Reflective Practice - An Enterprise Architecture Practice

I've recently been exploring some of the content from MIT OpenCourseWare.

I'm spending extra time watching the video files for Reflective Practice: An Approach for Expanding Your Learning Frontiers (11.965). My initial assumption was that it was learning material for improving our reflective learning skills, but it provides useful information for facilitating reflective learning.

Other Enterprise Architects might find the information helpful, particularly those interested in breaking down the walls of the ivory tower. The class provides some helpful insights and methodologies to help us interact with our constituencies. In short, people learn better when reflecting on the results of their own mistakes, not from the mistakes of others. This is deep anti-ivory-tower mojo.

I originally intended to include some examples to illustrate how the material translates to EA. Out of town visitors, however, are taking priority. Instead, I challenge EA practitioners to watch the first two sessions with an eye to analogs in their daily work. You might just find yourself making the time to watch the other sessions.

Unleash Your Lectures

Bob Warfield posted an interesting article entitled Universities Should Podcast Every Class.

In the article, Bob suggests the possibility of installing video equipment in every lecture hall, tying into class schedules, and posting the content for access by students.

For my tastes, I wish we had more efforts along the lines of the work being done by Jeff Curto.

Jeff's History of Photography podcast is an excellent example of what is possible with a very modest amount of technology. I highly recommend his lectures to anyone with a passion for photography. Those interested might also want to read Globalizing Education One Podcast at a Time, in which Jeff outlines how he creates the podcasts.

We are most definitely beyond the point where technology is the primary hindrance.

Informal or Personal Learning?

Tim Hand considers the topic of informal learning vs. personal learning in Re-form(al) learning. Tim questions the use of the term 'personal learning', as it seems to be double speak in the context of learning. He suggests that 'informal learning' might be more useful.

I've been entertaining similar thoughts, but have come to a different conclusion.

I'm not particularly pleased with either term. Both seem to carry the implication of an unstructured or unfocused learning effort.

I've been wondering whether 'self-motivated learning' is a more appropriate term. I'm not completely sold, but it seems to capture the dynamic without leading the assumptive mind astray.

I'm interested in opinions others might have on the topic.

Write a module - then teach them how to use it

Stephen Downes posted a blurb on eLML.

This looks interesting. It's an XML framework for creating e-learning content in Eclipse. It supports a interesting array of output formats (e.g. xhtml, PDF, ODF, IMS, and SCORM).

It's intriguing to imagine a certain class of subject matter experts using it to provide e-learning content to unleash the teacher in us all.

Is it difficult to imagine documentation as educational material, perhaps turning it into SCORM packages for an LMS?

I'm not sure I like the tight integration with Eclipse, but some readers might consider that a feature.

In case you're interested, the developer have plans for a WYSIWYG web interface in late 2007¹.

1. /me checks watch

Mmm... Apples...

In Newsletters that teach, Matt Linderman points out a good example of how to help users kick ass.

Providing factual information on a software feature is fine, but what if it's combined with a broader tip that helps the user apply the feature to their advantage.

This idea can be extended beyond simple tips and tricks. The idea is simple - provide the basic information and augment it with guidance on potential applications of the information.

Does our documentation provide guidance on when (or when not) to use a feature?

When we are asked to provide information on a topic, do we take the extra step to provide perspective to allow others to reapply the information to other situations?

Does our information help user become better users?

Feeding the Foragers

Continuing my contemplation of ways to improve the effectiveness of PLEs, I noticed an article from Clark Quinn, Formal, informal, and information foraging.

In addition to providing several interesting links, he reminds us of the role information architecture can play in this age of foraging. If there is play for PLEs as an application I suspect it will come in the form of an interface that restructures the data to increase its absorption rate.

Clark also has an interesting article, Filling the informal gap, which asks whether there is an important middle ground between formal and informal learning. Perhaps this is the sweet spot for subject matter experts and thought leaders to contribute learning material.

On a mildly related topic, it looks like Mike Kavis has made interesting progress towards turning Enterprise Architecture into a collaborative endeavor. I hope he provides future updates on his efforts.

My PLE ate your Web2.0

Tom Haskins posted in interesting article regarding Personal Learning Environments, growing changing learning creating: The next killer app?

The PLE is indeed already here. It is all around us.

I doubt most people view it as an explicit learning platform, but perhaps that is its most powerful feature.

My recent thoughts on PLEs have centered around what can be done to improve their effectiveness as a learning platform.

What improvements can educators bring if they leave the testing and tracking behind?

Is learning object metadata a useful addition to "web2.0"?

Is it better to avoid viewing the PLE as a learning platform? Is its value contingent on its current zen-like state?

Developing E-Learning Content Developers

A posting from Clark Quinn points to an interesting work from Clive Shepard, The 30-minute masters. Clive is developing "a curriculum to train subject-matter experts in the design of rapid e-learning materials for use in the workplace".

The session design is directly applicable to environments where a training organization needs or wants to enlist subject matter experts in the creation of online training material. The scripts are still under development, but seem sufficiently complete for others to adopt to their needs.

It's also intriguing to ponder its use as a tool for Architects as Educators.

The 30-minute model makes it easy to insinuate into a variety of situations. For example, it seems a good fit for an in-house Lunch & Learn session. One could also shanghai a meeting with an "unplanned learning session".

For what it's worth, Clive's work seems an ideal candidate for SlideShare. Perhaps he can inject a call to action for contributions. It would be interesting to see different interpretations of the work.

The Teacher in us All

PLEs are what?, from Tim Hand, has a nice set of reminders regarding the Personal Learning Environment (PLE) space.

Among other things, Tim reminds us that a PLE is a concept rather than an application. It is a way to frame the vast array of information gathering, transforming, and transmitting tools into a framework for learning and growing. He also ponders whether discussions surrounding PLEs will fade, at least under the term 'PLE'. Viewing our information tools as a platform for learning can hardly be a bad thing, so one would hope the PLE concept continues to evolve.

To evolve the PLE concept, it seems worthwhile to consider a couple possibilities.

The first is the possibility that the big idea behind PLE is not that one can co-opt communications and social interaction tools as education tools. Rather, it might be better to concentrate on the idea that education tools can be crafted to take advantage of communication and social interaction tools. Put another way, there is a difference (however intertwined) between the transport mechanism and the content.

Another possibility is to extend the focus of the concept beyond learning. Rather than a personal learning environment, it seems more appropriate to focus on a personal education environment. While considerable focus is placed on ideas for delivering content to learners and on techniques for using our environment as a learning experience, the discussions often seem to lack a focus on ideas and tools for injecting material to be learned.

This leads me to another, potentially more controversial, possibility. If the PLE concept personifies the democratization of learning, is it equally fair to extend to concept to teaching?

Is it heretical to want SCORM packages (or their future equivalent) created by citizens delivering their own learning content? Is it insane to imagine a Flickr/YouYube/Blogger for learning content?

We discuss the learner in us all. Are we ready to discuss the teacher in us all?

Architecture tweets? arch.icio.us? ArchMoodle?

Gardner Campbell provides an intriguing vision for digital education in The Future of Online Education. It is nicely summarized in the following quote.

"... learners will arrange their own “cognitive apprenticeships” by means of RSS feeds of content generated by a personal suite of trusted and inspiring experts, and they will build their reputations through certifications, testimonials, and a body of their own online work that generates persistent, sophisticated commentary."

If this is indeed a picture of the future, it seems Architects have a golden opportunity ahead - an opportunity both in the positive sense of the word and in the euphemistic MBA sense of the word.

In the positive sense, we have the opportunity to directly participate in the education and training stream, articulating our models and strategies as educational material. We can capitalize on the viral properties of networks to spread key concepts, allowing us to focus on delivery to key influencers. We can clarify misunderstandings by directly participating in the conversations spawned when clarifications are needed.

In the euphemistic sense, we have an opportunity to improve our ability to connect directly to problems and conversation streams. Architects are prone to the ivory tower syndrome. We get embroiled in frameworks and strategies, often lagging in our ability to connect theories to practices. We must continually check ourselves to avoid the darker tendencies of the job.

James Governor recently posted Some Enterprisey Use Cases for Twitter. He references a blog posting that enumerates uses from the Marketing community. He then goes on to describe how he uses it as a research tool with a direct connection to practitioners. James McGovern chimes in from a slightly different angle with Enterprise Architecture: When was the last time you had a meaningful conversation?, in which he comments on the value of direct conversations.

How many Architects use twitter to tap into their network? How many use del.icio.us as a way to pass along interesting web sites to their constituents? Are we using these tools to their full potential, or is this the PC to our Mainframe?

Do we find ourselves using 'skip-level' influence to overcome obstacles to adoption? If so, are there communication mediums we could be using to reach deeper into organizations, touching a wider range of alpha geeks/influencers? Would our effectiveness as leaders improve if we were capitalizing on those mediums?

Should we be articulating some of our ideas in a SCORM-compatible format and distributing them as enclosure links via RSS pipes?

Does anyone else see the huge potential for Architects to participate in "personal suites of trusted and inspiring experts"?

The Gen-Y Folks Will Know What To Do With It - Not

Yet Another Technology Adoption Myth:

Our "digital natives" are immersed in technology and therefore predisposed to efficiently adopt all-digital systems and processes.

Put another way, we seem to be on the verge of having a student/user/population base that no longer needs remedial coaxing to overcome technology angst. We will no longer need to exhort the benefits of adopting modern technologies. Its value proposition will be a foregone conclusion by virtue of the fact that it's already in wide-scale use. Our problem will have been distilled down to a simple plumbing exercise.

While the basic concept seems reasonable, it seems to be missing a critical component - empirical evidence.

Are we, in fact, on the verge of a population comfortable with technology? Let's check with the students.

I stumbled upon a wonderfully simple approach one Australian academic used to assess the degree to which her students were ready to adopt online technologies for learning.

In How Digitally-Native are Gen-Y?, Kate Foy relays the results of an informal survey she did with one of her classes. The article also references another post where she discusses online technology angst. Interested readers should definitely take a look.

Here are a small number of takeaways:

• Advanced features like mobile web access are becoming commonplace but often go unused due to cost. The mLearning crowd will probably need to lean on podcasts a bit longer if they want any appreciable market in the short term.
  
• Don't assume the Gen-Y folks 'live' on the net. This is a feature.
• We're still not to the point where lack of paper won't prompt anxiety. This is probably a feature as well.
  

None of these should too surprising...