E-learning Curve Blog at Edublogs » organizational style http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org E-learning Curve Blog is Michael Hanley's elearning blog about skills, knowledge, and organizational development using web-based training and technology in education Wed, 09 Sep 2009 16:00:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 en hourly 1 Shiny new technologies used by dusty old professions http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/29/shiny-new-technologies-used-by-dusty-old-professions/ http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/29/shiny-new-technologies-used-by-dusty-old-professions/#comments Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:04:00 +0000 Michael Hanley http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/29/shiny-new-technologies-used-by-dusty-old-professions/ I hadn’t planned on blogging about informal learning today, but an article in Irish e-zine Silicon Republic interested me, and I thought I’d bring it to you. According to the article Number crunchers find social media a ‘tweet’ surprise,  members of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants (CPA) have begun using social media such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn to co-ordinate continuous professional education. The CPA is the educational, representative and regulatory body for over 5000 members and students. The Institute’s role is to:

  • Regulate CPAs in accordance with the law and the Institute’s Code of Ethics in the public interest.
  • Ensure that CPAs are constantly up to date in all matters relating to their professional work.
  • Maintain the highest levels of educational standards for new entrants to the profession.
  • Represent the interests of members where appropriate.

The CPA’s Suzanne Shaw, outlined the reason for the emergence of non-formal and informal e-learning technologies in the Institute:

As one of [the bodies] in the Ireland that train accountants and regulate them throughout their professional life, our members are predominantly split three ways: practitioners; entrepreneurs; and employees of businesses.

All of them are at the coalface of the current economic climate and many of them use tools like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook to give one another practical advice about sustaining businesses and planning for a long-term environment. It’s a great way to get information out to people really quickly.

It seems that the CPA members are using Facebook and Twitter to share articles and information to keep each apprised of developments in their domain. Ms. Shaw again:

The beauty of social networking is it enables two-way communication or, if you want, one-to-many communication. The CPA uses it to gauge feedback on courses and products and adjust them accordingly.

One of the benefits of LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter is that they are "ready-made." The CPA’s experience is that they can concentrate on the business use of the technology without contributors having to worry about the technology per se. Despite being (by it’s very nature) a very traditional organization, the obvious business advantages of using these platforms for information-sharing seems to have eased the transition to using social media. There are a number of core uses of social media for learning in the CPA:

  • The CPA recently set up a space on Facebook for new students to get and share information.
  • In terms of professional use, with closed LinkedIn forums are used, so information can be kept confidential between members.
  • CPA accountants are using Twitter as a way of relaying information or lobbying issues.
  • Professional members make use of LinkedIn to keep in touch with each other, as well as business associates.

Interestingly, one of the main drivers of the growth in utilization of social media tools is that accountants’ clients are "pushing them to be more involved in online communication" according to Ms. Shaw.

It seems that once members are exposed to Web 2.0 technologies, they adapt their own information-sharing practices to include Twitter and Facebook. Ms. Shaw stated that:

Many share war stories and know-how in the forums. With CPE seminars taking place across the country, people not only meet up but can also keep in touch. Because people have hectic working lives and a home life to balance, they can’t get to every course or seminar, so they …use these tools to share notes and find out where the next course is taking place. Not every one can make it to the centre of Dublin after a day’s work, so we’ve started uploading video lectures. Students …are recording podcasts of lectures and sharing on places like Facebook. We estimate about 10% of our 5,500 members and students are using social media for continuous professional education. With Facebook, for example, they are truly engaging with one another. Many use it because they are that generation, others have begun dabbling. It can only grow from here.

Brutus, in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar tells Cassius that 

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune

Act IV, Scene 3.

In a similar vein, I would suggest that there are trends in the uses and the adoption of technology. The current global economic environment as well as the emergence and broad adoption of easy-to-use Read/Write Web tools like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn in society-at-large are profoundly re-shaping the ways people and organizations communicate.

As we know from Rogers’ writings on diffusion of innovation, people’s attitude toward a new technology is a key element in its diffusion. Roger’s Innovation Decision Process theory asserts that innovation diffusion is a process that occurs over time through five stages:

   1. Awareness
   2. Interest
   3. Evaluation
   4. Trial
   5. Adoption

The final phase of the diffusion process is characterized by large-scale continued use of the idea or technology, and by "satisfaction with" (Diffusion of Innovations, 2003, p.2) the idea. This does not mean that the the individual or organization that has accepted the idea will use it constantly, rather, it means that the diffused idea has been integrated into their schema or metal model as a valuable asset or resource.

Scurvebellcurve Figure 1 Diffusion of Innovation curve
[Click to enlarge]

Individuals or organizations will typically go through these processes at varying speeds, depending on factors ranging from the cost, time, and effort required to implement the diffused concept, the return on the investment, how well it aligns with their previous experience with similar concepts, as well as the complexity of the idea or technology under consideration. By endorsing and supporting a range of well-tested, free-to-use solutions, that are currently very positively received in the public consciousness due to their apparent ability to elect presidents (Obama), overthrow despotic regimes (Obama again for Dubya Iran), and circumvent traditional media channels (Michael Jackson’s death). Such momentum is hard to ignore, especially when coupled with the economic imperative of clients demanding access to CPA members’ skills via social media.

However, a corollary to the curve described in Figure 1 (above) is the Gartner Hype Lifecycle illustrated in Figure 2 (below).

Gartner_Hype_Cycle Figure 2 Generic Gartner Hype Cycle
[Click to enlarge]

I would suggest that Twitter, Facebook etc are well on their way to reaching what Gartner describes as the "Peak of Inflated Expectations" associated with this type of innovation. It remains to be seen if the CPA can take this flood in the tide of technology and progress their non-formal learning initiatives, or if they will be "bound in shallows and in miseries" if they are unable to leverage the potential of this phenomenon.

___________

References:

Kennedy, J. (2009). Number crunchers find social media a ‘tweet’ surprise. Silicon Republic. [Internet] 29 June. Available from: http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/article/13271/ [Accessed 29 June 2009] 

Rogers, E. M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.. Simon & Schuster International.

–

]]> http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2009/06/29/shiny-new-technologies-used-by-dusty-old-professions/feed/ 0 Tools for creating e-learning in an open (XML) environment http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment-2/ http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment-2/#comments Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:09:00 +0000 Michael Hanley http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment-2/ Digressing temporarily from philosophy, the gratis / libre debate, and the pros and cons of each approach, this post will focus on the range of tools that you need to develop e-learning content in a (relatively) open environment

The key to developing courseware in an open environment is to use a production model that liberates instructional design and content authoring from your final media outputs. In my view, this means taking an XML-based approach to your e-learning development environment.

I would suggest that you need tools and components the following tools to create an effective authoring and delivering system:

Content Creation Tools

  • XMLmind XML Editor (XXE)
  • GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP)
  • DocBook DTD
  • XSLT transformations and XS-FOP formatting object processors

Media Creation and Integration: OSS Tools

  • Audacity
  • Jahshaka
  • Nvu
  • OpenOffice.org
  • GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP)

Media Creation and Integration: Proprietary Tools

  • Microsoft Producer 2
  • Windows Media Developer’s Kit

Content Delivery Platform

  • Apache / MySQL / PHP
  • Moodle

Optional Proprietary Tools

  • Adobe Flash
  • Roxio Easy Media Creator

I’ll be discussing developing a production model using this toolkit tomorrow.

–

]]> http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment-2/feed/ 0 Tools for creating e-learning in an open (XML) environment http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment/ http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment/#comments Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:09:00 +0000 Michael Hanley http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment/ Digressing temporarily from philosophy, the gratis / libre debate, and the pros and cons of each approach, this post will focus on the range of tools that you need to develop e-learning content in a (relatively) open environment

The key to developing courseware in an open environment is to use a production model that liberates instructional design and content authoring from your final media outputs. In my view, this means taking an XML-based approach to your e-learning development environment.

I would suggest that you need tools and components the following tools to create an effective authoring and delivering system:

Content Creation Tools

  • XMLmind XML Editor (XXE)
  • GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP)
  • DocBook DTD
  • XSLT transformations and XS-FOP formatting object processors

Media Creation and Integration: OSS Tools

  • Audacity
  • Jahshaka
  • Nvu
  • OpenOffice.org
  • GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP)

Media Creation and Integration: Proprietary Tools

  • Microsoft Producer 2
  • Windows Media Developer’s Kit

Content Delivery Platform

  • Apache / MySQL / PHP
  • Moodle

Optional Proprietary Tools

  • Adobe Flash
  • Roxio Easy Media Creator

I’ll be discussing developing a production model using this toolkit tomorrow.

–

]]> http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/23/tools-for-creating-e-learning-in-an-open-xml-environment/feed/ 0 E-Learning, the Cathedral and the Bazaar: software development approaches http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches-2/ http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches-2/#comments Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:45:00 +0000 Michael Hanley http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches-2/ …or Top-down versus Bottom-up approaches to software design.

In his 1997 essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar, open source evangelist Eric S. Raymond suggests

the closed-source world cannot win an evolutionary arms race with open-source communities that can put orders of magnitude more skilled time into a problem.

Raymond considers the development of software by traditional methodologies to building a mediaeval cathedral,

carefully crafted by individual wizards or small bands of mages working in splendid isolation, with no beta to be released before its time.

He asserts that all software could be developed using the bazaar approach, which he described as

a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches… open to the point of promiscuity.

In this so-called Bazaar Model, roles are not clearly defined. Gregorio Robles suggests that software developed using the Bazaar model should exhibit the following patterns:

  • Users should be treated as co-developers

The users are treated like co-developers and so they should have access to the source code of the software. Furthermore users are encouraged to submit additions to the software, code fixes for the software, bug reports, documentation etc. Having more co-developers increases the rate at which the software evolves. Linus’s law states that, “Given enough eyeballs all bugs are shallow.” This means that if many users view the source code they will eventually find all bugs and suggest how to fix them. Note that some users have advanced programming skills, and furthermore, each user’s machine provides an additional testing environment. This new testing environment offers that ability to find and fix a new bug.

  • Early Releases

The first version of the software should be released as early as possible so as to increase one’s chances of finding co-developers early.
Frequent Integration
New code should be integrated as often as possible so as to avoid the overhead of fixing a large number of bugs at the end of the project life cycle. Some open source projects have nightly builds where integration is done automatically on a daily basis.

  • Several Versions

There should be at least two versions of the software. There should be a buggier version with more features and a more stable version with fewer features. The buggy version (also called the development version) is for users who want the immediate use of the latest features, and are willing to accept the risk of using code that is not yet thoroughly tested. The users can then act as co-developers, reporting bugs and providing bug fixes. The stable version offers the users fewer bugs and fewer features.

  • High Modularization

The general structure of the software should be modular allowing for parallel development.

  • Dynamic decision making structure

There is a need for a decision making structure, whether formal or informal, that makes strategic decisions depending on changing user requirements and other factors. Cf. Extreme programming.

In Raymond’s view, most well-known OSS products including Linux, Apache, and the GNU Compiler Collection align with the Bazaar model.

In the ‘traditional’ Cathedral model (advocated in Fredrick P. Brooks, Jr. in The Mythical Man-Month), development takes place in a centralised fashion. Clearly defined roles including experts dedicated to designing (the architects), established management styles, and ‘craftsmen’ (developers) responsible for implementation all contribute build a pre-established design according to a pre-agreed blueprint.


He goes further to say that in order to preserve the architectural integrity of a system, its design should be done by as few architects as possible.

Interestingly, the Bazaar model comes close (in manifestation, if not in philosophy) to what Brooks in the 1995 Anniversary edition of his text describes as “shrink-wrapped software.” Brooks suggests:

For the developer in the shrink-wrapped industry, the economics are entirely different from those of the classical industry… the starkly different economies have given rise to starkly different programming cultures.

(p.284)

Rather than the traditional Cathedral model,

The shrink-wrapped industry… [is] freewheeling and fiercely focused on getting the job done rather than on process. in this climate, there has always been a much greater recognition of the talent of the individual programmer, an implicit awareness that great designs come from great designers [my italics]. The start-up culture has the capability of rewarding star performers in proprtion to their contributions… [i]t is not surprising that many of the stars of the new generation have gravitated to the shrink-wrapped industry.

(p.284)

More tomorrow as we move towards the implications of these two models for the e-learning industry.

References:

Brooks, R.P. (1995) The Mythical Man-Month Anniversary Edition London, Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Raymond, E. S. (2000) The Cathedral and the Bazaar Version 3, Revision 1.57 [Internet] Available from: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/
cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ [Accessed 22nd April 2008]

Robles, G. (2004) A Software Engineering approach to Libre Software, IN: Robert A. Gehring, Bernd Lutterbeck: Open Source Jahrbuch 2004, Berlin: Lehmanns Media. [Internet] Available from: http://www.opensourcejahrbuch.de/download/
jb2004/chapter_03/III-3-Robles.pdf [Accessed 21st April 2008]

–

]]> http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches-2/feed/ 0 E-Learning, the Cathedral and the Bazaar: software development approaches http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches/ http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches/#comments Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:45:00 +0000 Michael Hanley http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches/ …or Top-down versus Bottom-up approaches to software design.

In his 1997 essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar, open source evangelist Eric S. Raymond suggests

the closed-source world cannot win an evolutionary arms race with open-source communities that can put orders of magnitude more skilled time into a problem.

Raymond considers the development of software by traditional methodologies to building a mediaeval cathedral,

carefully crafted by individual wizards or small bands of mages working in splendid isolation, with no beta to be released before its time.

He asserts that all software could be developed using the bazaar approach, which he described as

a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches… open to the point of promiscuity.

In this so-called Bazaar Model, roles are not clearly defined. Gregorio Robles suggests that software developed using the Bazaar model should exhibit the following patterns:

  • Users should be treated as co-developers

The users are treated like co-developers and so they should have access to the source code of the software. Furthermore users are encouraged to submit additions to the software, code fixes for the software, bug reports, documentation etc. Having more co-developers increases the rate at which the software evolves. Linus’s law states that, “Given enough eyeballs all bugs are shallow.” This means that if many users view the source code they will eventually find all bugs and suggest how to fix them. Note that some users have advanced programming skills, and furthermore, each user’s machine provides an additional testing environment. This new testing environment offers that ability to find and fix a new bug.

  • Early Releases

The first version of the software should be released as early as possible so as to increase one’s chances of finding co-developers early.
Frequent Integration
New code should be integrated as often as possible so as to avoid the overhead of fixing a large number of bugs at the end of the project life cycle. Some open source projects have nightly builds where integration is done automatically on a daily basis.

  • Several Versions

There should be at least two versions of the software. There should be a buggier version with more features and a more stable version with fewer features. The buggy version (also called the development version) is for users who want the immediate use of the latest features, and are willing to accept the risk of using code that is not yet thoroughly tested. The users can then act as co-developers, reporting bugs and providing bug fixes. The stable version offers the users fewer bugs and fewer features.

  • High Modularization

The general structure of the software should be modular allowing for parallel development.

  • Dynamic decision making structure

There is a need for a decision making structure, whether formal or informal, that makes strategic decisions depending on changing user requirements and other factors. Cf. Extreme programming.

In Raymond’s view, most well-known OSS products including Linux, Apache, and the GNU Compiler Collection align with the Bazaar model.

In the ‘traditional’ Cathedral model (advocated in Fredrick P. Brooks, Jr. in The Mythical Man-Month), development takes place in a centralised fashion. Clearly defined roles including experts dedicated to designing (the architects), established management styles, and ‘craftsmen’ (developers) responsible for implementation all contribute build a pre-established design according to a pre-agreed blueprint.


He goes further to say that in order to preserve the architectural integrity of a system, its design should be done by as few architects as possible.

Interestingly, the Bazaar model comes close (in manifestation, if not in philosophy) to what Brooks in the 1995 Anniversary edition of his text describes as “shrink-wrapped software.” Brooks suggests:

For the developer in the shrink-wrapped industry, the economics are entirely different from those of the classical industry… the starkly different economies have given rise to starkly different programming cultures.

(p.284)

Rather than the traditional Cathedral model,

The shrink-wrapped industry… [is] freewheeling and fiercely focused on getting the job done rather than on process. in this climate, there has always been a much greater recognition of the talent of the individual programmer, an implicit awareness that great designs come from great designers [my italics]. The start-up culture has the capability of rewarding star performers in proprtion to their contributions… [i]t is not surprising that many of the stars of the new generation have gravitated to the shrink-wrapped industry.

(p.284)

More tomorrow as we move towards the implications of these two models for the e-learning industry.

References:

Brooks, R.P. (1995) The Mythical Man-Month Anniversary Edition London, Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Raymond, E. S. (2000) The Cathedral and the Bazaar Version 3, Revision 1.57 [Internet] Available from: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/
cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ [Accessed 22nd April 2008]

Robles, G. (2004) A Software Engineering approach to Libre Software, IN: Robert A. Gehring, Bernd Lutterbeck: Open Source Jahrbuch 2004, Berlin: Lehmanns Media. [Internet] Available from: http://www.opensourcejahrbuch.de/download/
jb2004/chapter_03/III-3-Robles.pdf [Accessed 21st April 2008]

–

]]> http://elearningcurve.edublogs.org/2008/04/22/e-learning-the-cathedral-and-the-bazaar-software-development-approaches/feed/ 0