3 Responses

1. Interesting article Liv; just
   Interesting article Liv; just a couple of points for me. In the modern L & D age; education or access to learning should be available on demand as and when people need it. That’s the way people access new knowledge in their own lives and that’s the future for L & D too; in my opinion.This means moving away from a central ‘expert’ who controls how and when something is delivered.
   I wonder, therefore, how this affects presentations which are often controlled by a central person and not necessarily available on demand; unless it is videoed but that possibly takes away the interactivity.
   The other thing about e-learning (scorm-based at least), is that it isn’t intuitive enough. In other words if you need to get to a specific point; you often have to sit through most of a lesson before getting to the point you are actually interested in. So that could be quite frustrating if you have 10 minutes to learn about something but have to sit through 8 mins of stuff that’s not relevant.
   In terms of learning for the future, I think access to learning on demand that is intuitive will really engage people. Thoughts please?

2. Clive, thanks for your reply!
   Clive, thanks for your reply! You raise some really interesting points about e-learning. And I could talk about Glisser until the cows come home, I won’t however. Yet I imagine they find the same problems, they can run seperate streams and the presenter doesn’t necessarily have to be there for the presentations to be accessed, but you’re right about the level of interactivity losing out if the presenter is not well- present.
   Why do you want to move away from a central expert? Surely these would be the people who write the books or e-journals etc. that can be found online. Or are you referring to a central person who teaches and points at things whilst expecting you to keep up? Surely that would be the fault of the presenter and not the software, but I understand and agree with the need for a somewhat central hub of knowledge that can be accessed at ones own leisure and time.
   Whilst I think something like Glisser (sorry again) can be limited due to the lack of a presenter. I think that it will be extremely successful in a classroom environment be it secondary school or university- or both.Where learners have access to devices they use under the table anyway, and the knowledge can be on their phones, perhaps encouraging even the most reluctant learner to at least take something in, perhaps not.
   However Clive, if I were to ask you your opinion in a truly teaching focused training- with a central expert scenario- how do you see the interactive presentations working, if at all?

3. Hi Liv, re the central expert
   Hi Liv, re the central expert and as per my original comment; it’s not about the expert’s knowledge but more about the expert controlling when and how learners access content. In a modern age learning content has to be available on-demand; as and when the learner needs it, (not only when the expert is available to deliver it). That means that the learner is more in control. With presentations (no matter how interactive) you are still relying on a central expert ‘delivering’ and thus being in control of the experience.
   Yes, in a ‘lecture’ situation I can see interactive presentations being more engaging than power point say but I still think the future is something where the learner facilitates their own learning experience.