Notification
Newbie
1 posts
Yesterday, I wanted to look up the equation for an ellipse. And I wanted to find this information quickly. So I went to wikipedia typed ellipse and frantically (skimming paragraphs) went over the page, found the information and exited the page. Last week a visit to wikipedia on a related topic on Lithium saw me diving deep into this mazing mineral on whose availability a lot of green movement in based upon. By the way, I learnt that Chile and Bolivia control almost 90% of world’s reserves!
So what is it about ellipse that got be so agitated and frantic? And what in lithium caused me to engage in deeper learning? If you look at the pages, nothing specifically jumps out as being the driver behind this disparate behavior to knowledge.
So was the issue lying with me? Did the dual pressure of a deadline and picking up my daughter from skating had anything to do with the frantic behavior, as opposed to a more relaxed post-prandial online walk on the information highway searching for lithium? I am inclined to believe yes.
This is not something we have not experienced with respect to other digital content around us. This is not surprising because the consumer experience with the content is the ultimate barometer of content quality.
In an instructor-lead training (ILT), a good instructor is able to gauge the feedback from the learners in front of her and is able to tailor the instruction (whether they do or not is another matter). The learner does provide verbal/non-verbal feedback but the responsibility of acting on it remains the instructors.
However, in eLearning the instructor/learner feedback mechanism is broken. And with it the ability of the instruction to tailor itself to my moods.
But, does it have to be that way? It is possible that the instructor can anticipate eLearning scenarios based on her experience in the ILT world. Attaching FAQ to various sections of the courses could facilitate rapid information aquisition, while facilitating a learner to take a deep dive. Intelligent usage of branching functionality in various authoring tools like Adobe captivate allow instructors to create a course which is essentially 2-dimensional.
The instructor can also create courses that track user’s responses and use those trackings to navigate users in the optimum manner. For example, if the user is making wrong choices it is possible to take the user to parts of the course which explains the problematic concept in greater detail. For learners who understood the concept straightaway, this detour is not visible.
Self-paced learning is often promoted as a huge win for eLearning over ILT. Unfortunately for most of eLearning content, it is actually self-paced completion of a course/content. What we are talking about here is to refocus on the learning.
Yesterday, I wanted to look up the equation for an ellipse. And I wanted to find this information quickly. So I went to wikipedia typed ellipse and frantically (skimming paragraphs) went over the page, found the information and exited the page. Last week a visit to wikipedia on a related topic on Lithium saw me diving deep into this mazing mineral on whose availability a lot of green movement in based upon. By the way, I learnt that Chile and Bolivia control almost 90% of world’s reserves!
So what is it about ellipse that got be so agitated and frantic? And what in lithium caused me to engage in deeper learning? If you look at the pages, nothing specifically jumps out as being the driver behind this disparate behavior to knowledge.
So was the issue lying with me? Did the dual pressure of a deadline and picking up my daughter from skating had anything to do with the frantic behavior, as opposed to a more relaxed post-prandial online walk on the information highway searching for lithium? I am inclined to believe yes.
This is not something we have not experienced with respect to other digital content around us. This is not surprising because the consumer experience with the content is the ultimate barometer of content quality.
In an instructor-lead training (ILT), a good instructor is able to gauge the feedback from the learners in front of her and is able to tailor the instruction (whether they do or not is another matter). The learner does provide verbal/non-verbal feedback but the responsibility of acting on it remains the instructors.
However, in eLearning the instructor/learner feedback mechanism is broken. And with it the ability of the instruction to tailor itself to my moods.
But, does it have to be that way? It is possible that the instructor can anticipate eLearning scenarios based on her experience in the ILT world. Attaching FAQ to various sections of the courses could facilitate rapid information aquisition, while facilitating a learner to take a deep dive. Intelligent usage of branching functionality in various authoring tools like Adobe captivate allow instructors to create a course which is essentially 2-dimensional.
The instructor can also create courses that track user’s responses and use those trackings to navigate users in the optimum manner. For example, if the user is making wrong choices it is possible to take the user to parts of the course which explains the problematic concept in greater detail. For learners who understood the concept straightaway, this detour is not visible.
Self-paced learning is often promoted as a huge win for eLearning over ILT. Unfortunately for most of eLearning content, it is actually self-paced completion of a course/content. What we are talking about here is to refocus on the learning.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
- Most Recent
- Most Relevant
