Social Learning at Sun

Published
by
Joost Robben
on June 5, 2009
in Uncategorized
. 1 Comment

Via a tweet by @trishuhl I came upon a nice case study from Bersin & Associates on social learning at Sun Microsystems. It is a description of the “Sun Learning eXchange“. This is a sort of Youtube site which Sun employees can use to exchange content.

What I like about the project/ the case study is that it started from a real world business/ learning problem instead of just mere looking how to use popular webtools.

The first business problem lies within the cut back in budget for the Sun learning department (SLS). As a result of that they couldn’t provide the training hours needed to meet the training needs of the sales people.

Secondly, sales people needed to have access to the right tools and information needed to close their deals in the field.

Analysis found that 90% of the Sun sales people prefer to get their information through what they call TOI, transfer of information. It is described as a “technology-industry practice of informal product demonstrations and data sharing” (ie. informal learning??). The sales team wanted to be able to access this info right in the field, the solution had thus to work on mobile devices.

Social networking with the ability to exchange content was seen as a good solution for the sales people to learn. The report mentions a valuable lesson regarding the implementation of an online social networking service:

“While widespread adoption is best achieved through bottom-up viral marketing, corporate social networks cannot become embedded into the long-term
cultural fabric of the organization without visible executive participation and sponsorship.”

I must say that I find this one of the most difficult aspects of actually implementing informal learning like the use of social networking. By designing and implementing it for a reason, we are in a sense making it formal again. The bottom-up emergence of the use of social tools by early adopters has, at some point, got to get a more organizational approach. The active participation of the “hubs” in the network, influential people like managers, is of the most importance to its success to become widely used and to meet the intended business goals. I question myself, when do u do this (if necessary at all) and is perhaps regulation and procedures needed as well? Do we need, at some point, to make it mandatory to publish content to such a site?

Using Twitter for data collection

Published
by
Joost Robben
on April 28, 2009
in Uncategorized
. 1 Comment

The article “Where do you Learn?” Tweeting to inform Learning Space Development published in Educause Quarterly shows us an innovative way to use Twitter for data collection. The research described in the article has used Twitter discover the places where students learn. Instead of answering the question “what are you doing?”, serveral students were asked to share where they were learning. I think this is a real nice method of data collection becasue it is real easy to publish tweets at the same time that the action is performed. Survey’s or diary like methods usually are filled in long after action such as the learning place.

Yesterday, i read a post by Jeffrey Keefer on autoethonographic research. Though i’m not very familiar with  the research method it sounded like an interesting way to perform research. Reading the article today about using twitter, I’m wondering in what way could this else be used for (auto)ethnographic or narrative forms of research? I’m thinking it could be a very practical method for me as consultant to use during change processes/ implementations within organizations as I’m still looking for practical, low-cost ways to continue my research efforts while i work at a consulting firm. At the same time using tools like twitter helps not only to collect data in order to work analytically in a change proces. It also helps to get a head start in people using web 2.0 tools in a very productive way.

“My Diigo Favorites”

Published
by
Joost Robben
on April 2, 2009
in Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

For social bookmarking I used to work with Del.icio.us, probably the most used social bookmarking site. But i didn’t thought the “social”part of it to be worked out very well. Somewhere last fall i started to discover Diigo. At this time i’m very enthusiastic about the tool and have fully switched. From now on you can also see a list of the sites i’ve bookmarked to Diigo on the sidebanner of this blog, or you can visit my profile on Diigo.

I’m using the tool in a number of ways. First of all I’ve installed its toolbar that i can use to quickly save websites. What i like about it is that i can highlight texts on the sites and i can add comments to it. There is also a way to directly publish the link into a twitter message. The links, highlights and comments can be shared to a group of users. I’m experimenting to use the group functionality for a set of colleagues, so that i can easily share my favorites and we can start a conversation using the group tool. The only challenge is to actually have them using the tool…:)

Bottomline, i think Diigo is a very rich tool if being used in an extended social way.

Students not allowed to record lectures?

Published
by
Joost Robben
on December 4, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 1 Comment

Last week, Dutch political adviser Kay van de Linde gave a guest lecture at the University of Amsterdam (UVA). A student recorded the session in which van der Linde spoke critically about his party. In my opinion from a professional, reflective perspective as we like to see in academics. Afterwards, the recordings where send and published to mainstream weblog Geen Stijl and van de Linde felt it necessary to resign from his post and leave the party.

Today I read in an article that lawyers of the UVA have reviewed the incident and concluded that there are no rules for recording lectures in the study guide of the university. They recommend the university to cite explicitly that for records of lectures with eg mobile phones authorization needs to be requested.

On the one hand this is yet another example of authorities’ struggle with the increased possibilties for content creation and publishing. On the other hand, is forbidding (or a need for authorization) really a solution? This incident shows yet another time the importance of digital literacy. And yes, being aware of the consequenses of what (and where) you publish is also part of being digital literacy.

Towards “the real feeling of presence”

Published
by
Joost Robben
on November 20, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 2 Comments

Many organizations today are having employees working remotely. This may be working from a home office or perhaps they are based at a client’s office.  In my case i’m currently working from home as i’m recovering from an accident and not being able to travel. Not being able to be physically present at the office brings along some issues with team collaboration or knowledge sharing. Not to forget that having (physical) contact with colleagues inspires, engage and provides energy.

Many technologies can help getting a bit of a feeling of “presence”, connectiveness, immersive… etc. One example is using tools like Twitter to keep connected. I’m also using Skype a lot, which i still think ROCKS in this technology. To date i’ve had several opportunities to attend meetings at the office through the use of Skype. Having the webcam pointed at the team absolutely helps to have an improved feeling of presence. Being able to see someone speak and watch their non verbal signals is of absolute great value in this respect.

Lately i’m also involved in a project where we investigate the value and design and development of virtual worlds. I’ve seen several (recent) initiatives that focus on the use of virtual worlds for team collaboration.

Immersive Workspaces in SL

Linden Labs just recently issued a press release in which they anounce the Immersive Workspaces initiative. This is a collaboration with Run Rivers Red and is developed exclusively on the Second Life Grid. The movie below gives you a view on what Immersive Workspaces is.

I’ve not been able yet to actually experience the new service myself, but the promo video looks very interesting. I think this is the first really innovative attempt of Linden Labs to get more into the corporate use of Second Life. What i like about the initiative is that it is designed around real world business processes and applications. It does not attempt to provide a Second corporate Life, rather it attempts to enhance or complement real life experiences. A sort of same approach we see in other initiatives like Sun’s “Project Wonderland” or IBM’s “Bluegrass” initiative.

Project Wonderland

Project Wonderland is a Java based open source initiative in which’ development Sun Microsystems plays an important role. Wonderland has been initially developed by Sun in order to provide their employees an immersive 3d space for collaboration.


Part 1: Project Wonderland Technical Overview from Nicole Yankelovich on Vimeo.

Wonderland is currently still in early stages of development but offers great perspectives. The 0.5 release is soon to be expected which among others will include radically improved game graphics and avatar engine. These two important aspects are quite unacceptable in the current release, especially for those who are used to advanced graphics in commercial games like World of Warcraft. For more info watch the Wonderland 0.5 video. What i like about the project is that it is initiated by Sun from a real business process issue. They have 50% of their workforce working remotely at any given day, says Nicole Yankelovich. From this perspective they are creating an environment in which employees can work together and have all their applications shared in the 3d world.

I don’t  know if  3d online spaces in which i can use all my tools and collaborate constantly with my collegues and others are the ultimate solution, perhaps video conferencing can be more efficient in some situations. But it is sure a very interesting topic of research. The problem is real and the issues that it brings along are evident. As the number of employees working remote  are likely to increase more and more, initiatives like Wonderland and Immersive Workspaces are steps towards environments that are able to facilitate collaboration processes that provide the real feeling of presence.

[last edited on November 20 at 12:00]

“The classroom is nothing less than an state of the art information dump”

Published
by
Joost Robben
on October 31, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 2 Comments

This weeks topic at the cck08 course is about “Power, control, validity, and authority in distributed environments“, wow thats a whole lot of ground to cover in just one week. Moreover, i believe that the questions and issues that arise from this theme are very important if we want to move forward towards a more open and connected way of learning in (formalized) institutions.

I’ll try to externalize some of the things that i think are related and important to this subject trhough reflecting on some of my readings . One of these is an amazing post by Dr. Michael Wesch which i came upon by a tweet from Grainne Conole. The article is initinally meant to explain Wesch’ new insights on a video about the students perspective he co-produced a while ago. But while reading this i realized that Wesch is actually telling us a lot about power and control in the classroom.

Wesch explains how he felt about the classroom as he walked into it one day and he saw a lot of empty chairs, a large screen and a small stage for him to stand on. Wesch explains:

“The room is nothing less than a state of the art information dump, a physical manifestation of the all too pervasive yet narrow and naïve assumption that to learn is simply to acquire information, built for teachers to effectively carry out the relatively simple task of conveying information. Its sheer size, layout, and technology are testaments to the efficiency and expediency with which we can now provide students with their required credit hours.”

More than 400 students came into the room, and when Wesch started the class he noticed the following

“I started talking and an almost deafening silence greeted my first words”..but..“Somehow I seem to hold their attention for the full hour. I marvel at what a remarkable achievement it is to bring hundreds of otherwise expressive, exuberant, and often rebellious youths into a single room and have them sit quietly in straight rows while they listen to the authority with the microphone. Such an achievement could not be won by an eager teacher armed with technology alone. It has taken years of acclimatizing our youth to stale artificial environments, piles of propaganda convincing them that what goes on inside these environments is of immense importance, and a steady hand of discipline should they ever start to question it. “

But after class Wesch talked to his assistants who were sitting at the back of the class

“Apparently, several students standing in the back cranked up their iPods as I started to lecture and never turned them off, sometimes even breaking out into dance….The students were undoubtedly engaged, just not with me“

Ok….so what happens is that this teacher is pushed in his role as an authority and students have “learned” to play along but are actually engaged with something else. So using power on people and trying to control them doesnt really work…? I like the way Wesch describes the function of the classroom (auditorium like), it is just designed according to a power and control view on learning.

According to Wesch, the solution lies within looking beyond the walls of the classroom and technologies such as laptops, cellphones and i-phones should be welcomed in the classroom “we can use them in ways that empower and engage students in real world problems and activities”. In so, I think,  using technologies to give students the freedom to learn.

The things Welsch is struggling with reminded me of a book i’ve read a couple years ago by Carl Rogers called “Freedom to learn”. In this book (published in 1969!) Rogers tell us that he thinks that all teachers prefer to facilitate meaningful learning, but they are locked into a traditional and conventional approach:

“When we put together in one scheme such elements as a prescribed curriculum, similar assignments for all students, lecturing as almost the only mode of instruction, standard tests by which all students are externally evaluated, and instructor chosen grades as the measure of learning, then we can almost guarantee that meaningful learning will be at an absolute minimum.” (Carl Rogers)

Ain’t that one of the issue we come upon? Many of us would like to change their ways of teaching (and this also applies to management of course) towards a more open and engaging model but other elements are - at the least- not helping with this change.  I think we are in a kind of conflict here. As for example standardized (nationalized) curricula are helping to ensure a level of education among citizens and standardized test are made to have a grip on quality. Which of course is also related to power, or fear.

Difficult…:)

Design of virtual worlds

Published
by
Joost Robben
on October 28, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

I’ve just listened to an intersting interview with Jim Bower of Whyville, a virtual world for kids to chat, play and learn.

Jim argues for more understanding in how to design engaging learning activities. He tells us that engaging experiences in virtual worlds need to build around the combination of three major components:

  • social objects
  • economics
  • creation

A nice example of such a learning experience seems to be the new music maker in Whyville. Kids get the opportunity to create there own music tracks. They are able to listen to their music with friends and they can sell their music for so-called “clams” on the Whyville market.  From the sell records (out-sell of iTunes?) we can tell that there is maximum engagements though its hard to tell or measure what have been learned, I think.

Jim Bower argues that “traditional education is going to have to come to terms with the fact that its methods may no longer be the most effective way for learning to happen.” He’s trying to get schools to use Whyville as a didactic tool but sees a lot of resistance, “its too different from traditional school”. Jim thinks that vitual worlds best fit in the “workforce curriculum” as this is a rather new curriculum and schools are more open for new approaches. An interesting point from a organizational change perspective.

Searching the internet increases brain function

Published
by
Joost Robben
on October 16, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 0 Comments

In many publications on the Net-generation, assumptions were made on the effects that the use of media might have on the structure of our brains. The general claim was roughly that brain structures of todays youngsters have changed as a result of their intensive use of digital media and web technology.  Because of this event, we should change our learning strategies towards those kids. All well, but there were hardly any scientific studies to support those claims.

A recent study led by Dr. Gary Small  gives us some interesting new insights on the effects that the use of the web has on our brains. A press release of the UCLA shows us the main findings of the study that will be published in the next issue of the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. Results are also described in Dr. Small’s new book iBrain (Small & Vorgan, 2008).

The main findings of the study show that “searching the Internet triggers key centers in the brain that control decision-making and complex reasoning …. web search activity may help stimulate and possibly improve brain function.”

“Daily exposure to high technology—computers, smart phones, video games, search engines such as Google and Yahoo—stimulates brain cell alteration and neurotransmitter release, gradually strengthening new neural pathways in our brains while weakening old ones. Because of the current technological revolution, our brains are evolving right now—at a speed like never before” (Small & Vorgan)

The study was conducted with 24 volunteers with the ages between 55 and 76. Half of the group were experienced internet users, the other half were inexperienced.  Participants’ brain activity was measured during two separate activities, reading a book and searching the web. The image below shows us the results of an experienced user. On the left displays brain activity while reading a book, the image on the right displays activity while engaging in an Internet search.

You can see for searching the web, more and different parts of the brain are used that are not used during reading a book. Interesting finding was that this only happened with the more experienced internet users. According to Small, they might have learned to use more strategies to engage in an internet search.

According to an article by Judi Lin, Small argues on the Net-generation that the intensive exposure to the web is “rewiring their brain’s neural circuitry, heightening skills like multi-tasking, complex reasoning and decision-making.” But there’s a important node added to this: “All that tech time diminishes “people” skills, including important emotional aptitudes like empathy.”

On groups and emerging networks

Published
by
Joost Robben
on October 13, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 3 Comments

Last week’s conversation in the cck08 course has been on the distinction between networks and groups. Which is funny, because in his presentation George Siemens starts off by saying this is an unfair distinction as “they are the same”. Siemens tell is this because groups are a type of network. But aren’t we really talking here about the distinction of groups and the concept of “emerging networks” which i discussed in my previous post?

I get started to think that there is an interesting conflict underlying these two concepts and when overlook, often causes failure of designed learning environments. In this movie Stephen Downes elaborates on the differences between groups and networks.

“A lot of what people are presenting as online learning focuses on groups. I believe what online learning brings us looks more like networks” (Downes)

Groups are based on unity, coordination, closeness and are distributive in nature. Networks, according to Downes, are more diverse are  based on autonomy and openness and are connective in nature. So groups are manageable, they can be coordinated by a manager or a teacher. Groups have closed walls and teachers will present knowledge to their groups/ class. Groups will therefore need technologies like learning management systems which allow teachers to offer their class structure and manage their learning in a close environment. Networks cannot be managed. Members (learners) are autonomous and their learning environment is not bounded by (physical) walls. Networks need technology like personal learning environments, blogs, e-portfolio’s.

The mapping of groups and networks with the technology that fits with their charecteristics was a real eye-opener for me. It made me think about organizations wanting to implement portfolio’s in closed learning environments, demanding employees to write a blog post every week and doing this in a shared blog (non autonomous!), etc…..

Thinking about the differences between groups and networks is not a very easy task, but its very worthwile for every educator/ learning designer to be aware of the distinct differences between those. We (or I) certainly need to do a lot more thinking on the matter, make it concrete for deeper understanding. Many web 2.0 tools are gaining loads of attention nowadays for their educational/ learning purposes. We need to question ourselves wether such a tool was designed for a network audience or if it was based group principles and in what sort we would like to use it.

Emergent social networks

Published
by
Joost Robben
on September 30, 2008
in Uncategorized
. 9 Comments

Last Wednesday Valdis Krebs gave a guest lecture at the CCK08 elluminate meeting. Krebs talked about  emergent networks and social network analysis. I wasn’t able to actually attend the session but watched the recording and looked at the slides. As i’m a plain newbie to this subject of social network analysis i also used Wellman’s presentation on networks for newbies.

Krebs explained social network analysis as follows:

“Social Network Analysis [SNA] is a mathematical and visual analysis of relationships / flows / influence between people, groups, organizations, computers or other information/knowledge
processing entities.”

I found it really interesting to see how Krebs looks at organizational structures using social network analysis. He showed us a traditional organizational hierarchy diagram. Then he flattened the picture out and showed the hierarchy as a network diagram. You could see that this traditional organization consists of small (business) units  and that there are no connections between them other then via the top (management). Krebs stresses that in the white spaces between the units happens the work that’s most valuable to the organization. This is just like we see with innovation processes that occur the post at the periphery of and between communities or networks of practice. But then Krebs showed us the same picture that shows lines between the diverse nodes, those are the actual connections that happen during work. We now see that there actually are connections between the diverse units. Krebs has visualized the prescribed organization vs the actual organization.

Online social networks

Krebs also talked about online social networks, see also this article on his website. Krebs states that most online communities consists of three social rings: “a densely connected core in the center, loosely connected fragments in the second ring, and an outer ring of disconnected nodes, commonly known as lurkers.”

Online Community

The image above is a visualization of an existing online network, the three social rings are clearly visible. In the chatbox of the presentation, many people instantly talked about the similarities with the CCK08 community. People in the core of the community are actively participating and sharing their views on connectivism, people in the second ring are not that actively connected but do follow the course and perhaps connect with a small group of people. People at the periphery probably just read the daily and maybe follow some blogs or the disccusion at the moodle board (Stephen also wrote about this at the cck08 blog).

Unfortunately Krebs didn’t hook into that immediately, but at the Q&A George asked him about how to deal with the people in the outside ring. Should we pull them in, get them more active? Krebs told us that there is “no requirement to bring those in but its nice to know who they are and where they are. You can be a very pasive participant in one environment and a very active one in another, so its not just by personality. Its what you consider is important and what u consider urself skilled at.”

I think it’s important to consider how the networks in which you participate are build up and being aware of your position in those. I consider myself to act in the cck08 network somewhere on the border between the green and the red nodes. As i connect with more people and keep participating i expect to move further to the core. One question that arises me here is that this whole network was almost completly new to me. Is it so that those who initialy had more connections are moving quicker or perhaps starting at the core? In that way networks like this one really are emergent.