group within a week for English Language Training as long as I had their profiles. A "general" course would not be effective nor would it use my expertise effectively as I knew what a group of illiterate, rural administrators going to Tennessee would need as opposed to a group of educated (many outside of the country) auditors going to the NE US would need.

Many SME's, I can tell you from experience working with colleagues who are SME's, find elearning and the technology that affords informal learning as something inferior. They may perceive ID's as the "technicians" who really know nothing of the topic (nor should they in the SME's opinion). They often feel that pedagogy is the whelm of the SME and the ID should not do anything but put the real information into a "pretty" design. Likewise, I have worked with ID's who try to force my expertise into a format that I don't believe will work given my understanding of the subject.

I have a classmate who works at RPI. They have a great process for working with SME's. Theirs is a truly collaborative process in which they spend time developing trust with the SME's and designing learning based on the SME's own style. They are very careful not to tell an SME's that what they want to do cannot be done, but rather demonstrating different options from which the SME can choose. Often the same ID will work with the same SME over a period of time (which also helps to develop the partnership needed). They also have a great series of questions which they use when initially working with a new SME. This includes questions about their view of pedagogy.

To me, the most important thing to do when working with an SME is to spend the initial time getting know the SME and developing a trusting partnership, whether they are in the same physical space or not.

Combination of things I can't multi-task

In a recent comment on Ken Allen's blog, Karyn Romeis cited some studies that indicated that it is not whether we can multi-task or not, but rather what actions we can multi-task in combination. This got me to thinking about what I can and cannot multi-task.

What I can't multi-task:

I can't drive and talk at the same time
I can't write my blog and listen to what my kids are saying
I can't cook and plan the next day's schedule
I can't correct papers and plan tomorrow's class
I can't search for something on the internet and listen to my kids


Things I can multi-task

I can drive and listen to my kids' stories
I can read blogs and listen to what my kids are saying
I can cook and read
I can correct papers and watch TV
I can search for something on the internet and give my kids directions

Things I can never multitask

Finally, there are somethings that I need total concentration for, with no ability to multi-task as I work on these things:

Driving during poor weather
Writing a paper (including my dissertation)
Analyzing data
Transcribing
Taking down numbers or writing something that is being spelt out for me.

What does this mean?

In analyzing those that I can and those that I can't multitask in combination, I think I have trouble multi-tasking when there are two communication inputs or two communication outputs (creating and listening, for example). I also cannot multitask when the task itself is complex (a multitask) and I am still developing heuristics to accomplish the task. Once I have the skills or heuristics, it is easier for me to multitask as I can go on "auto-pilot" for those tasks for which I have developed heuristics.

I am not sure if this is something universal or unique to me (i.e. Gardner's "intelligences" where some might be able to multi-task using those skills in which they have an innate ability). I'd be interested in know what other people can and can't multi-task.

Why do I blog?

Ken Allen is hosting the comments for the Green Pen Society, and posted the question: What gets you flying when you feel you want to write?”


I'm not sure if I'm answering his question, per se. However, when I look over my blog posts over the last 3 years I see I can categorize my reasons for blogging as: learning, reflection, reaching out, and recording.

Learning

I love to read blogs. I often think about what I read and come up with great ideas (in my own mind). However, my own family really is not interested in the same things I am. Blogging allows me to continue both formal and informal learning by working out and reformulating ideas that I have heard at school, questions from my students, read in blogs or the periodicals I read on regular basis (such as the Financial Times), and even analyze and come up with my own theories on what is going on in those areas in which I am interested.

Often, while I am thinking about what I will write, I think back to other posts or comments I might have made and go back to reread what I have written in the past. I rarely reread papers or articles that I have had published. But I do go back and reread blog posts, which often look different with time. This allows me to revisit ideas and build on them as I gain new experiences.

Reflection

There are times when I just can't quiet my brain (usually at about 3:00 in the morning at the beginning of the semesters!). Blogging allows me to reflect on these ideas and put them into words. This requires a great deal of reflection and analysis, putting together ideas and verbalizing them. Sometimes they are just seeds of an idea that I am able to flesh out as I try to figure out how to word them.

This post is a great example. While I am working on a dissertation having to do with technology, writing and groups, I never thought about how to articulate the thought processes that setting up collaboratively written documents require. Without the chance to reflect, I would not have realized the level of learning that happens when I blog (see the section above). Blogging organizes my thoughts and quiets my mind so I can sleep at night!

Reaching out

This is perhaps the best thing about blogging. As I mentioned in my comment to Tony Karrer on a similar topic:

While I agree that the writing helps you to think, the difference between blogging and journaling is the public aspect of it. While no one may read your blog (I often feel this is the case with my own blog), a blogger is writing for that mysterious reader out there...for someone that might understand what they are saying. When you get a great comment on your blog (not something like, "Great post" but a question that you hadn't thought about or a different perspective) you have more than an internal conjugation of your ideas.

I love to read blogs and find blogs that address the issues I'm interested in. Whenever someone new posts on my blog, I click on their name to see if they have a blog. I figure if they are reading what I am writing, they probably are writing about what I am interested in reading about. I have found some great blogs this way. This networking makes the blogging seem more connected and less "personal." I feel that even if only one other person reads the blog, it is better than just writing for myself in which no one can challenge what I write, give me a different perspective, or give me additional information to support my ideas. I like the way the blogging connects my writing to others, something that I think is very important in writing (and writing instruction).

Recording

Finally, yes, as old fashioned as it sounds, I like blogging because it records my progress through life and learning. When I go back to my old posts, sometimes I'm really impressed with my insight; other times I can't believe my ignorance! I am a great believer in history, however. I feel that this is a record (as is everyone's blog) of my story at a certain period in history. I love rereading my father's letters to me during my teenage years when I was either away at camp or at school (college). My own kids are able to read them and get a sense of our relationship, his sense of humor, what was important for us as a family in terms of the world around us, in his own words. I feel a blog can be used the same way, making our thinking transparent.

Well, as I said, I'm not sure this answer's Ken's question, but his question got me thinking about why I blog.

Categorizing elearning

Ken Allen had a post entitled "Classifying elearning." This post is about what my first thoughts were when I read the title.

There are 3 different ways I thought of classifying elearning: by structure, by level of education, or by tools. Of course, there are many more classification systems out there, but these are what came to mind from my own teaching.

Classification by administrative structure

I begin my introduction to distance learning course by going over the different ways in which distance learning can be organized. There are five models:

Synchronous online: Instructor uses real time technology such as chat to students who access the course at a given time. This is especially changing due to mobile technology and access to social networking sites.

Asynchronous online: The use of mostly Learning Management Systems in which there is interaction between the instructor and student and other students. Normally, all members of the class will have interaction only online.

Blended learning 1: This is when there is some classroom instruction augmented with online (either synchronous or asynchronous--usually asynchronous) instruction.

Blended learning 2: this is when the instructor is at a different location (perhaps with a live class) and gives instruction to another class at a remote location. The remote location may have a cooperating teacher or they may have just a technician or moderator.

Learning objects and self regulated learning: This form has been around for a long time, but technology has developed it so there is more opportunities for students to learn with out an "instructor". Rather, they use interactive media, have learning assessment at remote locations, and/or develop their own Personal Learning.

Categorizing by level:

Each level of distance learning has different needs and goals:

Elementary: make connection to the outside world, access locations and experiences not available in school, develop communication, critical thinking and problem solving skills

Middle and High School: Developing social skills, access to expertise and complex problems, learner support outside of class, making connections with the outside world

Higher Ed: Access to expertise, developing regional or international research communities and agendas, access to resources and complex problems

Adult or Community: creating dialogue within a community and consensus building, developing best practices and support system, combining and organizing distributed knowledge for redistribution, access to resources and expertise

Categorizing by Tools:

Garrison and Anderson use a useful system to categorized based on the type of tool. First generation tools were those used for one on one dialogue (mail). The next generation allowed for the broadcasting of instruction. It was one way communication, but to a large group. This included radio and television broadcasting. The last generation that they identify is what I would term as the LMS generation. These are tools that allow for two way communication and group learning. However, this is all managed through the instructional design using online technology. I see there being an emerging generation, networked learning. This allows for students to manage their own learning with access to multimedia learning tools. This also allows for both formal and informal learning.

Ken's classification

In fact, Ken was looking at classifying elearning in a totally different way. I see his classification more about the instructional design of elearning. But I will leave that discussion for another posting.

Resources:

D. Garrison & T. Anderson (2003) Elearning in the 21st Century. London, RoutledgeFalmer.

How safe are social networks?

Mike Gotta, on his Collaborative Thinking blog, discussed a good article available at Knowledge@Wharten addressing the security issues around social networks. As I read through the linked article, I thought of some issues I have not seen addressed as yet.

At the conference, Hoffman illustrated how social connections are made online and the ease with which a stranger can become part of a network. He noted that he is regularly added to mailing lists and invited to become a friend -- or "friended" in the social network parlance -- of businesses that use the sites as a marketing tool. Indeed, pages used by businesses on Facebook were recently redesigned to look more like those of individuals.

The implications for this is mind boggling. This means that marketing representatives or organizations would have access to a person's personal information and preferences. So what's wrong with that? Unless someone has set their facebook privacy on "friends only" thousands of others will have access to your information. For example, my daughter "friended" her favorite local radio station when her status was "friends of friends" could see her data. This means that any radio listener has access to her information. At a minimum, the radio station knows the topics she discusses with her friends, what her interests are, and what she is susceptible to.

On the other hand, as a marketing professor, I also see the strength of this tool as more and more people are resistant to marketing research via phone or person interviews. This is less obtrusive than traditional forms of market research.

Another point made in the article had me thinking of personal responsibility and educating users of social networks:

When a business contact from the LinkedIn world wants to become your friend on Facebook, do you accept the invitation, giving them access to the photos on your Facebook profile from last summer's rowdy beach party?

And what about the person you don't really know who wants to be your friend because you have some friends in common? According to Hoffman, that new friend may just be mining your social circle for information. As networks grow and more friends of friends (and their friends) are accepted by users, it's unclear who can be trusted.

As my kids use facebook, I review who their friends are. Sometimes friends are declined which can be a form of bullying for middle or high schoolers (I don't accept you as a friend). On the other hand, students do need to feel they can decline interaction with anyone on the internet. This is not a new problem. I remember when my son was a toddler, he would speak to anyone. I had to teach him that he could be friendly with anyone, but he needed to keep his distance and never go away with them. My daughter, on the other hand was always very skittish around men especially. I did not want her to be rude, but I wanted her to trust her instincts. The same balance needs to be achieved in using social software.

The article recommends:

Ultimately, social networking security rests with each user of the service (those friend invitations can always be declined). Hoffman recommended that social network denizens know the privacy policies -- governing, among other things, how the information you provide can be used -- of the sites they frequent.

At the same time, Hoffman said, web site operators need to make privacy policies easier to understand. "Privacy policies differ in theory and practice. In theory, consumers know about a site's privacy policy and trust the network. The reality is that no one reads the policies. I don't read them myself." Hoffman cited Facebook's privacy policy -- which promises that users have control over their data and what information is shared -- as typically murky. (The most recent version is more than 3,700 words -- more than twice as long as this article.) Hoffman advocates new formats for privacy policies that act as simplified "nutrition labels," like those on food products.

Vicky Davis also suggested last year that there be different "friend" categories and different ways to block depending on the friend category (i.e. family, best friends, business friends).

As more and more of my information creates a digital finger print, though, I keep asking myself, "How is this different than what I do face to face?" In fact, before I post anything, I always wonder, is this something I would do in a face to face situation? When my kids are posting things, I will look over their shoulder and ask, "Would you say this out loud in a class?"

In fact, I find most of the youth use texting as their private form of communication and (for the most part) understand the public nature of social networks. Just like they may not be so careful when they are with their friends in a Mall, another public setting, they may not be careful when they are on facebook.

A new way of typing?

I wrote the following comment on Karyn Romeis's blog post about new software to teach typing:

Interestingly enough, my daughter was taught touch type, but does not use the process. Since getting a facebook account and a cell phone, she uses a two finger (forefinger and thumb) process that I see many of her generation using at a much faster rate than she ever used using all of her fingers.

I wonder if touch type teaching will change because of these new technologies.

It made me think of how difficult it is to change our patterns (both individually and culturally--in any society) to reflect new ways of doing things. What often happens is that those with greater power might deem what is acceptable or not.

I have found this in my data analysis for my dissertation. Because it was taking so long to create new processes, and because some group members were in a more politically viable position (department) than others, new processes were ditched to revert to the old templates (with some adjustments) and ways of doing things. However, before the big boss stepped in and began to set procedures to expedite the work, there was a high level of learning within the group (between group members). Many expressed their hope that they were creating a new format to present training within their field.

But, alas, there was just too much difficulty in changing those work patterns.

One of the problems I think I have in using a cell phone is the unlearning of patterns and relearning of new patterns. It is much easier for me to use facebook as it does not require the "unlearning" of anything. I do believe my kids are finding new ways to type that are every bit as effective as the way I type. However, it is considered "wrong" because it is a change of patterns, by necessity in light of the technology they are using.

Some interesting turns of phrases

For the last couple of months, I have been saving some terms and phrases I found on other sites that seemed odd to me or that I had never heard (and don't really know, but could guess the meaning from the context).

All of the writers are native English speakers (although some are bilingual) so I assume the terms are used in their neck of the woods (this expression means that part of the world where they come from). What got me thinking about these different terms was an expression I used in one of my own posts: Everything is gravy. As gravy is the luxurious extra you can put on a meal, this expression means it is above and beyond the minimum; a luxury.

Below are the expressions I have collected. I have included a link to the post with the expression. If you know what these mean or the origin of these, I'd appreciate your explanations. Also, feel free to add any that maybe you find "interesting."

Karyn Romeis: Parents need to step up the oche

Michael Hanley quote of Suzanne Shaw (Ireland) All of them are at the coalface of the current economic climate and many of them use tools like LinkedIn

Karyn Romeis: Friday sees the start of the BBC Proms season. This is a series of classical music concerts held around the country which has been running for 115 years, now. (Note: this was interesting because in the US a prom is a formal dance for high school students).


Ken Allen: Your fingers will be running up and down the keyboard like little fiddler crabs

Expertise

As I have been working on my dissertation, one of the "emerging" ideas (using grounded theory) has to do with expertise and how it is accessed within an organization. I have identified three "expertise" concepts that effect distributed teams (teams that are not located in the same place or department): identifying expertise, lack of expertise, and no expertise.

Identifying expertise

In identifying expertise, distributed teams may find an expert internal or external to the group or identifying the communal expertise. In other words, individuals may not hold the expertise, but the group together may possess expertise for their work by combining human capital and resources.

The factors that go into identifying expertise, however, may include the willingness of individuals to share their expertise, having an expertise that is needed or recognized by individuals, the group and/or the organization, or defining or identifying expertise that is important within the team or organization's power structure. For example, someone might have an expertise that is not considered relevant by decision makers. As a result this expertise is either ignored or a person with this expertise will not share it because it is not politically advantageous.

Withholding expertise effects teams and how they work. Often the withholding of expertise is dependent on the level of trust that team members have within their group, but also within a department or the organization as a whole.

Lack of expertise

Lack of expertise differs from no expertise in that there is some knowledge, but perhaps it is not relevant for the situation, it is distributed among group members so no one person has the expertise (each individual lacks expertise) or the expertise cannot be accessed as a group (perhaps it rests within a department that hoards the expertise or it is not recognized within the power structure of the organization).

There are three options when a group lacks expertise. They can either go outside to access an expert, they can bring in a new team member with the expertise they need, or they can train or develop the expertise within their group. The choice they make depends on scheduling, resources, the power structure of the organization and where the team fits, and goals. A forth option is to deal with lack of expertise the best they can, making up for the lack in other areas of the project where there is a high level of expertise.

No expertise

More often than not, no expertise will be met with a disruption in the group. Like the lack of expertise, no expertise can result in accessing outside consultants, putting a project on hold until new team members with the expertise are brought into the group, or training one or more of the group members in that expertise.

Of course, it is rare that there is no expertise. Often there is the expertise within the group, but that expertise is overlooked because of organizational politics or withheld by group members because of the organizational power structure. An individual may also not recognize their level of expertise, so be unwilling to share their limited expertise for fear of failure with the group or organization (thus creating a lower level of cognitive trust within the group).

The "expertise grid" or the "social grid for knowledge"

What I am working on now is how expertise is accessed within an organization and/or distributed group. How do groups identify expertise that they need to accomplish their work? How do they maximize the pathways so there is not a bottle neck to expertise in a timely manner? How do groups manage the need of expertise?

I look at it as similar to how power companies use a grid to route power through its structures as demand ebs and flows or how companies develop structures for communication (communication grid) during emergency situations.

On hold for a week

Well, I'm stepping away from the computer for a week and a half. As this is the northern hemisphere, we are supposed to be having summer. And I guess, we should be happy not to have snow (although a few weeks ago there was 2-12 inches of hail). July had 10 inches of rain, so we do feel ready for the sunny days of summer. Hopefully, we'll have good weather to do things with the family.