A funny thing happened while I was just doing my job

This week, my employer, D2L Inc., held it's annual users conference Fusion in Las Vegas. One of the main stage keynote sessions is called Solutions Spotlight, and it is focused on the new products and features that we're about to release. The hallmark of the keynote is that we demo new things that aren't live on the product yet, and we demo them live. My role at D2L is Product Management Director for our corporate segment, which basically means I drive strategy across development, marketing, support, and sales to meet the needs of our corporate customers. I was invited to do the portion of the keynote focused on the new corporate features, and while I practiced more for this demo than anything I've ever presented in my life, it was an honor to represent the work of the team at Fusion.

My mom has been asking me for the last year or so if there was a chance for her to see me in action at work. She obviously knows me very well, but she has told me she doesn't get to see "Work Koreen" and so, when our CMO took a picture of me onstage in one of our practice sessions, I posted it up on Facebook and tagged her in it, as well as my husband who was holding down the fort at home and who loves to see me present. So I posted the pic quickly in the minute or two I had to myself that day, thought nothing of it, and spent the rest of the day in customer meetings and more practice sessions.

When I got back to my room late that night and finally had a chance to talk to my husband, he asked me, "Did you see the comments to your post on Facebook?"

I of course had not, as I had been working hard for about 16 hours that day.

This was the first comment on my post:

I know the guy who posted the comment only as an acquaintance. I met him years ago through some learning industry event or another, and we had somehow ended up as Facebook friends. I know that he's retired, I know that I don't agree with his politics but I appreciate that he seems willing to agree to disagree. I know that he likes to make controversial (but I've never thought offensive) statements at times on people's Facebook posts. I know that he often will post complimentary things on my own Facebook posts, about my kids or family, etc. I was surprised by his comment on my picture.

Now, if you remember, I had tagged my mom and my husband in the post. So the first thing they saw after seeing my pic was this comment. My mom was upset. My husband was upset. My sister saw it too and was upset. I mean, it's pretty upsetting, right?

So here's the sad truth. I wasn't actually that upset. It wasn't, to be honest, the worst thing that had been said to me even that day. And over the course of my career in tech and gaming, the most dismissive, sexist, over the top things have been said to me that I think I have become numb to a lot of it.

The obvious sexism rarely bothers me anymore. It's the subtle stuff, the things that happen by well intentioned people, that accumulates and over time suffocates me.

What DID upset me, though, was that my family was upset. My mom doesn't know all of the overt and subtle sexism I have to navigate. My sister hasn't ever worked in tech. My husband has heard my stories, but I don't think he always gets what it's like; he can sympathize but not empathize. And here was a really crude comment that showed them all, more than I intended to, what it's like to be a woman in tech leadership.

Here's where things get pretty amazing. Other friends that I've met through work started commenting on my thread. Some of them copied the comment and posted it on their walls, calling out the bad behavior. Some of them replied back directly to the poster on how inappropriate it was. But the best was when people started posting comments about what I'm like professionally, where they first met me, what they thought of me both personally and professionally, and how I've impacted them and their careers. And my mom, my sister, and my husband got to see all of that, too.

In honesty, I wasn't able to respond to the hundreds of people who reached out to me over the past few days. I hope that this post helps in way of explanation: I was full stop working and connecting with folks at our user's conference, and I'm happy to say that not only did the live demo go off without a hitch, but I didn't fall off the stage or accidentally curse during the demo. I did read all of your incredibly kind words. I was lifted up by the memories of when we first met, and how you've all impacted me and my career as well.

It has crossed my mind that I'm sorry it took such a bad situation to hear all of the incredibly humbling things people said about me, but I am so grateful that I did. In the balance, more happy tears were shed than sad. That's all you can ask for, really.

And the guy who posted the comment? He never responded to any of the subsequent comments and posts. He hasn't deleted the comment. Maybe he was serious, maybe he was trolling us...I don't know.

Last night when I finally got home from the conference, Sallie, my 10 year old daughter, asked me how my trip went. I told her pretty good, and that I had presented that day. She said, I know, I saw the picture of you on that BIG stage. She said, "You're pretty badass, mom."

I think I'll excuse her cursing, just this once.

Top # of reasons you should buy my new book, Immersive Learning

It's official! The book is out!

(Ok, technically you could have already pre-ordered it, but today was the official announcement from my publisher, ASTD)

Having stole my own thunder yesterday, I'd like to celebrate the official release by listing the top # of reasons to buy Immersive Learning. I don't know how many reasons I'll come up with, and I titled this blog first, so the exact number of top reasons is a mystery even to me until this post is published. Actually, I'm not even going to count :)

Here we go! Reasons to buy Immersive Learning:

• You believe that learning is better when it's not passive. 
• You've ever said "Practice makes perfect," or quoted that "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?" quote. 
• You think performance objectives are more meaningful than learning objectives.
• You've ever created an avatar. 
• You think there must be a better way to assess learning than multiple choice questions. 
• You have a smartphone. 
• You've ever played house, army, or, if you were like me, "store."
• You prefer green apples.
• You're related to me. 
• You've played one of my ARGs.  
• You want to know what an ARG is. 
• You know who the Underpants Gnomes are. 
• You work in corporate learning and want to learn a new design skill to add to your designer toolbox. 
• You work in higher education and want to engage your students in meaningful practice.
• You work as a K12 teacher and you're looking for ways to transition your classroom to Common Core.
• You want to flip your classroom or training and want to create amazing application activities with  all that time you used to spend lecturing. 
• You have a favorite character from a movie or tv show that you quote. 
• You made a resolution with me and my book can help. 
• I used you as an example in it.
• I used someone you know as an example in it. 
• You are looking for a book to give a great Amazon review. 
• You haven't spent all of your holiday money on Candy Crush yet. 
• You believe knowing something and doing it are two totally different things.
• You heard me speak at a conference and I made some sense.
• You want to design meaningful and effective learning experiences.  

I'm sure there are more! If you think of any, please add them in the comments. And thank you, THANK YOU, for all of your support!

DevLearn 2013 Lessons Learned

I'm a notoriously bad note-taker (I blame it on paying attention), but coming out of DevLearn this year, I had some big epiphanies that I wanted to get down in writing.

First, thank you, as always, to the e-Learning Guild for hosting a wonderful event. Every year I say I'm going to present less and attend more sessions, and every year my dance card fills up. David Holcombe, Heidi Fisk, David Kelly, Reuben Tozman - another inspiring year! And a special thanks to Juli Balding, who is the world's best herder of cats.

In no particular order, my thoughts and observations on DevLearn 2013:

1. People have a hard time breaking out of "conference mode" - I would have liked to see more people building Lego robots. Maybe next year I can convince them to have a "Battle Bot" competition during DemoFest and bring in a Battle Bot alumni to host (ironically, I know one...). In general, I like the hands on learning activities, but I think it's difficult to get people to transition from soaking it all in to trying something new. Still...I think this is worth broadening and refining - and could evolve into a real application at a conference of immersive learning.

2. I wanted more diversity in the keynotes.

3. I didn't have to explain what immersive learning was so much anymore. I had GREAT turn outs at my pre-con workshop and Morning Buzz sessions. I like seeing the shift from "ooh shiny" technology focus to "what can we really do with this," and not in a dismissive way.

4. The data sessions were packed, and it's clear that many people still don't know what or how to measure. What the LMSs typically measure and track aren't the metrics that executives care about and that is a serious gap we need to bridge. A few years ago, I did a panel with Cammy Bean and Ellen Wagner at Learning Solutions on speaking the language of the business. We need that BIG TIME in data analytics. I want to show more examples. I want to break down a PNL for training professionals to really get what we need to communicate. I already have ideas on how to refine my session. Maybe there's a book in there.

5. There seemed like a lot less higher ed and government attendees. I like seeing a good mix, but all of my sessions were heavy on the enterprise attendees. I'd love to see more diversity, not less!

6. I worry about the new tech hype. As the girl who touted virtual worlds a few years back, I am seeing parallels in some of the new technologies. Augmented reality hasn't found it's home yet. Mobile is still struggling with good design practices. Games are finally accepted as valuable, but still there are so few examples of organizations implementing them in deep ways...still a lot of pilot tests. And now we have AI and robots and Google Glass and sensors...and yet many are still struggling to show how training adds value (and is not just a cost center) to an organization. Which, of course, takes me back to analytics...we need to keep the horse in front of the cart, and while I'm a huge fan of new tech, I worry that we need to catch up to where tech was 3 years ago. (Am I getting old and jaded?)

7. I was thrilled to get to hear Ian Bogost's keynote and even more excited that he delineated games from gamification. It's a message that learning folks need to hear, and he really broke it down well. I hope it helped some of that "let's make this boring activity a game" syndrome. Plus, I fan-girled out a little that he recognized me.

8. I've been talking about ARGs for 5 years and people still don't really know what they are. Part of it lies in the confusion of games versus gamification, but I'd like to really push more examples and case studies. It's a low cost way to create immersive learning that is completely under-leveraged. It may be time to jump back in to that pool.

9. Don't get a tattoo in Vegas when you live an hour from LA. Especially if you already got a tattoo in Vegas last year.

10. People are sheep. NO ONE would enter the Silver Clouds exhibit at the Andy Warhol exhibit at the Bellagio, even after John and I stormed in. Why would you not experience the art? Jump into it, people. JUMP. IN.

11. Every conference I go to, I think about the difference in value of presentations versus conversations.  Presentations are valuable, but it's usually the conversations where we learn the most. What would it look like to structure sessions around conversations with the goal of an outcome. Something like, "I need help with..." and "I can help with...!" and pair people up? Maybe we need problem - solution speed dating?

12. I didn't get as much social time this year. I think that's ok, but I do like to stay for the whole conference, which I couldn't do this year. There's always next year, right?

13. Smart people I admire take lots of good conference notes, or compile peoples' tweets, etc. You should check out Cammy Bean's blog for notes on the sessions she attended (including one of mine, and Ian Bogost's previously mentioned keynote). And David Kelly's compilation of the conference back channel, of course.

14. People really do love lynda.com. I can't tell you how many people stopped me to tell me their personal stories, and thank me for what lynda.com has done for them. It really makes me proud to represent a company that people feel so passionately about.

A few more thought-provoking conversations will be covered in separate blog posts, but my key take-away from DevLearn 2013? It's still all about the design, and the data, not the tech. We just need to figure out design and data FOR the tech. 

Ada Lovelace would probably be pissed that she has a day

(Let me caveat this rant by saying that I think it's important to recognize the significant achievements that women have made and are making in science, technology and mathematics. I think the intent of Ada Lovelace Day is good and YAY and etc.)

Doesn't it piss anyone off that we have to have a day to remember the achievements of women in STEM? Because Ada Lovelace day totally annoys me.

I was reading an article about Ada, and read this about her tutor:

But Ada persevered in her studies, and De Morgan recognised her brilliance when he said that had she been a man, she would have had the potential to become “an original mathematical investigator, perhaps of first-rate eminence."

So is it really any different today, when we have to have a special day to recognize and celebrate the achievements of women in STEM careers? I can imagine how Ada felt, hearing from her tutor that because she'd been born the wrong gender, she really didn't have a chance to lead her field of choice. I can imagine it, because I remember in 11th grade Advanced Trigonometry, when I got the exact same answer (and worked the same process) on a test as my male friend, but he had it marked correct and I had it marked wrong. I took both tests up to my teacher and asked him why. He replied, "It's because you're a girl and girls aren't as good at math." There were only two girls in that class, and the following year there was only one in calculus, because I decided I wasn't going to spend another year with that same teacher being subjected to ridiculous gender bias. (I took calculus in college and aced it, btw.)

This is not an unusual story. There's rarely a day that goes by in the games and tech industries that there isn't an article published about the struggles of women to be treated equally and with respect. I know it's no different in science or math. Those of us who stick it out find coping mechanisms, learn how to pick our battles and seek each other out for support. 

And then once a year, we get to hold up Ada Lovelace as a beacon for other little girls, to have at least ONE role model in STEM to whom we can refer when we tell our students and daughters that there is a place for them in medicine or math or robotics or physics or programming. I don't want to have to tell my daughters to lean in. I don't want to tell them they should wear high heels to make them look taller when dealing with all of the men in the gaming industry. I don't want to tell them that there are so few women in these fields that we have to have a special day. I want them to know that they are smart enough and geeky enough and logical enough and techy enough to outperform their male peers in any field they choose. I want my sons to know that women are a force to be reckoned with, not dismissed. 

So thank you, Ada Lovelace, for being our role model. I think the best way to honor you is by ensuring that there's a long list of women that make your day irrelevant.

A game of a different color: design for accessibility

In an earlier post, I deconstructed the design of Candy Crush and sang the praises of a lot of the smart decisions that the designers made that improved engagement, increased replayability and fine-tuned the concept of social. It was clear to anyone who read it that I love Candy Crush (I've now passed my sister and am holding steady at level 213). But this week, my husband deleted Candy Crush from his phone, frustrated because he could no longer engage with the game as I can.

John is severely color-blind. I learned early on in our relationship that I couldn't use color as a reference to things. Instead of color, I would have to rely on shape or size or location or any other identifying characteristic to describe something to him. It made me realize how much I rely on color as a differentiator, and challenged me to notice more details about things so that I could have more effective conversations with him.

For weeks, we've been playing Candy Crush together. We cycle through different games, but this one had stuck for awhile. I'm a lot more competitive than him, so John had lagged behind a bit in his quests. Over the weekend, he got to the level where Candy Crush introduces bombs. On previous levels, John was able to differentiate game pieces by their shape. He even gave them names: Werther's, Mike & Ike's, lollipops...John had figured out a work around to the color coding and so could play just like me. When he got to the bomb levels, however, there was no work around. John would have to ask me or the kids what color a bomb was, which frustrated and annoyed him. After getting past a few levels with our support, he finally gave up. Candy Crush had introduced a design element that prevented him from being able to play the game.

This isn't the first game he's had to give up on. Even board games that have color-coded die force John to rely on others to navigate the game play (I'm looking at you, Smart Ass). He gets frustrated that simple design elements could easily be included to overcome reliance on color, but that designers are only focused on color-abled players. Did you know that 1 in 6 men are colorblind? This is a huge, significant player population.

In our family of 8, we have 2 colorblind family members and 1 bionic boy that is 85% deaf.  For us, helping each other navigate the world without reliance on color and sound is a way of life, and a big part of our lives is playing games. While we understand that there are some limitations of design that just can't be overcome (it's never going to be easy for Vardan to play football because he can't hear his teammates on the field), what's particularly frustrating is when there are easy ways for games to be designed that provide access for the broadest possible player populations.

So, here is my request:
Dear game designers, please consider that a significant portion of your players have disabilities. Your design decisions have a serious impact on the playability of your game. Design standards exist to help you identify how to overcome many of the design traps that can alienate players with disabilities. Please use them. And if you decide to not use them, make it a conscious decision - you can't claim ignorance towards designing for accessibility anymore.

Oh, and while I'm at it?
Dear Santa Barbara, painting your curbs red or green to indicate where street parking is available is a complete accessibility fail. Seriously? Red and green? For the love of all of your colorblind residents, please reconsider your design choices there.

Sincerely,
a person who believes accessibility is not a design constraint but an opportunity for BETTER design

Competencies as achievements in the game of life

As another follow up to my participation at TechKnowledge this year, I tackled some big ol' buzz words today on the Ayogo blog: learning experiences, activity streams, and game mechanics. 

My brain works at intersections and these are three major concepts that seem to be moving towards a perhaps inevitable conclusion: technology already exists to build personalized curriculum, but the challenge is, can we DESIGN to support it? 

Looking forward to your thoughts...and more panel discussions with my co-conspirators, Aaron Silvers and Reuben Tozman. 

New tools, same old problems: curation and media literacy

I've been trying to find, to no avail, the source for the quote: "If it isn't written down, it didn't happen."
And of course, the flip-side, "If it's written down, it must be true."

In light of Apple's announcement on their iBooks Author program and the release of iBooks 2, there's been a flurry of discussion of how this is the nail in the textbook industry's coffin. Maybe...but likely not.

The truth is, we NEED curators, and that's what the textbook industry is. For all of their (many) faults, textbooks try to collect and document information to provide a basis for what constitutes being educated. (I'm resisting adding quotes around the key words in that sentence...) As long as we are depending on others to do the curation for us, we are subject to their biases. When I wrote my Master's thesis on media literacy, I had no idea that it would become exponentially more important to develop those critical thinking and analysis skills; at the time, I was focused on subliminal gender and political biases perpetrated through marketing and journalism. I focused my media literacy curriculum on questioning the source and asking questions like:

• what information is being communicated? 
• why are they choosing to communicate that information? 
• what information is being left out? 
• how do the intrinsic biases of the people making those decisions shape what others are being led to believe?
• who has differing viewpoints or counter information? 
• what information are the authors basing their message on?
• how does it benefit the author for you to believe his/her message?

I could go on and on. 

The point is, EVERY communication is biased, but where journalism, media agencies, and even educational curriculum developers (eg, textbook publishers) are concerned, we are not usually taught to consider the source. 

We should always consider the source. We all need to become curators.

Even more challenging is our brain's awesome and frightening ability to create fabricated memories based on our biases. We need documentation and curation to prevent not just the biases of others, but our own personal biases, from rewriting history.

Not all opinions are created equal and not all "facts" or "truth" are created equal either. The goal of "fair and balanced" shouldn't just apply to political journalism, it should apply to any content we consume. Collect data, consider the source, examine the biases...don't confuse opinion with fact.

As the opportunity for curation and publication becomes more readily available, the need for media literacy, critical analysis of content, and curation skills become increasingly important. I'm thrilled that tools are becoming available that are challenging the stranglehold of textbook publishers. But the bigger question is, are we prepared for the responsibility inherent in the use of those tools? 

Shameless learning promotion

If you follow me on Twitter, you may have noticed that I've been promoting (read: pimping) my pre-conference workshop for DevLearn 2011, titled How to Promote Learning Engagement Across the Enterprise.

I am really excited about this workshop.

Over the past several years, I've worked with organizations on adopting new learning programs and technologies, including organizational adoption consulting of emerging tech like virtual worlds. Time after time, in organization after organization, new learning technologies are introduced with the attitude "if we have it, they will use it." Um....no. These initiatives aren't JUST a technology introduction...often they represent a cultural change. In the triad of organizational adoption (people, process, technology), most organizations focus on the technology first, sometimes on the process, and often the people are an afterthought.

For learning professionals, people are your customers. How can you make your customers happy? How can you gain new customers?

I'm excited about this workshop because I'm going to be talking about the part of what I do that most people don't usually get to see. Most of my speaking engagements focus on leveraging new technologies for learning and design strategies, but this session is going to focus on what happens after an organization says yes to innovation. Dare I say, great design is not enough?

I hope you'll join me in Vegas and practice some of the critical competencies that go beyond design: marketing, sales, first experience strategies, and data collection and analysis.

Its time to make like Don Draper and channel your inner sales lizard. Fedoras welcome.

Curating digital identity: developing a personal social media policy

Earlier this summer, I got my first tattoo. I was (still am) really excited about it and immediately wrote a blog post to share it with everyone. I included a picture, explained the importance of it to me and was all ready to hit "Publish Post"...and I couldn't. It was the picture that stopped me, to be honest...the tattoo is on my ribcage and although there's nothing that you see in the picture other than my midriff and abs, I stopped because I wondered if posting the picture was appropriate for my blog where I mainly focus on topics that affect me professionally.

I had decided not to post the picture on Twitter, mainly because I thought it could potentially get me a bunch of "followers" (read: spammers)  I'd have to block anyway. Also, my Twitter account is connected to my LinkedIn account, and I didn't want the picture posted there.

I did post the picture on Facebook. My rationale was that even if you know me professionally, if you friend me on Facebook and I accept, we're agreeing that we're sharing more of the personal sides of our lives.

Now, keep in mind, this tattoo is completely visible when I'm at the pool in my swimsuit. Yet I literally thought through the implications of posting it to any of the social media tools that I use and what the impacts could be.

After going through this process and making my decisions, I realized how important it is to start getting kids thinking about their own digital identities and what information is appropriate to be shared online. I'm not just talking about avoiding child predators; I'm even thinking more subtly than losing out on a potential job or ruining relationships. Everything you post online is a representation of who you are. What other people post and say about you is an expansion on that digital identity.

My 13 year old nephew illustrated that point to me with clarity this summer during my vacation in Michigan. As I took pictures of him with my kids, he said, pleading, "Please don't tag me on Facebook." As an early teen, being seen hanging out with his little cousins wasn't exactly the reputation he was interested in curating online. Since that conversation with him, I've started asking my kids' permission before I share online any pictures of them or stories about them. There is an element of respecting other people's privacy, not just your own, that is one of the critical competencies of using social media and an important lesson for kids...and parents. People who share out information about their children's medical conditions, educational struggles, or behavioral issues are making decisions about how those children's digital identities are being formed, with potential long-term implications and impacts on their reputation.

As a professional, I'm making decisions daily on what messages, content, and personal information I share online that builds and expands my digital identity. As a parent, I'm talking to my kids about how they can start making good choices about their emerging digital identities. Forget corporate social media policies...each of us needs to develop our own social media policy to curate our digital identities and reputations. To support our personal goals, we need to develop the skills to critically assess the content we share, the context we're sharing it in, the intended audience, the channels that we're using to communicate, and the potential implications for ourselves and others in what we choose to share. For me, this means if you want to see my tattoo, you'll have to friend me on Facebook or catch me at the pool. 

Live events still rock & thoughts on the future of virtual events

Over the past week I attended two very different live events that epitomized where virtual events need to go in order to gain more widespread acceptance.

Geeks Celebrating Their Geekiness

The lovely Pamela Kucera & I geeking out

Last Friday, I attended the Philly Geek Awards, conceived and hosted by Geekadelphia and featuring awards for all kinds of local geek-related activities: tech start ups, film making, comic art, blogging, podcasts, viral videos, geek fashion, art, science, app development, game development...really, a veritable smorgasbord of geekery. There were mentions of Star Wars, Star Trek, Game of Thrones, and bacon (lots of mentions of bacon). At one point, a furry accepted an award. Besides the furry, let's just say I was with my people. It was a black-tie event, the equivalent of a geek prom. It was a blast.

Cosplay Kids Category Winners at BCC

On Sunday, I attended the Baltimore ComicCon. This is the 3rd year I've attended, and it continues to be my favorite of the ComicCons (no, I haven't been to San Diego) because of the emphasis on the writers and artists. I got to see Anthony and Conor from Kill Shakespeare, peek behind the big black curtain to glimpse Stan Lee, chat with the writer/artist for one of my son's favorite kids graphic novelists, and see more cosplay than I need to for the entire year.


What do both of these events have in common? They bring together busy communities for an opportunity to bond.

Granted, both of these events focused on people in creative industries...industries full of innovators, entrepreneurs and creators. They provided an opportunity for people who busy themselves making things a chance to look around and see what their peers are making. There is immeasurable value in that...in lifting up your head from your own work and seeing the success, hearing about the trials and failures, of others. I loved being a part of these events because they inspire me to look at my own goals and dream bigger.

Can virtual events recreate that experience of allowing creatives and creators to talk, share, bond and inspire each other? Yes. But they need to reach beyond their own user groups.

Right now, the most successful virtual events are focused on the communities and people engaged in virtual events. No surprise there, really, and its encouraging to see people eating their own dog food. But as a designer, I think about how these technologies could enable the extension of the communities that gather in person for events like the Philly Geek Awards and ComicCon on an ongoing basis. I don't think the live events will go away, nor do I want them to, but I see potential in extending out the connections made, information shared, and inspiration disseminated at these events on a more consistent and ongoing basis. We're not just a community for an annual event...we're a community all year round. We're not a community when we're face-to-face, we're a community that exists in interest and common goals no matter where we are.

Virtual worlds and event platforms can enable that type of interaction whenever you need it, not isolated to the scheduled dates and times. Pervasive community interaction already takes place in 2D tools like Facebook, but it doesn't capture the feeling of presence and engagement that 3D environments provide. It's really not possible to have a Facebook "event" and Twitter, although it provides the opportunity for live chats, is lacking the visual sharing that is such an integral part of creative communities.

Consider this a challenge to my creative friends. We push the boundaries and pride ourselves in creating new things. Shouldn't we be the ones to embrace the most progressive technologies for establishing and growing our communities?

Innovations in E-Learning 2011: Conference Reflections

I'm not the best conference attendee. I am really selective about which sessions I'll attend and I find that most of the most valuable conversations I have actually happen outside of the sessions. I actually only attended a couple sessions, missing several that I was interested in, so this is not a post that is going to provide you with an overview of the conference. If you'd like that, Wendy Wickham did a smashing job of that here (including her notes on my session on ARGs).

With that caveat, I had some observations on the Innovations in E-Learning symposium last week that I wanted to document as a starting point for my evolving thoughts around where the training industry is currently, and where it might go.

• People are still all wrapped up in "devices": There are altogether too many people who are still focused on the "cool" technology. To which I say, get over it. If ANY of these technologies are going to be useful for workplace learning, their creation and design should be guided by business needs. As far as I can tell, most of them are still being led by "wouldn't it be cool if?" thinking. 
• Invest in Windex: If many of the new technologies showcased really are the future of learning...be prepared for a lot of glass. ("What?" you say. "Glass??") Yes, glass. Evidently our future looks like big touchable screens all over the place. Its a germaphobe's worst nightmare. All joking aside...I don't buy it. From a purely practical standpoint, there's no way that I'm outfitting my house with "smart" technology that my 3 kiddos and adorable puppy are going to render useless with their grimy little paws. And I LOVE new technology. I love the futuristic thinking, but the practical realities of life may put the brakes on many of these ideas.
• Speaking of practical realities...: There was a session I attended during which I expressed my disbelief (on Twitter) that a systems model of learning, with interchangeable SCOs (shareable content objects), was being described as "the future of learning." I am admittedly completely biased on this subject: I do not believe that people learn through linear systems of interchangeable "chunks" of information that are linked together. Mainly, its because I believe that people learn through context, not content, and that the reason why we as a learning industry are moving towards immersive learning, games, social learning, etc. is because we have seen and realize the limitations of content delivery systems in changing people's behaviors. I do believe that there is a place for content delivery, but its a small, perhaps initial, part of the learning experience. I respected the obvious thought that went into developing a prototype of this SCO delivery system, what bothered me was the lack of explanation of how the system would work in context of broader learning goals and environments. Where's realistic practice? Where's coaching, mentoring, and communities of practice? There was talk of motivation, but the example shown looked like a scaffolded, incremental improvement model. At the risk of being the grumpy old lady shaking her fist and telling those darn kids to get off my lawn, we (the learning industry) tried to make purely SCO-based learning systems work in the late 90s, early 2000s. Its an appealing thought, for sure...developing a system that facilitates systematic learning for everyone. I just don't believe that's how we truly learn. 
• How can we better bridge academia and workplace learning?: No surprise that I was thrilled to see Chris Dede's keynote on immersive learning environments in virtual worlds; the work he's doing is amazing. Unfortunately, there's a big bridge to cross between the work being done in academia and the business problems that new learning technologies such as virtual worlds can help solve. There ARE organizations that are designing learning and collaborative experiences in virtual worlds that are addressing real organizational issues. I'd like to see more of those stories in conjunction with the academic exploration of these technologies to help close the gap of understanding how new technologies can help organizations today.
• What is the problem you're trying to solve?: Here is the crux of my observations at the conference: it was like seeing a bunch of solutions in search of a problem. I didn't hear a lot about the organizational issues to be addressed, but did hear a lot about what the "future" looks like...mobile, social, virtual, game-based, augmented...these are all the waters I swim in with my projects and clients every day. What I think everyone struggles with is how to justify the "new" and that's because there haven't been a lot of case studies, examples, business problems that these new technologies have effectively tackled.

My conclusions? Its time for case studies. Its time for strategies to address organizational issues. Its time to focus on the design elements that will make these new technologies successful. Let's accept the fact that the future is mobile, social, virtual, game-based and augmented, because...it is. I don't think the future is made of glass; I think the future is organizations implementing these new technologies to solve business issues in new and effective ways. Right now, I'm over "oooh shiny"--there's something new and shiny every day. Right now, I want real examples and real stories and yes, real data.

Show me THOSE innovations. If you can, I promise to pass them on.

Virtual worlds 2.0: don't call it a comeback

It's not just my gut that's been telling me that virtual worlds are emerging from the Trough of Disillusionment and moving into the Slope of Enlightenment on Gartner's Hype Cycle.

On the corporate front, I've just finished up Phase 1 of a consulting engagement focused on developing an organizational adoption plan for a large, global company that is utilizing a virtual world platform as an emerging tool for delivering immersive learning and fostering collaboration and idea sharing among employees spread around the world. It is extremely encouraging to see companies moving out of the "technology implementation" stage and into the "organizational implementation" stage; this signifies a movement of virtual worlds out of the IT departments and into human resources, training, and other departments focused on internal communication. Organizations who have been thinking about or starting to implement virtual worlds have spent a lot of time focused on getting the technology to work and integrate with their existing corporate systems for the past two years; we're moving out of that focus now and into questions of how virtual worlds can best be leveraged. That's an exciting trend for those of us who've been focused on immersive design and how virtual worlds can support different communication and collaboration dynamics.

Another sign that virtual worlds are headed for mainstream adoption are emerging best practice examples of their use for training and learning. Just today, Proton Media announced a partnership with PPD to develop a Virtual Clinical Trial training solution. I've been working with clients recently on virtual preceptorships, virtual apprenticeships, and developing virtual sales territories. There are more and more conversations emerging of using these "mirror worlds" for realistic practice and this trend will continue.

Aaron Silvers blogged this week about his experience at GameTech 2011 where there was more talk about virtual worlds than games. In February, Aaron and I had talked about the current state of virtual worlds  at TechKnowledge 2011 (where I had presented two sessions on virtual worlds for learning). I had been arguing that they were re-emerging from a lag in interest and I think his observations on GameTech confirm that in the government, virtual worlds are certainly garnering renewed attention as a learning tool.


Earlier this week I did a quick search for "virtual worlds" on my blog and found that in the last three years, I've written 32 blog posts related to virtual world topics. I was pretty surprised. Although I've spent a lot of time thinking and speaking about immersive learning design since starting this blog, I don't think I realized how much I'd actually written down. In December 2009, I wrote a post titled "Virtual World 2.0...a few humble predictions" where I made some assumptions about the emerging characteristics of virtual worlds that would lead them to mainstream adoption. I did pretty good on my prediction scorecard:

• Browser-based: almost all virtual worlds are moving in this direction, with minimal plug-ins and more consistent web navigational standards
• Less user-generated content: the most successful serious virtual worlds have provided packaged experiences (eg. Protosphere, VenueGen, web.alive, VastPark)
• Open source: OpenSim continues to strengthen and expand its reach
• Integration with other tools (mobile, augmented reality, existing workplace systems like Sharepoint): this has happened on many levels and in different ways across platforms, but the system integration features may be the key to pushing virtual worlds to mainstream adoption
• More seamless user-experience and navigation: point-and-click navigation is practically standard in the most popular serious virtual worlds. Oh, and have you seen Kinect?

Virtual worlds have been moving through a natural evolution and are beginning to emerge as a valuable tool in corporate and government learning, communication, and collaboration. Our thinking now needs to evolve as well; its no longer a question of if, but when. For organizations who understand this, the real question is, "how can you prepare to successfully adopt and integrate immersive and experiential learning?" 

Why more women aren't using Quora

I'm about to make some broad, sweeping generalizations about behavior based on gender. Yes, I know that opens up a whole debate where people will point to specific examples that run counter to my argument, and yes, they exist, and no, I'm not saying that ALL women behave one way or that ALL men behave another. But there are some culturally defined and perhaps genetically determined differences in how the genders interact (lots and lots of books written about this...) and this post is focused on addressing how those differences affect design, specifically community and user interaction design in social media.

I read a story this morning that came through my Twitter stream: Is Quora a Sausage Fest? 

And it immediately clarified for me why I don't like Quora. Quora is actually designed for men.

Let's take a step back. Lots of business and political arenas were designed by men, for men...they focus on the ways that men interact with each other. Sorry, guys, but a lot of what you do is just professional chest-puffing, testosterone-rich, back-slapping pissing matches. Sure, it may look more civilized in some contexts, but I'd argue that on any given day, C-Span taps into the political version of a Gladiator ring with a bunch of guys trying to out-argue each other over issues that neither party is going to budge on.

Why aren't women's professional sports more popular? Why are first person shooter video game players predominantly male? Why aren't there more women politicians or CEOs?

When you design systems based on the way men interact and communicate, men will be more interested in participating in them and will be more successful in them.

So let's look at Quora...

Although some people might call it a social media tool, there's not a lot social about it. If you don't know what Quora is...the simplest explanation is that its a forum where people can post questions and people can post responses. That seems gender-neutral enough, right?

Except, its really not. Quora has one formula to participate: question and answer. If we think about this as a community where everyone has the opportunity to become an "expert" then all of a sudden, the dynamic becomes "who can post the best/smartest/most relevant answer." In essence, Quora becomes one big competition to be the most prolific, the most engaged, the most respected...by answering other people's questions "the best."

This isn't a format that lends itself to conversation or discussion. This is a format that is a bunch of people getting up on their pulpits and preaching. This is Senators presenting on the Senate floor, gladiators in the ring fighting for their lives, people climbing over each other to get themselves up the corporate ladder. This is a format designed for men.

If you look at the most successful social media tools, Twitter and Facebook, there's one overarching feature that makes them just as appealing to women as they are to men. Its the opportunity for people to engage and interact in different ways. These tools allow for people to create their own experiences. They allow flexibility in participation. They create lots of different opportunities for people to define their own "success" or value in using the tools. With Twitter and Facebook, what you get out of it is what you put in...you create your own experience.

Quora, on the other hand, is a defined experience and type of interaction. There are values already built into the design and dictated by the interaction style. And the interaction style is very masculine.

I talk a lot in my presentations on designing experiences to account for gender differences. There are some general guiding principles in immersive design you need to pay attention to: how you orient new users to the environment, how you reward behaviors, how well defined success is, etc. These gender differences impact how people perceive these environments, all the way from "is it useful?" to "is it fun?" and its important to understand how people engage with each other to design for different types of engagement.

Women are more communal, collaborative, and like to talk things out. Men are more decisive, exploratory, and willing to take risks (trial and error). I could tap into all the research that shows how our language, behaviors, and decision-making differs along gender lines, and how that contributes not only to how we are perceived and valued in professional settings, but also how that reflects how we think about ourselves as women and men. There are powerful cultural forces that have gotten us to where we are today; many of those cultural beliefs are what perpetuate gender stereotypes and inequalities. The fact remains...there are differences between women and men. That's a good thing, when those differences are acknowledged and accounted for.

So back to Quora. Its designed to post up a question and open it up to answers. This isn't a format like "Ask the Expert" where credibility and respect have already been established as part of the interaction design. This is a free-for-all of throwing yourself out there and making yourself an authority. If you look at just the basic differences between women and men, it makes sense why more men are engaged in this format. You're rewarded for having the most decisive language, strongest opinions, and taking a risk by throwing your opinion out there. Most women take one look at that and think "not interested." Then I'm guessing they go ask their question on Twitter or Facebook.

Asking questions and seeking answers are human characteristics that have nothing to do with gender. How we ask questions, who we seek out for answers, and they types of answers we value can be extremely gender specific. As we continue to explore social media tools as opportunities to engage people in new ways, we need to make sure we are aware of the differences if we want design to engage BOTH genders in the conversations. Perhaps before designing a tool that's whole purpose is to provide opportunities for questions and answers and then wondering why women aren't participating, it would be important to look at how women are already asking and answering questions and building those types of interactions into your design.

Unless you want, in the immortal words of Flight of the Conchords, "Too Many Dicks on the Dancefloor":

Too many men
Too many boys
Too many misters
Not enough sisters
Too much time on too many hands
Not enough ladies, too many mans

QR codes: practical design considerations

There has been so much written and talked about lately regarding QR codes, but most of what I've read has focused on the basics of what they are, trends in their use, or their pros and cons. For anyone who is interested in QR codes, I've collected a few links and references that should help you get a crash course on what QR codes are, and catch you up on the basic opinions being bandied about on their usage (or not):

• What are QR Codes and Why Do You Need One? - Marc Lyne (an article from 2009, a great overview)
• OMG QR Code Madness - Phil Baumann (great, no-nonsense overview)
• Momentum is building for QR codes - Shel Holtz (recent prediction of trends, optimistic)
• 11 Reasons Why QR Codes Suck - David Wachs (Cons to QR codes)
• 11 Reasons Why QR Codes (Don't) Suck - Simbeck Hampson (Pros of QR codes, counterpoint to Wachs's article)

My LinkedIn QR Code

Where I'd like to focus my energy are on the actual design considerations for whether or not QR codes will help you solve a problem...or if they are an "ooooh shiny" technology innovation.

Let's start with what QR codes do: they are images that you can scan from a QR reader on your phone that launch a webpage that either provides you with information or prompts you to do something. For example, someone could use a QR code on their business card to launch their LinkedIn profile where  you could choose to add them as a contact. Cool, right?

But lets look at the bigger picture. Are the use of QR codes good design?

Audience analysis: you need to have a smartphone for QR codes to be useful. There is all sorts of data available on demographics of who owns smartphones, but let's make some sweeping generalizations that less represented populations of smartphone owners are the young, the old, people with low incomes, and several minority populations. Of those people using smartphones, your audience is further narrowed by those who would actually download a QR code reader app, or have purchased a phone with one already built in. And then finally, your audience would need to know what QR codes are and see the need for using them.

The audience analysis portion of QR codes is important, because many of the potential uses (that are NOT product marketing) I see for QR codes are actually most beneficial to the young, the old, and underserved populations.

Needs analysis: So, in what situations do we need to automatically launch a website?


Yeah, um...not many.

I like the LinkedIn example I mentioned above, because I think it would be more convenient to share contact info digitally than through paper business cards. I also like some healthcare related examples, like having a QR code on prescription bottles that provides all the prescribing information. It would be helpful for food labeling to start including QR codes for nutritional information. I'd love if things that required instructions (IKEA furniture, programming a universal remote, changing the fluids on my car) could launch from my phone whenever I needed them. A lot of this is "just in time" type of information and instruction that would be really beneficial to have at the ready and using a QR code to launch that type of content could be extremely useful. In essence, I'm thinking of QR codes as "job aid launchers" and I think looking at them in that capacity could be a viable and appropriate use.

I also see the opportunity to use QR codes for game design, specifically in the design of alternate reality games (ARGs) and scavenger hunt games. Again, though, the audience analysis is key...people can't play the game if they don't have the technology they need to play.

Unfortunately, what I've been seeing is mostly QR codes being used as promotional content launch points. There's two reasons why I don't think this makes sense...

1. when you scan a QR code and it launches a website, especially for promotion, the likelihood that you are in a position to actually review the content on the website is pretty small. Let's say I'm at a conference...let's say SXSW. And there are QR codes everywhere. Am I going to be walking around with my phone, scanning QR codes and standing there reading about your site? Is that information being saved anywhere for me to review later?(answer = probably not) Wouldn't my time be better spent actually talking to people and looking at the technology? And if I'm passing out QR codes, why not just pass out marketing materials that have the website address on it so that I can take it with me and review it on my computer instead of my phone?

And 2. most QR codes aren't reinforcing your brand. I've seen some customized QR codes, but for the most part, QR codes are black and white 8-bit looking boxes that do nothing to promote your brand or your messaging. If anything, they strip the messaging away, or add an additional step for your potential customers to learn more about you. Why make your customers work harder to learn about what you can do for them?

From a designer's perspective, you want to minimize the work you make people do to get to the content that is most important to them. When you're thinking about QR codes, think about your audience, think about what you're trying to accomplish, think about the actual logistics of how they are used,  and then ask yourself...are QR codes the best solution for the need I'm trying to address or the problem I'm trying to solve?

Augmented Reality Games, Alternate Reality Games, and the Future of Learning

Watch live video from RELATE Live! on Justin.tv

Thank you to Rick Zanotti and Terrence Wing for inviting me to speak today on #elearnchat. You can check out the video here...including our "prep" session at the beginning! 

What IBM Watson means for learning, education, and instructional design

During the NFL Playoffs, I started to see IBM's commercial for Watson. I was interested for two reasons...first, it didn't seem like appropriate placement for the commercial (my sister used to be a media buyer so I peripherally know too much about commercial placement) and secondly, I was having a hard time caring if a computer could answer trivia questions faster than a human.

OF COURSE we've gotten to the point that a computer can beat Ken Jennings at Jeopardy. Isn't that what we've been working towards, since the beginning of computers? Haven't we been trying to get computers to handle sifting through large amounts of data and finding the correct answers at a much faster speed that we humans could do? Haven't we been trying to alleviate our burden of determining complex logic algorithms that lead to a "correct" answer? For questions that have a correct, single solution or, even for questions that clearly have a best answer, we have finally developed a computer that can more quickly and accurately come to that answer than most, if not all, of our brains can handle.

Yay us!

Now what?

The irony in IBM Watson being such a revelation is the juxtaposition with educational trends, specifically an increased emphasis on standardized assessment and testing. Just today in my Twitter stream, I'm seeing tweet after tweet about the US government's multi-billion dollar funding of "Race to the Top" and the emphasis on making our educational system more competitive with other countries on standardized tests. Guess what, everyone? We have actually built computers to do the work that standardized tests test for, better than we are able to do it.

So, what do we value? Do we want to continue to beat our heads against our own technological innovations and try in vain to measure ourselves against systems that will always be more efficient at performing the tasks that they are designed specifically to do? Or should we be thinking about what we, human beings, can do that no computer can? What makes us human? What makes us different from a machine?

We are emotional, creative, intuitive...we can solve complex problems with no clear right answer. We are social and thoughtful and we strive to create meaning where it doesn't currently exist. We are complex and complicated and messy and funny. Yes, we can be logical and systematic and we can memorize and recall our address where we lived in when we were 6 years old (6521 Ralston Rd, btw), but we can't always remember where we put our car keys.

I hope we never create technology that is so perfect in its humanity that we lose our own. For now, we've developed a technology that does something important: answers certain types of questions, faster and more reliably than we can. So let's stop focusing on trying to train our brains to work like IBM's Watson and instead focus on training our brains to handle the types of thinking and work that Watson can't. Let's stop focusing on standardized testing as the measure of educational success and let's focus on how we can get students to solve complex problems. Let's make sure they understand history...not so they can recall dates and names on demand, but so they can understand how the decisions of the past have led us to where we are and we can learn from the lessons of our collective history.

Let's reward risk-taking and innovation and bravery and determination. Let's instill lessons of compassion and responsibility and community and resilience. Let's facilitate communication and empathy and love. Yes, I said it: love. Let's start educating people, young and old, as people...not training them like computers or like cogs in the system. Let's think about education as a way of making us more human, not more like computers.

That, in the end, is what will save us in the Robot Revolution. In the meantime, I call Watson for my team in Trivial Pursuit.

Learning mobsters: #4sqchat

I've been one of the moderators for #lrnchat on Twitter for almost 2 years. Saying that amazes and humbles me...I've met more brilliant people and had the opportunity to learn from so many new friends through the serendipity of social media and my life is forever changed for the better because of the #lrnchat community.

On the other hand, I've been participating in #lrnchat for almost 2 years. And its really been the only Twitter chat I've participated in, besides an occasional #edchat or #hcmchat.

In retrospect, this seems absolutely silly. I've talked about in the past how I learn the most from the non-learning focused conferences I attend: gaming conferences, technology conferences, industry conferences...those are the conferences that typically get my mind whirring and my creativity flowing. So why have I not participated in any of the hundreds of chats you can now find on a regular basis on Twitter?

I don't have a good answer.

But luckily, some of my #lrnchat friends pointed out the obvious. We need to learn in places outside of our own backyard. We need to get out into the world and explore. We need to flashmob other chats!

If you don't know what a flashmob is, check out an example of one that I experienced myself by the Opera Company of Philadelphia here. The basic concept is that as people go on about their normal activities, a group of people come in and perform an organized event...and then everyone goes on about their normal activities. Flashmobs aren't intended to be disruptive...they are intended to entertain and enrich and often, to teach something, to expand people's viewpoints.

Tonight was our first chat flashmob. Our target? #4sqchat which takes place Mondays from 9 - 10 pm est. We didn't really know who all would show up...honestly, I didn't plan on participating. But 9 pm rolled around and I was online and I started to see my #lrnchat friends tweeting with the #4sqchat hashtag and I just couldn't stay away.

I will admit, I'm not an avid user of Foursquare and I have been skeptical about leveraging geolocation services for learning. Tonight, as part of the chat, I learned some things and got some ideas that expanded my viewpoint:

• Foursquare has the ability to post photos to a location. Very cool! Some practical applications of that may be:
• Running a game where people check in and take a picture of themselves or their team completing a task to score "points"
• Documenting a trip by assigning a photo to each check in. There's even a service that allows you to create a memory book based on your check in photos: Memolane 
• Businesses could market their products and services by adding photos to their business location in Foursquare.
• You don't have to check in to post a photo to a location. This could address some people's privacy concerns.
• Foursquare check ins could be set up for different locations within a conference, facilitating the creation of games at conferences and events. Think about checking into sessions, checking in at vendor booths in an expo hall, etc.
• Check ins could be set up in locations at your company to support the creation of a new hire orientation activity.

Want to learn more about Foursquare? Participate in the weekly chat, check out the chat transcript, or check out this local Indianapolis Foursquare blog: 4sqindy or this more general AboutFoursquare blog.

Another cool thing we saw at the end of the chat? Analytics! Check out this data from Tweetreach on the chat and notice some of the #lrnchatter names on the board :)

But the coolest part of participating in #4sqchat? We learned new things, met new people and quite a few members of the #lrnchat community who didn't know about our flashmob plans joined in as well! Oh, the beauty of Twitter...

We don't know where we'll show up next, but be on the lookout for the learning mobsters to crash another chat near you...

A week without social media: what is Harrisburg University learning?

If you haven't cut off social media yourself, you have probably heard about the social media blackout imposed at Harrisburg University this week.

To be honest, I was surprised about the blackout for two reasons. First, I know these guys! I'm serving on advisory boards, presented at both LEEF conferences, and have plans to do more with them in the future. So I know they aren't crazy. And second? They are a technology-focused university. The whole building is wired and designed like a tech-girl's dream. All of their degree programs are technology-related.


This seems like the university least likely to cut their students off from social media.


Knowing the brilliant people who are moving Harrisburg University forward has its advantages when the topic starts trending on Twitter. I decided to reach out to two of my friends to get the scoop on their week off from social media.


Speaking to Charles Palmer (@charlespalmer), Exec. Dir. Center for Advanced Entertainment & Learning Technologies/Assoc. Prof. of Multimedia, I could tell just two days in that there had already been an impact on him personally. "I feel like I'm missing out on conversations," Charles admitted after telling me that he was also imposing the blackout at home. "I miss Twitter, but I'm realizing that I use Facebook as a distraction." 


Andy Petroski (@apetroski), Director of Learning Technologies and Assistant Professor of Learning Technologies, shared this about his experience so far:

For me personally, it’s had a big impact on me sharing out resources to my network.  There have been at least a dozen times over the past 1 ½ days when I would have shared resources via Twitter and was not able to (via the desktop).  Usually, the activity of sharing via Twitter also results in my finding resources from my network as well.  I’ve also received LinkedIn group notifications of resources and discussions that I’ve been unable to review.  Those resources are often valuable and have an impact on my work.  I’ve marked them for later reading (or the evening or next week) for now.

Charles shared some of the students' perspectives as well. The reaction started out as uproar on Friday when they first found out, but has settled into one of two camps: students who are accepting it and students who are figuring out how to circumvent the system. Both of those experiences may be valuable...either from an actively reflective perspective of how technology impacts our lives, or simply from the standpoint that these future technology professionals are gaining valuable experience about working around (or enforcing) network security. Ironically, Harrisburg University's Social Media Summit is this week. I'm sure the blackout will spark much of the conversation there, as it has been all over the world.


I think the big question is, what's the point?


Unplugging from social media may actually help students better assess how these tools can, and should, be used. By removing social media from the equation, students may become consciously aware of how they use these tools to communicate, build relationship, work, and learn. Taking a break might help them realize which tools are actually valuable and why they are valuable. As these students enter organizations, this reflective exercise may help them better understand how organizational dynamics are impacted by social media and help them lead organizations in implementing appropriate tools, processes, and policies to support effective use. 


Of course, Charles admitted, they might not learn much at all. A week isn't a big enough window to change behavior, and they don't have any misconceptions that it will. But Charles mentioned that this initial experiment may lay the foundation for a larger, more comprehensive future experiment where real research can be conducted. 


In speaking with Charles and Andy, I think the real value of this experiment is not what the outcomes are this week. People have become so engrossed in social media as a communication tool that they sometimes neglect other, perhaps more valuable, forms of communication. This week provides a chance to do some comparative analysis. Giving students an opportunity to experience an unplugged existence provides a chance for critical and intentional behavioral reflection on how they are using social media. As learning professionals, we often ask students to critically reflect, but don't always provide the space or environment to facilitate that reflection. Even a week without social media could provide valuable insight into how students gain value, or not, from social media tools.


In the case of Charles and Facebook? It sounds like I'll be seeing less status updates. But I'll be happy to see him and Andy back in my Twitterstream. 

Tandem Learning Innovation Community: 1st event recap

Just a quick post to thank everyone who attended our first official Tandem Learning Innovation Community event. We hosted the event on our new Second Life island and I'd encourage all of you who were unable to make it to stop by any time and take a tour. The island is open and public; we'd be happy to share the space with any member of the TLIC who'd like to run a meeting in SL. Feel free to contact me if you'd like a guided tour or assistance in how to work our browser displays.

I can't thank Earth Primbee (SL name, for those not in-world) enough...he did a fantastic job building the island to suit our needs, and he completed the entire build in just a few days. Amazing. He also served as tech support and transcriptionist during the event. Big kudos on an amazing job and for all of his help!

We had about 15 attendees for our first event, ranging from people in academia, corporate training, consultants and designers/developers. Although we kept the event informal, we spent some time doing introductions and talking about topics we'd like to see discussed in future TLIC events before letting people explore the island. 

One of the topics discussed was what new technologies community members would be interested in learning about through TLIC events. Suggestions included:

• OpenSim
• Unity3D
• Alternate reality games (ARGs)
• Jibe
• Augmented reality
• Geolocation technologies

The consensus was that community members would be more interested in hearing about case studies in future events than in seeing new technology demos. We also discussed what major issues organizations are facing in implementing new technologies. The major issues raised included:

• access to the technologies (firewalls, hardware, etc.)
• interface design issues 
• ease of use

It was great to see our friends in avatar form and meet new community members who provided great feedback and insight. Plans are already underway for our next event and we're looking forward to some additional announcements to the community in the next few weeks. 

In the meantime, we'd love to hear your thoughts on what new technologies you'd like to find out more about and what types of programming for future events would be of interest to you!

Announcing the 1st Tandem Learning Innovation Community event!

We are pleased to announce the first, official Tandem Learning Innovation Community event scheduled for Friday, August 27th, 2010 at 9:00 am SLT/ 12:00 pm EST. We’ll be hosting an open house on our new Second Life island. The official networking event, led by Koreen Olbrish (SL: Nina Sommerfleck), will be an informal discussion of community topics, including:

• New technologies for the TLIC to explore
• Major challenges in technology adoption for the community to address
• TLIC at DevLearn 2010 – call for interested parties to be showcased

Please let us know if you plan to attend by emailing Jedd Gold via linkedin or at jedd.gold@tandem-learning.com. We will be sending out the SLURL the day before the event to everyone who RSVP’s.

If you haven't yet joined the Tandem Learning Innovation Community, you can request to join here.

We are looking forward to seeing you there!