I will outline the technical aspects of creating, recording, producing, and distributing podcasts at a later time, but for now, I want to investigate some aspects of audio delivered via podcast as a learning channel.

The greatest advantage of the sound medium lies in its direct appeal to the imagination. There is a (probably apocryphal) story told that a child once said they liked radio better than TV ‘because there are better pictures on the radio’. The sound ‘pictures’ are better because they are built in the mind and imagination of the user. If done correctly, ideas and meaning can be conjured up in sound as easily as a software simulation demonstrates the steps involved in formatting a spreadsheet…

…well, perhaps not quite so easily. Sound demands a greater contribution from the learner than visually presented material. To compel this involvement – and to deserve it – the material emerging from a loudspeaker must maintain a high level of interest throughout. If it drops for one moment, the imagination is turned off like a light and all real communication is lost. However, there are many ways to stimulate the imagination: to some extent, they depend on form, and to some extent they depend on studio and recording technique. Apart from this, what is done is a matter for individual judgment and intuition.

In the analysis of any podcast, we should probably take interest as our starting point, because the one factor that all successful podcasts have in common is their ability to engage and retain the audience’s interest. Gauging interest depends on our previous life experiences: we know what we like; what we’re not motivated to care about leaves us relatively indifferent – very few people are interested in subjects that cannot be explained in terms of concepts that are already understood.

In this context, a podcast presents a learning stimulus, guides knowledge acquisition or learning through example, and elicits understanding. As such a podcast is a practical example of Bruner’s concept of instructional scaffolding – the learner’s current level of knowledge can be described as an edifice that represents their cognitive abilities. Mayes and de Freitas (2005) describe the scaffolding as “a means of exploiting the ZPD” (p.19). The cognitive scaffold surrounds what is already known and can be done. The new is built on top of the known as the learner develops, and over time the supports can be removed as the learner can independently actualize the knowledge, behavior or skill. Each new learned knowledge or asset becomes a level in the learner’s constructed schema and this becomes the foundation for extending the learner’s ongoing development.

When we listen to somebody talking, we soon forget such relatively superficial qualities as accent and voice timbre (unless we are forcibly reminded of them at any point); we do not listen closely to the actual words, but go straight to the meaning – we forget the words almost as soon as they are spoken, the meaning we may retain. This meaning, together with its associations in the audience’s mind (through visual, memory association or other means) forms an image that may be concrete, abstract, or a mixture of the two. If it is possible to present a subject in such terms, a considerable amount has been achieved in enabling the audience to learn for the podcast.

With that in mind, here is the latest episode from my ‘Other’ Podcast Transatlantic: the Flying Boats of Foynes (’New and Notable’ according to the iTunes Podcast Store). If you choose to listen to the podcast, you’ll notice that the piece is not merely a narrator telling a story: along with narration, there’s dramatization, eye-witness accounts, and incidental and background music. Other sound elements included in the series of podcasts include archive recordings, wild track, and (in Part 5) a very cool sound collage to set the scene for the outbreak of World War 2 in September 1939.

The observant among you will notice that the piece isn’t about e-learning. That’s OK – the point of e-learning is to provide training professionals with a means of creating and distributing content that enables people to acquire information, knowledge, skills, and expertise on a diverse range of subjects: as e-learning practitioners, it’s our job to facilitate this process.

In Part 3 of Transatlantic: The Flying Boats of Foynes:

On the 4th of July 1937, the Pan American flying boat Yankee Clipper inaugurated the west-east part of the transatlantic air route with Foynes as the fulcrum of the New York – Lisbon flight.

Chief Operator of Morse Code & Semaphore Frank Buckley describes the sight of Pan American Captain Harold Gray’s Boeing B-314 Clipper arriving for the first time in Foynes, Ireland.

We get a sense of the glamour and the whiff of danger for passengers undertaking the still-difficult journey from one side of the Atlantic Ocean to the other.

We tell the story of the invention of Irish Coffee.

Click here to listen.

As one of the contributors in the podcast has quite a noticeable regional accent, I’ve included a transcript for the podcast – indeed, some people may find using their visual as well as their audio register is a more satisfying experience. Click here to view the transcript of this podcast (PDF, 30K).

Does this format work for podcasting in your view? Have I managed to elicit interest in the subject matter. As a listener, are you motivated to find out more, by retrieving Episodes 1 & 2 or by subscribing to the series? Let me know what you think.
___________

References:

Bates, A. W. (1984). Broadcasting in education: an evaluation. London: Croom Helm

Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance education. Oxford: Routledge Falmer

de Freitas, S. & Mayes, T. (2005). JISC e-Learning Models Desk Study Stage 2: Review of e learning theories, frameworks and models. [Online] London, JISC. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20(Version%201).pdf [Accessed 15th January 2007]

–

First a little about podcasting…

A podcast is one in a series of digital media files (usually in either  audio MP3 or video M4V format) that is released periodically and made available for download by means of web syndication.

This syndication aspect of the content delivery is what differentiates podcasts from other ways of accessing files, such as simple download or streaming. Special client software applications called RSS aggregators (also known colloquially as podcatchers) such as Apple  iTunes or Nullsoft Winamp can  automatically identify and retrieve new podcast files in a given series when they are made available, by accessing a centrally-maintained ‘feed’ that lists all files currently associated with that particular series.

New files can be downloaded automatically by the podcatcher and stored locally on the user’s computer or other media device for offline use, enabling the audience to download content that is released episodically without having to manually check that new material has been made available.

According to the Horizon Report (2006) podcasting is

At the leading edge of a wave that will last for the next several years and beyond, personal broadcasting takes advantage of small, easy-to-use devices that people already carry to capture and share personal experiences, information, and events. This trend, which has roots in text-based media (personal websites and blogs), is expanding to include audio and video, as the tools for capturing and sharing those media become smaller and better. From podcasting to video blogging (vlogging), personal broadcasting is an increasingly popular trend that is impacting… audiences.

(p.11)

It’s easy to see why podcasts have value in e-learning. Will Richardson states in Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms that the

underlying technology here is digital recording and the idea that it is now very easy to create and publish these recordings… As long as you have a way to make the recording, and as as long as your students have access to the Internet, you can make this work.

(p.113)

Now that I have started publishing podcasts, I’m obviously going to write a series of articles about developing and delivering content using this learning channel. What’s more, I will discuss podcast authoring using production techniques, based upon my experiences as a radio documentary maker in a ‘previous life’ – I’ll be talking about the craft of writing for audio, as well as the technical aspects of the process.

Now, [drum roll] I want to introduce you to the E-Learning Curve’s Other Podcast. This podcast service is about subjects that interest me other than e-learning. Topics I’ll be covering include aviation, history and music, among others. The first set of podcasts is called Transatlantic: the Flying Boats of Foynes:

July 2009 is the 70th anniversary of the first scheduled trans-Atlantic airplane passenger service. Told against a backdrop of the momentous events of World War Two, this eight-part podcast documentary series by Michael Hanley tells the story of a unique era in world aviation.

Airlines like Pan American Airways (PAA) and the British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC) with their flying boats like the Short series of planes, and the massive Boeing 314 ‘Clippers’ were welcomed to the seaport of Foynes, in the embrace of the River Shannon estuary on the Western edge of Europe. Come with me now as we fly back in time to the Golden Age of Aviation, a era of adventure, conflict – and the invention of Irish Coffee.

Parts 1 and 2 of the series are now available. You can listen and subscribe to each episode here, or you can access the podcast via iTunes. The next installment, The Glamour of Travel will be released on Tuesday July 28th, 2009.

The more observant among you will have noticed that this podcast channel is called the Other Podcast, which implies that there is a regular E-Learning Curve Podcast, discussing subjects associated with learning and development.

Yes there is. And it’s on it’s way soon. More about this closer to its launch.
___________

References:

The New Media Consortium (2006). 2006 Horizon Report. [Internet] Available from: http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2006_Horizon_Report.pdf Accessed 15 July 2009

Richardson, W. (2006) Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

–

Reflecting upon the growing adoption of Web 2.0 technologies in enterprises and organizations, about two weeks ago I wrote a post called Shiny new technologies used by dusty old professions. In it I considered that an ad hoc approach to adding Web 2.0-based learning channels without appropriate strategy, planning, and management could lead to a diminution of their effectiveness in the long term.

In response to my article, I received a comment from a person associated with an organization who had gone down this very road by implementing informal learning and knowledge-sharing channels (including FaceBook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and asynchronous content delivery) on an “as needed” basis, and who contradicted or declared against the points I made in my post.

Here are some of the assertions made in the comment:

• I wrote that informal learning was “casual”
• Regulated professional bodies do not undertake informal learning (supporting evidence to this was included via a link to the organization’s Continuing Professional Education overview document, available online)
• Social Media is a “fad”
• I “miss[ed] the point completely. Social media is nothing to do with e-learning.”
• My name is Brian

Naturally I published the comment (as I do with every comment I receive unless it’s spam). The missive wasn’t e-mailed to me personally, but to my blog, so I assumed it was submitted to the public domain. About a week later, I composed a response to the comment and e-mailed it to my correspondent.

To date I have received no reply from them, so I considered the matter is closed. However, a few people who read the comment got on to me (privately) and said that the remarks that were made in the comment were so inaccurate and erroneous, that it was worth highlighting them to a larger audience.

In fact, they said, the comment was a distillation of the general lack of understanding of informal learning, e-learning, and Web 2.0, and should be addressed as a matter of credibility for L&D professionals, if nothing else. And also that my name is not Brian.

So, for your consideration, my rebuttal to the charge that “Social Media has Nothing to do with E-Learning.”

Now read on…

“To whom it may concern:

Many thanks for taking the time to communicate with me. Firstly I need to apologize: as in many occupations (accountancy among them, no doubt), learning and development professionals sometimes use certain words and phrases in very specific contexts that extend their meaning beyond popular use. It simply didn’t occur to me that any of the terminology in the blog article text needed further exposition, and I regret that lack of clarity has caused you to object to and attempt to refute the remarks I made in my blog post.

However, you have misquoted me, suggested that my article was inaccurate, and that I "missed the point completely" so I’m invoking my right to reply. I’d like to say that I hate having to do this, as it makes me come across as long-winded and boring, and I am neither. Nevertheless, I wish to address each of the remarks you made in your comment: I’d appreciate it if you would take the time to reflect upon what follows. 

First the misquote: you state in quote marks that I wrote "informal and casual" somewhere in my text. Let me be crystal clear about this: there is nothing "casual" about acquiring skills, knowledge, and expertise. I take the activity (and my part in it) very seriously. I did use the term "ad hoc" but in a completely different context, I will address this later. 

I would assert that you felt motivated to respond to me because you would argue for what Colley, Hodkinson & Malcolm call the "perceived inherent superiority" (2002, p.2) of formal learning over informal learning.

Let’s get this formal/non-formal/informal business out of the way, because it’s part of the first point you refuted. All learning occurs on a continuum (see Figure 1) with formal learning at one extreme, and informal learning at the other, and non-formal learning ‘in the middle.’ Now here’s the good bit, so I’m going to place this in a paragraph all on its own:

Eighty percent of organizational learning takes place informally.

Gartner Research (2008, p.1).

You will note that the continuum illustrated below is on a horizontal axis, and that there is no hierarchical distinction between the learning modalities.

Figure 1. The Learning Continuum

It’s apparent that a dichotomy exists between the paradigms of formal, goal-directed training programs and informal "learning at the water cooler" (Grebow, 2002):

it is difficult to make a clear distinction between formal and informal learning as there is often a crossover between the two

    (McGivney, 1999, p.1).

For much of the forty years since the terms were first coined (Coombs, 1968, p.1.) there has been a great deal of debate as to the nature of formal, informal and non-formal learning; the components of each of the paradigms, their boundaries and their overlaps. It’s an ongoing discussion in L&D, but at this juncture we can say that the distinctions between them have been recognized by the EU and the OECD among other organizations. The European Commission state:

Learning takes place in different settings and contexts, formal, non-formal as well as informal. Learning that is taking place in the formal education and training system is traditionally the most visible and the one likely to be recognized in the labor market and by society in general. In recent years, however, there has been a growing appreciation that learning in non-formal and informal settings is seen as crucial for the realization of lifelong learning, thus requiring new strategies for identification and validation of these ‘invisible’ learning outcomes. However, definitions and understandings of what counts as formal, non-formal and informal learning can vary between countries.

(Valuing learning outside formal education and training)

At EU level, the following definitions are used:

Table 1. Definition of learning types

Regarding your own organization, I notice that in Continuing Professional Education, under the section entitled ‘Unstructured CPE’ (p.3), it is stated that:

Unstructured CPE can be defined as any form of informal learning or development of day to day working skills achieved through self-study and/or informal training. Unstructured CPE can be measurable but is not verifiable [my italics].

Personally, I support Alan Rogers’ view that a ‘new paradigm’ for learning exists, in which "most programs [are] partly formal and partly informal" going from formal to informal and from informal to formal in both directions along a continuum. Both forms of education are important elements in the total learning experience" (Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm, 2004).

As you stated in the Silicon Republic article Number crunchers find social media a ‘tweet’ surprise "It’s our job to support our members at each point in their career." Implicit in this statement is support for the ongoing, formal, certified professional development initiatives that are required to ensure your members achieve and retain the appropriate knowledge and skills to undertake their professional activities competently. I didn’t question this facet of these activities at any point in my article. 

Equally I’m sure you design, develop, and implement your formal training initiatives based upon Training Needs Assessments and Skill/Gap Analyses to remediate deficiencies in your members’ current skillsets and knowledge.

The next point I’d like to clarify concerns e-learning, social media, and the Read/Write Web (or Web 2.0). E-learning has been characterized as:

The continuous assimilation of knowledge and skills by adults stimulated by synchronous and asynchronous learning events – and sometimes knowledge management outputs – which are authored, delivered engaged with, supported and administered using internet technologies.

(Morrison, D. 2004, p.4)

So while you confidently tell me that "Social media is nothing to do with e-learning" I have to tell you that you’re wrong: it has everything to do with it.

I suspect you perceive e-learning to be that old pageturner-with-audio stuff that characterized e-learning 10 years ago, and is still occasionally foisted upon organizations like the yours for compliance and regulatory reasons. 

You don’t have to believe me if you don’t want to, but believe your own reasoning faculties and reflect on Don Morrison’s above definition carefully. You’ll see that e-learning ‘checks all the boxes’ that characterize social media.

As you state, social media are a great way to communicate, engage with, and create dialog between communities of practice. This is what makes Web 2.0 technologies – and it’s associated products like Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter, as well as related technologies like on-demand video, such valuable and effective learning channels. According to industry analysts Forrester:

Learning 2.0 – or informal learning – means that employees take charge of their learning. Specifically, employees decide when they need information, where to go for information, and how to get information from other resources.

(Schooley, C. 2007, p.3)

This approach delivers learning right when people need it via:

• Delivering small pieces of searched for learning content
• Providing collaborative interaction support
• Making job aids, reference sites, and materials readily available
• Bringing contextual learning to specific tasks while workers are on the job

Forgive me if I’m incorrect, but is this not exactly what your organization is doing?
And finally we get to The Point That I Apparently Missed.

Is social media a "fad"? No.

Everett Rodgers’ Diffusion of Innovation theory tells us that the technology is maturing and has entered the Mainstream Adoption phase. My view is that the shift in information transmission we’re seeing will prove to be as socio-culturally important as the invention of movable type 500 years ago.
You say that social media is

one of many communication channels we successfully use to direct members to education and learning opportunities, class-based or online.

I say that it is a learning channel – as you yourself said "Many share war stories and know-how in the forums": this epitomizes informal (e-)learning in action.

I think now I can reiterate my point (remember the "ad hoc" reference?). The purpose of the blog post was to highlight the issues associated with adding new learning / social media channels without a strategy, a plan, a goal, and a set of learning outcomes. Now, as we know, ad hoc according to Webster’s Online Dictionary means "for the particular end or case at hand without consideration of wider application." As I concluded my article:

…it’s one of the advantages of a non- or informal approach to e-learning, but I would suggest that too much of a ‘make it up as we go along’ approach can lead to spreading finite resources too thinly for any of them to be truly effective.

Or, more prosaically, if you don’t manage, and maintain your content delivery channels effectively, you will see fall-off in use, and enter what Gartner call the ‘Trough of Disillusionment’ where

[technologies] fail to meet expectations and quickly become unfashionable.

Consequently, they are abandoned. In online circles this is called "blogrot" named after the estimated 125 million out of 133 million blogs that are not updated regularly (Technorati, State of the Blogosphere, 2008). To counter this, organizations need to actively manage and maintain their content and their knowledge, or can peter out and ultimately cease to be of value.  

The purpose of my post then, was to commend your informal e-learning activities, but to temper that commendation by highlighting the requirement to keep up the momentum surrounding these activities, for if your initiative fails, it becomes that much more difficult to re-implement similar programs in the future. Indeed, I consult for institutions including UCC and the ECDL Foundation, assisting the development of their learning programs, so I have a substantial amount of experience in this domain. 

I hope this detailed missive clarifies matters; I look forward to making your acquaintance at some point in our respective careers, and I wish you every success in your ongoing learning and development initiatives.

Best regards,

Michael Hanley BA, H.Dip.Ed., H.Dip.Communications, MSc. Education (Hons), MIITD”

__________
References:
Certified Public Accountants (ND). Continuing Professional Education. [Internet] Available from: http://www.cpaireland.ie/UserFiles/File/CPE/CPE_Requirements.pdf [Accessed 1 July 2009]

Colley, H., Hodkinson, P., & Malcolm J. (2002) Non-formal learning: mapping the conceptual terrain. a consultation report [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/colley_informal_learning.htm [Accessed 28th January 2009]

Coombs, P. (1968) The World Educational Crisis, New York, Oxford University Press.
Eraut, M. (2000) Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge, in Coffield, F. (Ed.) The Necessity of Informal Learning. Policy Press. Bristol

European Commission, Education and Training (2009). Valuing learning outside formal education and training. [Internet] Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc52_en.htm [Accessed 1 July 2009]

Holford, J. Patulny, R. & Sturgis, P. (2005). Indicators of Non-formal & Informal Educational Contributions to Active Citizenship. A Paper Prepared for the European Commission by the University of Surrey. [Internet]. Available from: http://crell.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ActiveCitizenship/Conference/05_Surrey_final.pdf [Accessed 1st July, 2009]

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009). Recognition of Non-formal and Informal Learning. [Internet] Available from: http://www.oecd.org/document/25/0,3343,en_2649_39263238_37136921_1_1_1_1,00.html [Accessed 1 July 2009]

Grebow, D. (2002) At the Water Cooler of Learning [Internet] Available from: http://agelesslearner.com/articles/watercooler_dgrebow_tc600.html [Accessed 30th February 2009]

McGivney, V. (1999) Informal learning in the community: a trigger for change and development NIACE. Leicester.

Morrison, D. (2004) E-Learning Strategies: how to get implementation and delivery right first time, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Rogers, A. (2004) Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/non_formal_paradigm.htm [Accessed 30th January 2008]

Rozwell, C. (2008) The Business Impact of Social Computing on Corporate Learning. Gartner. [Internet] Available from: http://www.gartner.com (subscription required) [Accessed 1 July 2009]

Schooley, C. (2007) Informal Learning Connects With Corporate Training Programs. Forrester Research. [Internet] Available from: http://www.forrester.com (subscription required) [Accessed 1 July 2009]
–

…I think that the technology decision has to include consideration of the client capabilities of the audience you are serving as well as the network you will ultimately be streaming into and their openness to the ports and protocols. Most enterprise networks close the streaming ports.

Communications and collaboration using streaming media platforms only work if the client side has the facility to access the content. If you or your organization has a requirement to deliver content (on-demand courseware or a pre-sales demo, for example ) to a customer, you are probably familiar with the refrain " I can’t see the content" from the prospective attendee or viewer. There are many reasons why this may occur, but all other things being equal, the probability is that the client cannot access the content because their firewall is blocking the data delivery.

According to Wikipedia, a firewall is

a part of a computer system or network that is designed to block unauthorized access while permitting authorized communications. It is a device or set of devices configured to permit, deny, encrypt, decrypt, or proxy all (in and out) computer traffic between different security domains based upon a set of rules and other criteria.

To control the flow of data, numbered ports in the firewall are either opened or closed to specific types of packets. The firewall reviews two pieces of information in each arriving or departing packet: the protocol through which the packet is being delivered and the port number to which it is being sent. If the firewall is configured to accept the specified protocol through the targeted port, the packet is allowed through. The most commonly-known example of this process is probably Port 80, the access point for TCP, UDP, and the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP).

Firewall policy management is beyond the remit of this blog, but suffice it to say that most organizations are understandably cautious about providing ‘open house’ access to their networks. The downside of this caution is that when a legitimate need arises to provide access via a rarely-used port, most organizations’ IT departments have reservations (to say the least) about granting access. 

Table 1 describes all of the ports needed to facilitate the delivery of unicast streaming via Microsoft Media Server 9.

Table 1 Delivering a Unicast Stream via MS Media Serve 9

Table 1 only represents a small portion of Windows Media Server 9’s requirements, the platform has separate port access requirements for:

• Delivering a multicast stream
• Streaming from an encoder
• Distributing content
• Administering the server remotely

Apple, on the other hand, provides proxy server software to get around firewalls, by the IT department maintaining the firewall must install the proxy software.

The Flash Streaming Server platform uses what Michael Topic (2002) calls a "drastic solution" to negotiate this problem: HTTP tunneling

Where [Real Time Protocol] RTP packets are wrapped inside ordinary HTTP packets so that they can pass through the firewall.

(p.99)

"Unfortunately" he notes, this approach adds "significant overhead to the stream" taking up more bandwidth. Adobe Systems solution to this issue (and the one implemented by Digital Chalk, as well as a broad  range of e-learning vendors and other enterprises and institutions) is to implement the proprietary Real-Time Messaging Protocol for streaming audio, video and data over the Internet, between a Flash player and a server..

According to Adobe

The Real-Time Messaging Protocol (RTMP) was designed for high-performance transmission of audio, video, and data between Adobe Flash Platform technologies, including Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR. RTMP is now available as an open specification to create products and technology that enable delivery of video, audio, and data in the open AMF, SWF, FLV, and F4V formats compatible with Adobe Flash Player.

The protocol works by a client (such as the Flash Player) communicating with a Flash Communication Server (for example via a corporate Adobe Connect solution) using RTMP protocol over port 1935. If that fails, it will try again over ports 443 and 80 in an attempt to get around firewall policies within an organization, which prevent TCP/IP connections over non-standard ports.

According to Adobe this approach allows "approximately 96% of all users to access publicly accessible Flash Communication servers."

More…
___________

References:

Adobe DevNet (2009). Real-Time Messaging Protocol (RTMP) specification. [Internet] Available from: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/rtmp/ Accessed 11th July 2009

Adobe TechNote (2009). HTTP Tunneling protocols [Internet] Available from: http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/166/tn_16631.html Accessed 11th July 2009

Nelson, D. (2007) Firewall Information for Windows Media Services 9 Series. [Internet] Available from:  http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/serve/firewall.aspx Accessed 11th July 2009

Topic, M. (2002) Streaming Media Demystified. McGraw-Hill Professional. eBook, United States.

Wikipedia (2009) Firewall. [Internet] Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewall Accessed 11th July 2009

–

Using this paradigm, the initial request for data originates from the client, and then is responded to by the server. When using digital media, uncompressed audio and video is first compressed into a single, muxed (multiplexed) media file for delivery over the Internet or a network at a specific bit rate. The media file is then placed on a regular web server. A web page containing the media file’s URL is also created and placed on the same web server. When the link on the web page is clicked on, a client-side player (such a Windows Media Player or QuickTime Player) downloads and plays the requested media file.

In the context of e-learning, it’s pretty standard for a video demo (for example) to be stored and progressively streamed from a Moodle LMS running on an Apache  such as Apache server (see Figure 1) 

Figure 1. Demonstration: Uploading a WMV file to Moodle, and playback via HTTP streaming in Windows Media Player
[Click to play the demo]

From a user’s perspective, this process looks and feels identical a download-and-play case use case. From a technical point of view, the difference lies in how the client functions.

Unlike the download-and-play model, the client player starts actually starts playing the streamed digital media file while it’s being  downloaded. This is possible because the content is cached: a process of collecting the first part of a media file before playing. This small ‘buffer’ of information allows the content to continue playing even during periods of high network congestion. With this delivery method, the client retrieves data as fast as the Web server, network and client will allow, regardless of the quality of the compressed stream. Only certain media file formats support this type of progressive playback including  Microsoft’s Windows Media format (WMV) and Apple’s QuickTime (MOV).

Web server streaming uses the Hyper Text Transport Protocol (HTTP), the standard Web protocol used by all Web servers and Web browsers for communication between the server and the client. HTTP operates on top of the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), which handles all the data transfers.

It’s useful to remember that HTTP/TCP is optimized for asynchronous, static   applications, such as displaying static Web pages, and file transfer; this can affect the distribution and delivery of motion-based, asynchronous (’on-demand’) content. Users may experience interruptions, ‘glitches,’ and temporary loss of playback because to the limitations of the HTTP and TCP protocols when handling multimedia content.

More…

–

You may recall back then I wrote:

I have been an Apple iPhone 3G owner and user since the model was released here in Ireland in mid-2008. Since I acquired the device, I’ve come to rely on it to manage my e-mail accounts, utilize my time, play music, video, take notes (text and audio), and generally be more productive. I’ve Twittered, Quittered, Facebooked, YouTubed and blogged.

Five months later, I have added e-learning course management, and even Skyping to my ever-growing range of iPhone-compatible activities. It seems I’m not alone in my view that iPhone is more than just another device.

According to Forrester analyst Ted Schadler, the iPhone

drives business culture change; it gives employees freedom to choose their own tools; and it changes the support model to self-service. But the real payoff of iPhone and similar mobile Internet devices is that it is a new platform for delivering content and collaboration applications to an increasingly mobile workforce.

(2009 p.1)

This assertion is remarkably positive, doubly so considering the source of the comment: Forrester, in common with the ‘other’ major industry analyst organization Gartner, are notable for their disdain of Apple products. In December 2007, Forrester’s Benjamin Gray et al published The iPhone Is Not Meant for Enterprises, a six-page report more commonly known by its subtitle The Top 10 Reasons Why We Recommend That IT Not Support It. In this document, Gray and his team leveled a number of criticisms at the device. Among them:

1. Doesn’t natively support push business email or over-the-air calendar sync.
2. Doesn’t accommodate third-party applications, including those internally developed.
3. Doesn’t support securing data on the device through encryption.
4. Can’t be remotely locked or wiped in the event of a lost or stolen device.
5. Lacks a hard keypad that provides feedback, which isn’t ideal for rapid and accurate input.
6. Has limited service provider support and its carrier lock-in inhibits flexibility.
7. Comes with a premium price tag.
8. Is only the first generation of the device.
9. Lacks a removable battery, so when the battery dies, so does the unit.
10. Lacks case studies of firms that have deployed it enterprise-wide.

Since 2007, Apple has worked assiduously to counter most of the deficiencies of the iPhone. A number of business-focused enhancements were integrated in the release of iPhone OS 3.0 on June 17, including:

• Added on-demand to require VPN login where needed.
• ActiveSync calendar synchronization issues fixed, and added CalDAV support.
• Encrypted device configuration profiles that are prevented from being deleted.
• New policy capabilities, including disabled cameras.
• Encrypted backup to the desktop through iTunes on PCs and Macs.
• New device functionality, including cut-and-paste, device search, and click-to-call.
• A thousand new developer APIs enabling developers more ways to build custom applications.

According to Forrester:

The iPhone’s intuitive interface, superior browsing experience, and rapidly evolving developer tool kit make content-centric applications far more appealing on an iPhone than on a BlackBerry or Windows Mobile device. While BlackBerry is still the email and calendaring winner, iPhone devotees do make the shift to typing on glass.1 It’s also important that Apple isn’t linking its mobile future solely to mobile providers. The iPod Touch delivers most of what enterprises need over 802.11, lacking only GPS and 3G network access.

For enterprises, this makes an iPod Touch a viable addition to a BlackBerry or Windows Mobilecentric strategy. …Should you consider supporting iPhone? At least three companies say yes.

(2009, p.1)

In Oracle (one of the organizations Forrester spoke to) employee demand drove the company to adopt the iPhone. In Kraft Foods, the device has becomes a totem to demonstrate that their IT division is serious about supporting culture change. By January 2009, almost half of Kraft Foods’ mobile users have iPhones, with about 400 new iPhones ordered each month.

In Amylin Pharmaceuticals, the "passion" (p.3) and sponsorship of a C-level exec who has long advocated offering more user choice for mobile devices and open platforms for computing saw the iPhone as an opportunity to give employees the mobile capabilities they were asking for. The iPhone has become the company’s “enterprise netbook,” with support for the campus-wide wireless network. They have also found the iPhone “easier to support than other mobile platforms.”

Based on the evidence supplied by these an other organizations, the iPhone offers genuine workplace benefits including "self-service, empowered employees, and mobile collaboration" (p.4). Notably, employees were willing to "vote for freedom" by buying their own iPhone rather than take a company-supplied PDA. Ted Schadler states that if an iPhone makes an employee happy – and more productive, then supporting it delivers collateral benefits of a more content workforce, and a new line of communication between IT and employees. 

With the continuing growth in business- and productivity-centered iPhone apps, mobile collaboration opportunities are greater for the iPhone than for pretty much every other PDA. What begins as a better user experience is consolidated by an enhanced developer tool kit in OS 3.0 and the continuing maturation of the iPhone ecosystem.

Forrester say that anyone who has used both iPhones and BlackBerry will confirm that "the internet feels natural on an iPhone and a like chore on a BlackBerry" (p.8). Document viewing, WebEx presentations, and Internet access are better on the iPhone.

As developers build new applications for SharePoint access, data analysis, multiway conferencing, and training, the workforce can leave their laptops at work."

(p.8)

In the workplace context, communities of practice for the iPhone can lower support costs. All three firms discussed here have iPhone wikis so that employees can support each other. This "community-led support model" (p.8) may be new for many organizations, but it’s effective where the iPhone is concerned.

In Kraft Foods, their early adopters provide better support than their IT team can. As a bonus, Kraft Foods sees a growing desire for self-service that is driving a workforce culture change. It expects to see similar changes in other areas in the future. Even from a financial perspective, data plans for other mobile devices are more expensive than the consumer plans (US telecom provider) AT&T is offering for iPhones. This company was able to reset its baseline plan pricing 30% lower for all phones because it supported iPhone.

As with the emergence of non-formal and informal learning in organizations, and the growing pervasiveness of social media tools for collaboration in enterprises, it seems that the demand for, and growing acceptance of the iPhone as an enterprise-level communication, collaboration, and learning platform is due to people power. Despite the declamations and derogatory noises of industry analysts it seems that, like all politics being local, all communication is ultimately personal.

A phenomenon of the popular adoption of Web 2.0 technologies in society-at-large seems to be a concomitant shift in the culture. Beginning in 2008 and gathering momentum ever since, we have noted again and again that people are less willing to accept what they are told, and are making choices based upon their own experience, judgment, and from information more likely supplied by peers than from opinions delivered from “upon high.” So it has gone for traditional media channels. So will it go for enterprise communication?

You decide.

___________

References:

Gray, B., Whiteley, R., Silva, C., & Dines, R.A. (2007). The iPhone Is Not Meant For Enterprises: The Top 10 Reasons Why We Recommend That IT Not Support It. Internet: Available from http://www.forrester.com [Accessed 16 April 20 2009] Subscription or Purchase Required.

Schadler, T., Brown, M., Gray, B., & Burnes, S. (2009). Making iPhone Work In The Enterprise: Early Lessons Learned. Internet: Available from http://www.forrester.com [Accessed 16 April 20 2009] Subscription or Purchase Required.

–

Brandon Hall Research, domain analysts for the e-learning industry and providers of  information about tools, technologies, and best practices related to employee training and enterprise learning have just released a comprehensive new guide called Authoring Tool KnowledgeBase 2009: A Buyer’s Guide to 120+ of the Best E-Learning Content Development Applications.

According to their press release, "the current edition of this online, database-driven KnowledgeBase contains 10-20 page profiles of 122 content development tools" including:

• 65 products to create online courses
• 26 products to create online tests and assessments
• 20 products to create software simulations
• 23 products to help you convert your legacy content to e-learning
• 9 products to create non-software simulations
• 8 products to create instructional games

They also include two online software applications:

• A selection tool that helps you narrow your product search by filtering out the tools that don’t meet your needs
• A comparison tool to help you see how two similar products differ

I recently published an article called What’s on your e-learning bookshelf? In it, I listed my shelf of “go to” e-learning texts. I’ve re-published the picture of my shelf below, so that you can see, right there in the middle, a text called E-learning Tools and Technologies by Horton and Horton.

In the early part of this decade learning and development professionals and educators found this text to be an invaluable reference resource. If you had a requirement to understand a new training modality or learning channel in a hurry (as many of us did in five or six years ago as we faster, better, and more integrated communications networks burgeoned) the Horton and Horton text was a good place to begin to find out about it. However, as we reach the end of the decade, the tools and some of the technologies in text (I have the first edition) is looking decidedly dated; Blogger.com was still owned by Pyra Labs; podcasting is not given a look-in in any shape or form. As far as I could discern through a brief search (on Amazon, Wiley Books Online, and Google Books), the 2003 edition is still in print.

The outcome of this is that while the text is still full of good advice, useful information, and valuable insight into topics associated with e-learning design, development and delivery, many  of the products it highlights are deprecated (Authorware), redundant (GoLive), or changed beyond recognition (most products featured in the text). In my view this is where resources like the Brandon Hall KnowledgeBase come into their own. While, necessarily, the text and the information is not as rich as in the Horton and Horton book (see Figure 1 for a comparison between the layout of the two resources), it’s competitive advantage is that is delivers bang up-to-date, regularly refreshed information, and a easy-to-use selection and comparison utility to choose and compare products.

Figure 1. Side-by-side of the texts: Horton (l), Brandon Hall (r)
[Click to enlarge]

In one sense, this is the threshold between the analog and digital forms of information delivery. Putting my cultural anthropology hat on for a moment, I would characterize this as a liminal state. Liminality has been described as "the place in between" (La Shure, 2009)  infused with ambiguity, openness, and indeterminacy.

For example, as a university lecturer delivering a course on learning technology do I include E-Learning Tools and Technologies on the required reading list, or the more up-to-date Authoring Tool KnowledgeBase? How do I set a question on the information in the latter source as it is in one sense, just a list and description of products and their capabilities, with none of the context provided by the former text? Which is more "academic?" Does this reflect the text’s accuracy? Is the cost ($795 annual subscription) of Brandon Hall membership justifiable for students, or people who just was occasional access to information, as opposed to about $40 for the out-of-date Horton and Horton text. How much is the information worth?

These are  difficult questions to answer satisfactorily.

I have no doubt that over time, e-texts will become integrated into the mainstream of academic, professional, and consumer activity. Online libraries like MyAthens already provide access to a range of electronically-available materials for a nominal fee to the individual user as membership to institutions, universities, and libraries.

E-readers like the Kindle, and e-book software like Lexcycle Stanza (recently purchased by Amazon) are beginning to provide the facility to view electronic versions of printed texts.

Maybe this electronic means of access will become more generalized; I use Stanza on my iPhone and it’s changing my reading habits. Perhaps the current practice of hard- and e-texts being used in concert will become firmly embedded as the most effective method of using the old and the new. As usual, people will do what works for them, and the usual rules for adoption of innovations will apply.

Yet the question remains: How out-of-date is too out-of-date?

I think that my Horton printed text still has great value, especially in the context it provides for e-elearning-related technologies; yet I can’t rely on it to provide current information about specific e-learning authoring applications. With over ten years experience in the learning and development industry, I feel competent to apply my well-developed critical faculties to find out what I need from the range of knowledge and information at my disposal. Could I make my tacit, hard-earned ability to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information available to some-one else? Probably not.

How do you use the resources at your disposal? I’d love to hear your views and about your experiences – let me know.

___________

References:

Brandon Hall Research. (2009). Authoring Tool KnowledgeBase 2009: A Buyer’s Guide to 120+ of the Best E-Learning Content Development Applications. [Internet] Available from: http://www.brandon-hall.com/publications/atkb/atkb.shtml Accessed 29 June 2009

Horton, W., & Horton, K. (2003). E-learning Tools and Technologies: A consumer’s guide for trainers, teachers, educators, and instructional designers. Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana

La Shure, C. (2009). Liminality. [Internet] Available from: http://www.liminality.org/about/whatisliminality/ Accessed 29 June 2009

–

• 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.

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).

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.

–

What have we learned? More of that anon, but for now I’m going to cover the the Seels and Glasgow Model in this E-Learning Curve Blog series on a systems approach to instruction design.

Now read on…

In a 2008 article called Can we reinvent e-learning? I asserted that

ADDIE emerged from the principles of project management, and resembles the philosophy and practice to this discipline’s methodology more than a pedagogy. Treating learning like a project leads to "training outcomes" equivalent to project deliverables.

In my view this is no bad thing: the reality is that Learning & Development is a pragmatic discipline, tasked with facilitating individuals in their endeavors to learn, educators would be poorly served if the theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical epistemologies of the domain did not at least tacitly acknowledge the practical challenges associated with implementing learning programs. 

Barbara Seels and Zita Glasgow’s Model (see Figure 1) reflect this assertion; they situate their understanding of ISD and their model on the thesis that design occurs in the context of project management (p. 177).

Figure 1. The Seels and Glasgow Model
[Click to enlarge]

Their model is distributed across the three phases of project management:

1. Needs Analysis Management
2. Instructional Design Management
3. Implementation Management

This distribution allows a learning program (or project) to be planned, resourced, and managed much as any other project in an organization is arranged.

In this model, the first phase (Needs Analysis) includes the establishment of the instructional goals, requirements, and context for the courseware. Next, the Instructional Design phase begins when Needs Analysis is completed: this second phase consists of six activities:

1. task analysis
2. instructional analysis
3. objectives and tests
4. formative evaluation
5. materials development
6. instructional strategy and delivery systems

- all of which are linked via feedback and interaction communications channels. In Phase Three of the model (Implementation and Evaluation) the development and production of materials, training delivery, and summative evaluation are undertaken.

As is usual in a systems-based approach to ID, the phases in this model can are typically applied in a linear fashion, but they are often applied iteratively. As Gustafson and Branch highlight, the steps in the instructional design phase are interdependent and concurrent, and multiple iterations of this process may occur during this part of the development lifecycle (2001, p.43).

In this sense – and reflecting on my ADDIE/PM remarks, we can say that this is a product-oriented approach to content development. According to Chen

Developing an instructional project involves skill sets ranging from project management and interface design to sound preparation and programming…Design teams represent various fields of expertise (producers, instructors, editors, etc.).

(2007 pp.2-3)

Managing potentially large teams and and hundreds (if not thousands) of media assets needs substantial resources and commitment, and requires strong project management to stay on time and budget at the appropriate quality of outputs.  To support this objective, Seels and Glasgow focus on the importance of well-designed materials, the need to identify and understand communication patterns within organizations, develop strategies for diffusion of innovations, and the importance of supporting learners.

Interestingly, Seels and Glasgow also include the concept of diffusion of innovations in their model:

The strategies that lead to diffusion are most effective if used during all the phases of a project.

(1998, p. 178)

They consider that when their model is applied ,the phases are generally linear in nature but

it is not necessary to complete a step before proceeding, and the order can be changed so that steps can be performed concurrently.

(1998, p 179)

We can say that this model successfully aligns to the systems philosophy epitomized in ADDIE quite will, while acknowledging the needs and limitations of the practical application of instructional design. Much like 3PD, formative evaluation via a feedback mechanism (multiple iterations rather than recursion) is a distinguishing (but not unique) characteristic of Seels and Glasgow’s approach.

Next time: What have we learned? The implications of Instructional Systems Design for E-Learning
___________

References:

Chen, I. (2007) Instructional Design Methodologies. In: Kidd, T. & Song, H. (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Instructional Systems and Technology. IGI Global

Seels, B. & Glasgow, Z. (1990). Exercises in instructional Technology. Columbus OH: Merrill Publishing Co.

Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making Instructional Design Decisions. (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

–

Given the ASSURE Model’s constructivist epistemology and successful implementation in early 21st Century educational contexts, you may be surprised to learn that the ASSURE methodology has it’s roots very firmly located the venerable, behaviorist-influenced (and occasionally criticized) Events of Instruction, devised by Robert M. Gagne.*

Now read on…

According to Kevin Kruse (2006)

Robert Gagne is considered to be the foremost researcher and contributor to the systematic approach to instructional design and training. Gagne and his followers …focus [...] on the outcomes – or behaviors – that result from training.

I would assert that familiarity with Gagne’s work, and educators’ drive to continually investigate the New have perhaps led to a certain disregard (in some quarters) for the substantial contribution Gagne made to our discipline. For example, to characterize Gagne as a Behaviorist is, in my view, to underestimate the sophistication of his theories, the elegance of his models, and the relevance of his work today. Indeed, Walter Wager (2004) states that

Gagne didn’t feel that the behaviorist theories were adequate to explain human learning. Rather, Gagne should be considered one of the early cognitive psychologists.

(p.296)

As I have previously indicated, his work still influences theorists and learning practitioners today. During his career, Gagne primarily concerned himself with understanding "the process of learning" (1972, p.1). In his life, he was central to the development of five instructional theories:

1. the five domains of learning
2. events of instruction
3. conditions of learning
4. role of the media
5. integrated goal theory (Wager, 2004)

Gagne’s text The Conditions of Learning (first published in 1965) attempted to identify and describe the cognitive processes that occur in learning: the eponymous ‘conditions of learning.’ His philosophy was influenced by the concepts of cognitive mapping, as well as the information processing interpretation of the events that occur when (adult) learners are presented with various stimuli. In The Conditions of Learning, Gagne argued that that internal and external conditions of learning must be created to stimulate the desired learning response.

To understand the sequence of activities needed to support learning, Gagne suggested that tasks for

acquiring the intellectual skills needed should be organized according to complexity.

(Hriko, 2008, p.353)

He argued that information underwent a series of internal processes before being stored in long-term memory; he developed a nine-step process called the Events of Instruction to represent the manifestation of the external factors that influenced the acts associated with the process, which "correlate to and address the conditions of learning" (Hriko, 2008 p.353). Table 1 shows these instructional events in the left column and describes the associated mental processes in the right column.

Table 1. Nine Events of Instruction (after Gagne, 2004)

More…

* Yes, his name is Robert Gagné (with an acute aigu ), but English speakers typically don’t enter accents into Google, and I’m nothing if not pragmatic…
___________

References:

Gagne, R. M., (1972). Domains of learning. Interchange 3(1),pp.1-8.

Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. and Keller, J.M. (2004). Principles of Instructional Design (5th.Ed.). Wadsworth Publishing Co Inc.

Kruse, K. (2006). Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction: An Introduction. E-Learning Guru. Internet: Available from: http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art3_3.htm Accessed 12 June 2009

Hriko, M. (2008) Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. In: Tomei, L.A., Morris, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Information Technology Curriculum Integration. Information Science Reference

Wager, W. (2004) Robert M. Gagne. In: Kovalchick, A., and Dawson, K. (Eds.), Education & Technology: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO

–