Even though almost everybody can understand that:
many people believe that e-learning is the same as learning in a live group, and distance education or online learning is the same as full time study.
My faith in the credibility of almost everything I read on the Internet is at an all time low, and I plan on addressing that in future in various posts. The inaccurate information and huge, fast spread of faulty interpretations is scary because of its potential impact on two things (among others): Our democracy, and how money is spent. But that’s a big ball of string. Too big for right now.
So…
Everyone talks about the importance of networking. I get the point. The more people who you know, and who know a little about you, the more likely you will “make a connection” that will pay off, whether it be in person, or online. I hate the underlying assumption, or presupposition about networking, not to mention that I’ve had the experience of being at in person gatherings where everyone is “marketing” to each other under the guise of networking.
My objection is simple. Continue reading
So, tell me. If I happen to go to the water cooler down the hall, and bump into George, who tells me about the new software I could use, is that informal learning? Sounds like it.
We don’t know what position Social Learning plays on this team. And you know what? I don’t give a damn, and neither do the customers and clients of trainers and educators.
If you are at all involved in the delivery of training via the use of technologies, you have probably seen, heard, or used the terms e-learning or social learning*. They have become common currency in the discussion of training and learning undertaken in non face-to-face training and education contexts.
Unlike the term “distance learning” which is an older term with a very clear and precise definition, both the terms e-learning and social learning lack clarity of definition to the extent that many practitioners who use the words don’t have clear ideas about what they themselves mean; what is included and what the terms exclude. This is not an abstract issue of linguistics but a practical issue that has profound impact on both research and practice.
…the people who oversell the value of social networking and social learning through exaggerations, deliberate or ignorant interpretation of research (which is usually poorly done anyway), and general religious zeal.
In short, many of the “gurus” in these fields, who are a) converts and true believers while b) making lucrative incomes, or hoping to make lucrative incomes by becoming the keeps of the wisdom (a tactic used in the old days of mainframes, in case you are wondering.
Bill Harris wrote:
> Reinhard Sprenger wrote (in _Mythos Motivation_) something to the effect
> that “All motivation (actions designed to get people to do that which they
> don’t want to do) is demotivating (leads towards decreasing their desire
> to do what you want them to do because they see through the efforts at
> control).”
Good point. Actually it’s not quite accurate. Motivational actions (whether they be rewards or exortations, etc) will demotivate to the extent that employees see the attempts as manipulative.
A brief comment on Who Moved My Cheese and the apparent popularity of dumbed down, stupid management books!
I haven’t read it, but just a comment on the genre of short, readable and cute, but sometimes relatively contentless books.
Today, a TRDEV-L group member posted an interesting message asking what’s wrong with training? I sent a reply to him via the list, but thought I’d share it here as a think piece and stimulus for comment.
Why is it so? Do people have so many bad experience in training that they don’t believe training is any good? Have they been exposed to so many bad trainers that they don’t believe there are any good ones? (Phil Connell)
We know from psychological research that human beings tend to discount information, data, or viewpoints that conflict with their pre-existing positions on any issue. We all do that to some degree. What is jarring is seeing learning professionals, trainers and teachers deliberately avoiding interacting with those who have views different from their’s.
I’ve seen this among the leading proponents of social networking as it is used to promote learning, i.e., social learning people. For example, Elliott Mazie, an elearning guru refused public discussion on an article he posted that clearly mis-stated some research numbers. Others have done similar things on Twitter. In fact, when challenged on the basic tenets of social learning dogma, the majority shut down. Avoid & deny.