Core Activity 7.2 - Professional Learning Situation v's familarity

A bit late as ever, thanks to John Sumpter for the Frame work questions.

A: Situation / Familiar | Learning Task / Familiar

As a teaching assistant with a degree in International Relations and Security my transition to Instructor for the Navy was relatively simple. In comparison, some of my colleagues had no significant teaching experience and didn't know their subjects either. This task/situation was simple, non threatening and achieved with little angst or issue.

B: Situation / Unfamiliar | Learning Task / Familiar

Learning the fundamentals of Action Based Leadership was simple enough.  Until placed under considerable stress achieved through mental and physical exhaustion and placed on Sheep's Tor on Dartmoor at 3am in freezing conditions with team members coming down with Hypothermia. All of a sudden the fundamentals seemed some what abstract.  This was an unusual learning environment but has since served me well.  I failed the task set.  I learned more through non achievement than I ever would have thought possible.  I was left to 'reflect' on that failure for some time to come and eventually completed the same exercise (though not the same task).  This was a  profound event in my Naval career, learning how to bounce back from failure is a Key part of my job when training the future Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of our armed forces.

C: Situation / Familiar | Learning Task / Unfamiliar

Learning the basics of the Moodle VLE was a significant unfamiliar learning task in an envirnment I understood or knew well.  I am competent with a PC and Office tools, but Moodle was a new task entirely.  I neither understood the capabilities of the tool, its inherent issues or what I was attempting to achieve with it.  In this instance I learnt through exploration and inquiry. Significantly I had no real time pressure, I was undertaking R & D to inform the Navy of possible delivery options for the future.  Had I been aiming to achieve a particular Learning objective I believe that this would not have been so comfortable.

D: Situation / Unfamiliar | Learning Task / Unfamiliar

Some tasks in H808 has been similar to instance D.  Learning to use or create Podcasts to achieve particular learning outcomes has been difficult.  Here the unfamiliar is more about the circumstances and criteria than a physical location, place etc. Instance D isn't comfortable for me, though it has been challenging and hopefully I have learnt the correct learning outcome.

“Where / How would you classify the learning you are doing here and now? What is the nature of the risk involved?”

Where H808 has pushed the boundaries thus far is in that instance D has occurred a number of times.  I have found myself reticent to engage and have found reason to wait and let others take the lead. I often read and then re-read the requirement and see what others have done and think that wasn't my understanding of the task.  But as many are 'old hands' at this I have followed their lead.  

“Now consider Clegg's table”

Reflection and the value of, is changed through time.  For initial reflection I would go with Instance A and B.  But the value of being pushed way outside ones comfort zone may make immediate reflection more difficult, but its use over the longer term has considerable value.  This is particularly if the Unfamiliar, though prolonged exposure becomes familiar and the nuance of that environment can be understood.  Here it can have Reflection and benefit value over the longer term.

Sector diversity and Lofty values?

It is interesting that the ALT values are quite sector related, where as the engineering are quiet lofty ideals.  It would appear to me that as the role of the professional in the sector become more diverse as we see with the e-learning sector, then the values which the professional holds within it become more elevated and abstract.  The wide diversity of the engineering sector requires values which include, welfare and safety, the environment, identification of risks, remaining up to date, not misleading anyone and acting with integrity.  These too could be used by the e-learning professional aspiring to professionalism and indeed may become necessary as the diversification of the sector approaches that of the engineering sector.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that the professional values of the engineer could be used for the e-learning professional, but they couldn't be used visa versa.  Therefore are lofty values of much use or value, or as I'm beginning to believe, the route to professional recognition?

E-learning Prof values in MoD?

Ah would have been helpful to put my own ideas of values down as well!  I however, work in a sector devoid of e-learning understanding and actually delivering e-learning isn't what I do, but I spend a great deal of time espousing the merits of and cajoling and bulling others into hearing me out on the subject.  Therefore my experience of the e-learning professionals values within my field constitute:

1. An infectious enthusiasm for e-learning.

2. A commitment to Lead the discussion and persuade others.

3. To remain abreast of technology and its application and relevant pedagogy.

4. To understand the needs of the customer and deliver against it with confidence.

In the final analysis I much prefer the lofty and generic values of the engineering fraternity as outlined in Bronagh Powers doc.

11 December 2010, 11:40

The E-Learning Professional

An E-learning Professional is someone who develops, implements, evaluates, and administers online education in all fields of learning.  Through their efforts they advance the technical and institutional support for practitioners and encourage the dissemination of online education, its related technologies, necessary skills, and perspectives as a discipline.  They apply educational theories and research to online education and exchange ideas and engage in scholarly debate, promoting a professional discipline based on sound pedagogical theories.

Adapted from the vision statement of the World Association for Online Education (WAOE).

Deborah Judah Post - 15 November 2010, 22:41

This is quite strange!! Deborah's review of the Lit comes to the conclusions that the Kely Activities of a LT are: 

1. Actively seek to keep abreast of developments in learning technology

2. Facilitate access to learning technology expertise and services

3. Liase and collaborate with other units in the university having related interests and objectives

4. Act as consultant, mentor or change agent for other staff

5. Advise and assist with introduction of new technology into learning and teaching programmes.

This is almost my Job description for my secondary tasks at the DCAE.!!

The Envisaged E-Learning Professional Breakdown of DCAE by Current Roles

Below is an adaption of The Research Center for e-Learning Professional ‘5 kinds of e-Learning Professional.  I have broken them down into how I would envisage the departmental responsibility across the existing DCAE according to current function, future functions and level of understanding (and therefore training required). 

Instructional Designer - As Is - The leader of Design and Development phases, design an e-Learning course to deliver the Key Learning Points are required by the course sponsor.  Would require significant awareness training. 

Contents Specialist
 - Technology based Training Unit - Developers of specialist content and media. Manages the Content Management System and is responsible for finding, tagging and utilizing existing resources. Where external assistance for media development is  necessary the TBTU would assist in its specification, and Project/contract management.  Media development unaffected, Project and contracts management would require significant training. 

Instructor and Training Development Officers- As Is - Offer the educational help to implementation phase
 subsequently grades achievement.  Critical component to the system,  considerable training would be required to develop the skills and attitudes for wholesale implementation. 

Mentor
 / Coach - Support and encourage students to learn for themselves and become independent learners.  This role would be led by a specialist team, but coaching skills would be required as part of the wide instructor development program. 

Learning System Producer
 - Implementation
 manager who sets, maintains and manages the e-Learning system.  Responsible for the implementation of and development of standards.  Holds the executive responsibility for Continuous Improvement. 


These are some initial thoughts which I will need to refine over time as I believe we will be implementing Training Transformation on a huge scale in the not to distant future. 

Reference the ‘profession’, ‘elearning’, and ‘elearning professional’

Some thoughts....  I work for the MoD and the most glaringly obvious point to come out of my recent dealings with a world leader (apparently) in training was that they didn't understand our business and were always going to struggle to deliver it more effectively and efficiently than we did, despite the promise of e'learning huge swathes of our courses. The complexity of translating our requirement into their systems and therefore producing content was immense. What it has highlighted in my mind is that when asking questions of whether elearning professionals need to have educational  qualifications I would suggest no, but they do need a background in it. A few of my current cadre of instructional staff have  a Cert Ed but the remainder have a three week train the trainer course behind them.  I am now attempting to justify the upskilling of these instructors in order deliver in a modernised context.  The key point here is that they have Subject Matter Experts in their subject, they have taught / instructed in some way shape or form and now we are going to convert them into 'learning facilitators', but the skills they require are readily lifted from the educational world.  I have previously referred to reflection as a dirty word in the MoD but I value my instructors being able to do it.  Truth is the greatest challenge for us is to get the instructor to give up the all knowing position they currently hold and become more facilitative in their approach.  Instructional Designers need to understand the art of the possible, the content specialists deliver the media and the instructor deploys it as appropriate.  The Mentor role remains unchanged here except for the fact that some of the communications methods are text based rather than face to face.  Lastly, on the Japanese model, the system producer is where I see myself sitting. Putting it (the system) in, and making it grow and develop from a management perspective.