The End?

I turned in my last assignment for my last class for my MA program last week. Since then, I've been (obsessively) checking the online gradebook.

As stated in a previous post, I began grad school 2 years ago, in August 2006. At the time, I thought it would be cool to: A - finish the program, and B - keep a perfect GPA. I did well in high school and I did well with my undergrad. But I wasn't perfect. I got a few B's and a C here and there (doggone Geology class, anyway!) but overall, I did well.

For some reason, I decided to give myself this crazy goal of successfully completing my MA program with a 4.0 I don't know why. I just thought it would be a good goal to reach for.

I just checked my grades for that final project.

I can’t believe I’m done. I can’t believe 2 years of late nights and almost no weekends is actually, finally, successfully completed. Not just over, but successfully completed. At first I thought having a goal of achieving a 4.0 for this program was a little bit of a stretch. Then I thought it was outright crazy. Then I thought it was do-able, then I thought it didn’t *really* matter, as long as I finished. Then I thought I would cry if I didn’t do it.

Then I cried when I did.

I'm still in absorbing mode. I'll reflect later!

Peru trip!

Holy smokes, we bought our plane tickets!!!

We're flying to Lima, then to Cusco. We'll stay there 2 nights to acclimatize, then begin our 4-day Inca Trail trek in late August, to celebrate two graduations. Hubby finished his BA and I'll finish my MA.

We gotta start training!!! The 4 day Inca Trail hike is "only" 26 miles. Cusco is at about 11,000 ft, whereas Machu Picchu is at 8,040 ft. There are mountains between there. The highest point of the trail is over 13,000 ft. Criminy.

Interestingly, training for Peru will also help my project for my Action Research class this semester. It's all about getting in shape.

I figure if I can train the for 3-Day in the summer (with hubby's help), then we can train for Machu Picchu in the spring and summer. August is pretty much the grossest month here, so we should be well conditioned by then. We're planning to head up in altitude as much as possible and just hike as much as possible between now and then. We'll start close to home and then go farther up in elevation as the temperatures rise for the year.

I did the stairmaster at the gym for 20 straight minutes today without passing out - or realizing I'd gone that long. I thought I set the timer for 10 minutes, but the next time I looked down, the readout said 20 minutes. That's exciting.

Holy COW we're excited!!!

Technology is Worth It

For one of my classes, we had a group project to defend the position that it is worth it to invest in technology for training and education purposes. Our position paper is below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Technology is Worth the Investment for Training and Education Programs

Team Giada
M. Finch, C. Rodriguez, J. Tipton
Learning Processes Applied to Instructional Technology
IT 6740 – Spring 2008

Technology is Worth the Investment

Our position is that technology is worth the investment for training and educational programs, to foster learning processes. Technology motivates students to be involved in planning and constructing their own learning; accommodates diverse learning styles, and increases social interaction. Opponents to this idea believe that the cost of technology will be higher than the benefits and that learning methods, such as critical thinking, will be ignored by technology. Currently, education is in a state of technological transition where students require both old and new skills in order to compete in the 21st century economy. Students achieve stellar results when technology drives learning processes.

Student Involvement

Students are motivated to be involved in planning their own education (Knowles, 1975). Students attending the Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage Summit in February 2008 indicated that they have a higher motivation to be involved in planning their own education using technology (Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage, 2008). The purpose of the Youth Summit was to increase students’ exposure to and appreciation of Colorado history. The youth’s responsibility was to recommend methods for other youth to learn about history. After touring four sites, they recommended the following:

1. Webcasts of information prior to, and interactive materials while walking on the Heritage Trail and the State Historical Museum. They wanted to be actively engaged in learning.


2. Podcasts of stories from past residents of the Governor’s Mansion and of scandals on the Heritage Trail. They wanted relevant stories delivered through technology.


3. Scale models of landmarks exhibited in the State Historical Museum, followed by live tours. They sought physical models, virtual tours, and then live exploration of the landmarks (Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage, 2008).

Without naming them, youth were asking for these learning processes:

1. Exploration and planning instruction – principles in Andragogy, Constructivist, and Experiential Learning theories.


2. Engaging interaction, a principle in Experiential Learning and Genetic Epistemology theories.


3. Multiple representations of content, a principle in Cognitive Flexibility theory.


4. Relevant experiences, a principle in Andragogy, Cognitive Flexibility, Experiential Learning, and Situated Learning theories (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Bruner, 1990; Bybee & Sund, 1982; Collins & Duguid, 1989; Knowles, 1975; Rogers 7 Freiberg, 1994; Spiro, Feltovitch & Coulson 1992).

Furthermore, if students not only plan instruction, but also develop it, they can learn more. When students create a podcast, they start with a challenge – what to create and how to create it. Their task-oriented, enterprise orientation fosters meaningful learning (Smith, 1998). Students use several learning processes to meet the challenge: First, they use problem solving and exploration to select from different recording methods. Next, they use collaboration with others, the important social aspect of learning (Smith,1998) to develop the content. Finally, they use critical thinking to edit and publish the podcast. By moving from receivers of information to creators, students use higher order processes. All these learning processes are part of Cognitive Flexibility theory (Spiro et al., 1992).

Diverse Learning Styles

People learn in different ways. There are a multitude of methods to categorize learners, such as Myers-Briggs and Learning Orientation. Each model shows preferences and the best ways to teach them. All models point to respecting diversity, a key principle of the Seven Principles of Good Teaching Practice (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1987). The most effective teaching approaches offer multiple representation of content, a key principle of learning in Cognitive Flexibility theory (Spiro, et al., 1992).

The overarching solution to diverse orientations is to offer diverse approaches. At best, the traditional class can vary approaches, but not simultaneously. Then, learners will prefer and be successful some of the time and will have to conform to a secondary method other times. In contrast, technology can provide parallel approaches to the same objectives, where learners can select the method that is most comfortable to them and offers them the greatest success.

Martinez (2002) describes how technology supports different learning orientations, including transforming, performing, conforming, and resistant learners. Technology provides opportunities for transforming learners who “place great importance on self-managed learning” (p. 107) to explore on their own and who are hampered by traditional, single direction methods. Interactive lessons and collaborative work are well-suited for performing learners, “skilled online learners who are typically self-directed in areas that they value” (p. 108). Well-structured webpages, precise instructions, and frequent feedback helps conforming learners, who need support from environment and social relationships. The fourth type, resistant learners, will gravitate to individual exploration, available through technology’s variety.

Increase Social Interaction

Student/student interaction and student/teacher interaction are key social principles for good practice (Brown et al, 1989; Chickering & Gamson,1987; Smith, 1992; Trinity College).

Technology provides a major advantage in student/student interaction. Electronic discussions, electronic document exchange, and email can help students interact with others by connecting:

1. Groups of students who are geographically close but socially distant.


2. Groups who are geographically distant.


3. Students who have difficulty attending a traditional class, such as disabled people, who can learn from a physically-supportive home office and may use software that improves communication, such as voice recognition (J. Tipton, personal communication, February 11, 2008).


4. People with conflicting time schedules. Asynchronous technology allows participation at times that accommodate each person’s schedule. Essentially, class operates 24/7.


5. Shy and aggressive people. Each must contribute equally to electronic discussions.

Technology also increases student/teacher interaction. Students get to know teachers through video portraits. Contact extends beyond traditional class time and office hours through email and electronic chats. Furthermore, the style of the interaction can improve. When technology is the source of information, the teacher's role shifts from knowledge dispenser to coach, mentor, and collaborator in the learning adventure. Teachers then contribute in the best human way to support learning (WestEd Policy Brief, 2002).

Counter-Argument: Does the Cost of Technology Equal its Benefits?

Educators agree that children should learn how to use a computer but disagree that computers are increasing higher achievement in core subjects. Lowell Monke (2004) suggests that the relationship between technology and learning is with technology, test scores are higher but the interaction between technology and the values learned in school are not addressed. If the fundamental priorities are not addressed, is technology worth its cost in the classroom?

Simulations on the computer cannot be compared to first-hand experiences of emotions and associations (Monke, 2004). Monke goes on to say, “…there is a huge qualitative difference between learning about something, […] and learning from something…” Learners need a concrete experience to draw from when they are trying to make associations with abstract information. Their participation is essential in making meaning out of their experience with objects, people, nature, and community. The learners’ intellect develops as a matter of interacting with the world around them (Ginn, 2008). If the technological classroom does not allow students to develop their intellectual creativity and personal growth, they might have a harder time competing in the global economy.

Neil Conan in an NPR interview with Todd Oppenheimer states “since 1990, the promise of better education with computers cost 70 billion dollars” (National Public Radio, 2004). Does the cost of technology equal its benefits? How are instructors prepared to use technology? The cost to stay-up-to-date with changing technology is having a major impact on schools. A 2004 case study was completed by the Consortium for School Networking for the Virginia District Public Schools to determine a cost estimate to implement technology in the district of 166,000 students. The total district cost was $233,059,569 or $3,255 per client computer. The estimates do not include costs for creating and maintaining the online campus and ongoing support, training, and technology updates (Consortium for School Networking, 2004). Instructors and vital classes such as art and music are being cut in order to make room for technology.

Technology should be viewed as a tool, not as the end to itself. Do students see technology as a form of entertainment or as a learning tool? Students should be learning critical thinking skills and how to solve problems instead of learning how to maintain a computer if they are going to be able to compete in the world.

Technology is cost-effective when it is used correctly for students to get basic skills. There is no turning back to a previous century or ignoring that technology is prevalent in other aspects of life. Teachers and trainers need education on the most efficient way of delivering lessons using technology.

Technology in Transition

"Our concept of literacy has been based on the assumption that print is the primary carrier of information in our culture and that the most important skills are those that enable students to understand and express themselves in text. The new definition of literacy is based on a different assumption: that digital technology is rapidly becoming a primary carrier of information and that the broader means of expression this technology makes possible are now critical for education. Text literacy is necessary and valuable, but no longer sufficient" (Meyer & Rose, 1998).

In the 21st century we live in a knowledge economy. Data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics in 1993 states 35% of public schools in the United States had Internet access and ten years later, that percentage increased to 99.5% (NCES, 2005). The data collected does not reflect combined elementary/secondary schools because of the small sample size, schools with missing data, and schools with free or reduced price lunch participation.

The 21st century is defined by technical change and social challenge, which makes for a confusing time for teachers and students. In the global economy students will have to combine old and new skills. Technology offers new teaching tools that are constantly changing and helps us accomplish things. Technology changes the way we do things.

Teachers will have to change how they use technology to teach, based on the understanding of how people learn.

“Research has established certain basic facts about the way our brains function that remain important no matter what is being taught or what new technologies become available to help teach it:

• Learning is a complex activity cooperatively carried out by systems in the brain that recognize patterns, that develop and exercise skills, and that motivate and organize action.


• Learning a skill requires effort and practice, and exercising a skill does not.


• Every individual learns differently from every other, bringing unique
  preferences and capabilities to the process” (Meyer & Rose, 1998).”

Because technology is causing an educational paradigm, we must adapt our teaching to the current culture while honoring time-tested learning processes. To prepare our learners to thrive in the 21st century global economy, we must help them become proficient in both old and new skills.

Conclusion

In examining the benefits of technology and the counter-arguments about technology’s cost in educational and training environments, we conclude the learning outcomes far outweigh the financial cost. In addition, we conclude technology enables learners to increase their social interaction by breaking down geographic, social, and physical boundaries; that technology allows us greater access to address diverse learning styles; and students are better able to be involved in the planning and constructing of their instruction with the use of technology. Technology is not a merely another cost, is it an essential investment in learning.

References

• Alliance for Childhood. (2000, September 12). Alliance for Childhood. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Alliance for Childhood, What We are Doing and Who We Are: http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/computers/computers_articles_call_for_action.htm


• Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, S. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.


• Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  Bybee, R.W. & Sund, R.B. (1982). Piaget for Educators (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.


• Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. The American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, March, 1987. Retrieved February 9, 2008 from http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/


• Colorado’s Youth Promote Heritage (2008, February). Presentation to Colorado Preservation Conference, Denver, Colorado.


• Consortium for School Networking. (2004, March). Virginia District Case Study. Retrieved February 12, 2008, from CoSN: Consortium for School Networking: http://www.classroomtco.org/2004_case_studies/virginia.pdf


• Ginn, W. Y. (2008). Jean Piaget - Intellectual Development. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Piaget: http://www.sk.com.br/sk-piage.html


• Knowles, M. (1975). Self-Directed Learning. Chicago: Follet.


• Martinez, M.(2002). Audience Analysis and Instructional System Design for Successful Online Learning and Performance. In J.Woods & J. Cortado (Ed.), ASTD Training and Performance Yearbook (pp. 104-114). New York: McGraw-Hill.


• McCormick, P. Dealing with Learner Resistance to Technology-Delivered Training. In Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, Winter 01, 33-38.


• Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (1998). CAST: Chapter 5: Technology, Teaching, and Literacies Old and New. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from CAST Transforming education Through Universal Design for Learning: http://www.cast.org/publications/books/ltr/chapter5.html


• Monke, L. (2004). Forum: The Human Touch. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from Hoover Institution: http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/3259156.html


• National Public Radio. (2004, January 26). The Flickering Mind. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1617851


• NCES. (2005, Oct). Public Schools and instructional rooms with access to the Internet, by selected school characteristics: 1994 to 2003. Retrieved Feb 15, 2008, from Digest of Education Statistics: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d04/tables/dt04_424.asp?referrer=report


• Rogers, C.R. & Freiberg, H.J. (1994). Freedom to Learn (3rd ed). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Macmillan.


• Smith, Frank (1998). The Book of Learning and Forgetting. New York: Teachers College Press.


• Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.


• Trinity College, Why Use Instructional Technology? Retrieved February 7, 2008 from http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/cc/documentation/fachbk/primer/2primer.html


• WestEd Policy Brief. (2002, August). Retrieved February 9, 2008, from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/po-02-01.pdf

The Book of Learning and Forgetting

Note, I started this blog back on January 31 and somehow, just never published it. Oops.


It's a brand new semester and one of the classes I'm taking is Learning Policies in Information and Learning Technologies (ILT). One of the required books for the class is The Book of Learning and Forgetting by Frank Smith.

The author discusses two educational trains of thought - the classic view and the official view.

In a nutshell, the classic view says that learning is easy. We do it all the time without even trying. Kids learn to roll over, crawl, walk, talk, cry, get Mom or Dad's attention, etc ... without trying. We join "clubs" and that's how we learn. You learn about music from other people who are interested in/good at music. You learn about history from others who are interested in/good at history. We learn from those we most identify ourselves with. Think of the person who knows every piece of trivia there is to know about his/her favorite sports team. That's classic learning.

The official view of learning is that it's hard work. We have to fight to learn anything, it's all about memorization, we have to take tests to measure our learning, and we forget almost everything as soon as the test is done.

By the way, according to this book, the official view of learning was modeled after the Prussian Army in the early 1900s. This book says official learning isn't effective, but no one wants to admit it.

One story he tells is that a student gets a poor grade on a test. The teacher says "you didn't learn very much did you?" But on the contrary, the student learned a lot. S/he learned to recognize that look of disappointment or distaste on the teacher's face. S/he learned the feeling one gets in the pit of their stomach when they're told they've done something wrong. And the student learns - again - that learning is hard.

Smith doesn't believe these are the lessons we want to teach our children, or ourselves. It's only a 100 pg book; those of you in education might especially find it interesting and useful. I did!

eLearning guru follow-up

"Hi, I'm Lisa with Allen Interactions," she says, offering her hand.

"Margi," I say, returning the shake. "Nice to meet you."

"Do you have a blog?"

I'm not prepared for this question. "Why do you ask?"

Lisa then tells me she received an email while she was traveling to Denver. It notified her of my previous blog detailing my excitement about meeting Michael Allen. I'm embarrassed, and vow to be sure to read through my blog and delete anything that's overly frivolous. *ahem*

I'm floored, really, that my little blog caught the attention of folks at Allen Interactions and of Dr. Allen himself. Apparently, they have something that searches for keywords, like Allen Interactions and Michael Allen. I wonder how their search is doing now that those keywords appear multiple times in this posting? :-)

It's now time to get started and we begin by going around the room briefly introducing ourselves. I am again inspired and humbled by the company I keep. My colleagues at Schwab are a pretty impressive group of people. I'm trying to decide what to say when it's my turn.

"My name is Margi and my introduction to eLearning began with your book," as I angle myself to look at Dr. Allen in the back of the room. He smiles. Several people smile and nod. "I have been in training for about 10 years; most of that as a facilitator. I came to Schwab as an instructional designer about a year ago."

Whew! Other people introduce themselves and I hear years of experience in the field in the 8-20 year range. I realize again how new I am to this field and how much more I have to learn. Dr. Allen introduces himself and says something about the late 60s being his entry into the field. Wow. Again, I'm humbled and impressed.

Our next item on the agenda was to review the very cool piece of eLearning Allen Interactions partnered with Schwab to create. To oversimplify, it is a tool that allows learners to practice a phone call with a client. However, it's cooler than just that. In a classroom setting, an instructor can mimic a client as much as possible, but both the instructor and learner know that it's not really a client they're talking to. This tool is totally online; learners have headsets and microphones. When they click a button, they answer the phone as they realistically would on the job. The client then responds. And so the conversation goes.

What's also nice about this tool is that the clients aren't always necessarily nice. In a classroom setting, an instructor isn't likely to be "too hard" on a learner. We don't want to make people feel badly or embarrassed. Each client in this tool, however, gets frustrated, annoyed, irritated. I'm pretty impressed with it.

Next, the moment most of us have been waiting for - our director introduces Dr. Allen. It's a very gracious and complimentary introduction, to which Dr. Allen replies "Oh, that's great. I can't wait to hear what I have to say!"

Note: I took notes throughout the session, and I think I captured most of it. However, if you were there and catch an inaccuracy in my account, please let me know so I can correct it. Or, if you have further information to clarify some things, like Dr. Allen's background, etc ... I'd appreciate those comments as well.

Dr. Allen strikes me as a genuine person. I generally think of experts as “stuffy” or above the rest of us. But Dr. Allen strikes me as affable, soft spoken, and confident (not to mention a positive presence in the room). He says he's thrilled to be here, and I wonder if he says that all the time. My guess is if he didn't mean it, he just wouldn't say anything at all about it.

He says he has always had a passion for creating great learning experiences. This isn't about creating training with all the latest tools. Sure, the latest tools are certainly helpful in this goal, but the real message behind everything is about creating a great learning experience.

Dr. Allen points to the plethora of terrible eLearning that's out there. He says it's almost a little embarrassing to admit he's in the field of eLearning simply because of the terrible things people are putting out there and calling eLearning. Similarly, I have had to explain, and almost justify, my interest in this area for the past year. There are far too many examples of someone plopping a boring text-only (or worse, over-animated) PowerPoint presentation on the Web and calling it eLearning. Ew.

Dr. Allen's schooling began designing control systems. He's always been interested in fun gadgets with buttons and things that make life - and learning - interesting. He went on to study philosophy and psychology. I'm impressed, but I'm sure he'd shrug it off if I said that directly to him. He doesn't strike me as the kind of person to think his degrees are impressive.

He talks about computers and computers used for learning: they can be used for both good and bad things. But really, they're about "amplifying our humanity." In a classroom, a facilitator teaches, delivers, facilitates. It can go well or not. At the end of the day, it simply went. Yes, you can learn and improve next time, but that class you just delivered is over.

With eLearning, it's an iterative process. We create eLearning. The first time out, maybe it's terrible. Hopefully, that's our testing phase. As we continue to improve that piece of eLearning, it gets better and better. So by the time it's all said and done, it's fantastic! Well, at least that's the goal most of the time.

We talk a bit about Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and Instructional Designers (IDs) and what "sets them apart." When creating training, SMEs are most focused on the content. IDs are most focused on the experience. Or at least, that's how it should be for IDs.

Dr. Allen says he doesn't believe Instructional Design for eLearning is hard. Unless you have training in classical instructional design, or if you have experience as a student in training/education designed with classical ID processes. By the way, I'm pretty sure that's just about everyone.

He suggested instructional designers should ask themselves "How would I like to learn?" and stop focusing on "models" we think we're supposed to follow. "How would I become confident with this material; how would I become engaged with this material?" These questions should be an ID's guide when creating new material.

Dr. Allen then opens the session up to questions and someone asks what's next in the field of eLearning.

His answer is pretty much the rest of our session and I take lots of scribbled notes. He says the next thing in training/education is change management. It's a focus on performance. He points out that companies and employers don't really care what their people know. Employers care what their employees do. When employee performance increases, so does a company's bottom line. Duh :-) Those of us who have been in training and have ever had to justify our presence to management know this fact.

As professionals in the training field, it is our job to help people realize their potential faster than they would have without our help. This reminds me of my days teaching software programs. I often told my students that the program we were covering that day wasn't necessarily hard to learn or use, and that I certainly wasn't any smarter than they were. My job as an instructor in that situation was to show them things about the program that they're smart enough to figure out on their own, but didn't have time to mess with. It's simply faster for an instructor to at least introduce some basic concepts about a program to give learners a more solid foundation so they can start teaching themselves the rest of what they need to know.

Dr. Allen shows us a pretty cool graphic, and if I can get a copy of it, I will post it here.

Classic instructional design says that learners go through some sort of instructional module(s) and as a result, their behavior and performance is expected to change. Sounds easy enough, right?

The real world says there are a million factors that come into play. Someone coming into a training program has prior successes and failures. Maybe not with this material, but in some training capacity. They have their own thoughts and ideas and attitudes that shape how they even "show up" for training.

During training itself, people have all kinds of things on their minds. Personal or professional, it doesn't matter. The fact is, people have other things going on in their lives in addition to any training they attend. Training success is increased by a learner simply stating - intending - what they will learn. So the next time you are in a training class and the instructor asks why you signed up for the class, give it some real thought!

One statistic Dr. Allen quoted is that informal learning events account for 80% of business learning. At first that surprised me, but then it made a lot of sense.

For those of us who have been in corporate training (I'm pulling from pre-Schwab experiences for examples here), there seems to almost always be some sort of disconnect between management and training. For some reason, there is animosity between those groups. When a new hire comes out of training s/he is immediately given a list of "oh, we don't do it that way." Worse, the comments turn into things like, "oh, the trainer's never DONE the job. Don't listen to him/her. Let me tell you how it is."

Then there are well-intentioned coworkers. "Oh, here's a shortcut I learned." And it's wrong, and either no one knows, or notices or they don't care. And then the managers continue to say training doesn't work because this new hire is continually doing X task incorrectly. (I can almost hear colleagues groaning and see heads nodding in agreement. We've all been there.)

After the instructional event, there are performance expectations, which come from supervisors and coworkers. There are rewards (or not), there are job aids (or not). This is a lot to process; no wonder new hires are always nervous taking that first call, or performing that task the first time on their own.

Dr. Allen cites the work of James Prochaska in discussing how people change behaviors. And isn't that what training is really about? Changing behaviors, learning new ones, etc. People don't change until they go through a process. And the first step in the process is articulate the change they want to make. At this point, Dr. Allen has ceased using the word 'training.' He's talking about performance and training is simply performance maximization.

I have a few more scribbled notes from our session, but I can't read them. I hope I'm not missing something really important!!

After our session, Lisa tells me she'd like to introduce me to Dr. Allen and walks me over. He's read the blog "teaser post." I feel like a teenaged groupie. :-) I'm excited and honored and Dr. Allen gives me his card "because I don't really have a souvenir to give you except this." It's all I can do not to giggle.

And now, it's time to ask someone to read this post before it goes live. Dr. Allen will probably read this, after all!

eLearning guru

I've been fortunate to attend a webinar by Bill Horton, an expert in the field of eLearning. I even got to interview him for an assignment in class. Pretty exciting stuff.

And this week, another exciting event. I'll get to meet Michael Allen! No, it's not a one-on-one meeting or anything like that. His company, Allen Interactions, has partnered with my company, Charles Schwab, to create a very exciting piece of eLearning. The project kicks off this week and to mark the occasion, Michael Allen will be at Schwab's office on Wednesday. I'm so excited. I'll post about it.

Is that a light at the end of the tunnel?

Or is that an oncoming train?!

I'm going to go with the light theory.

My two classes are revving up for a couple of big finishes with projects this semester, and then there will be a few weeks of reprieve. I have been thinking a lot lately about stuff and thought I'd jot it all down.

I attended a web conference this week about Web 2.0 tools. We discussed social networking, social bookmarking, photo sharing, wikis, etc ... We watched this YouTube video and were asked for our reactions. One of the questions posed by a fellow classmate was

For good or ill, we surf, search, mine the Internet for information to increase our own knowledge, to make our lives better, to make ourselves richer. . . at what cost? We write, post, blog, respond, collaborate, live a virtual life via the Internet to communicate, to connect, to inform, to persuade . . . to what end?

I'm curious to know what others think?

Blog newbie

I have struggled with the idea this semester that I'm supposed to go find things to read and then blog about them. I don't have time to blog. Like most people in my class and life, I'm busy. I have a full time job, am going to school full time, and have other personal commitments that I signed myself up for. My brain keeps saying, though "at least you don't have children." People with kids are INFINITELY busier than I am, so if Michelle can find time put up her thoughts, then I certainly can. Of course, I'm much more relaxed reading someone else's blog than take the chance of writing my own, but that's my own issue I'll get figured out eventually!

So today, I took a chance and went to Brent's blogsite to read a little bit. I read his posting about Finding Your Voice and thought - hey, that sounds like me. I don't have any issues with the technical aspects of blogging. I'm just not sure that I have anything all that interesting to say. I followed a few links and found Wendy's blog In the Middle of the Curve: Fear of Blogging and it settled my anxiety a little bit. Now I just need to schedule the time to read things and blog about them!

Schedules!

I'm learning again that I need to schedule my time better. It seems I encounter this challenge at the beginning of every semester and that doesn't make any sense to me because it's not like I've had long amounts of time between semesters!

I'm caught up in one of my classes and getting close in the other one. I'm mostly caught up at work and I've been fundraising my little heart out. The last time I checked, my fundraising total was $3625, which I'm pretty doggone excited about. If you're interested in reading about that, you can visit my page at www.the3day.org/Arizona07/margi3day and that page will link you to my MSN space where I've gotten pretty good at blogging, but only for personal stuff.

Next entry - more along the lines of school, I promise!