Let’s say you’ve been spending the last few years on the other side of Mars and just tuned into the blogosphere to find out where online learning is today.

What would you discover?

With all the focus on social networking and social media (SN/SM) you might conclude that online learning — especially asynchronous elearning — had gone the way of the manual typewriter, 8-track tape, and those TV dials that used to change the channel and adjust the volume.

Advocates of SN/SM probably don’t see a problem with that (who wants to get up, walk over to the TV, and change the channel anyway?!?).

But here’s the thing:

Mentoring and training are not the same thing. They serve different purposes, take different amounts of time, and require different skill sets.

Here’s an example:

Let’s say your fundraising for program development in your association is conducted by volunteer members from a committee. The committee of five rotates 2 or 3 members off and on each year.

Which is the most effective way to prepare your volunteers for their responsibilities? (Select one answer.)

A. Call each individual and explain to them what’s expected.  This is individual mentoring.

B. Convene a general call with the full committee and explain everything. This is group mentoring.

C. Create a brief tutorial that covers all the essential information, and make sure all committee members complete the tutorial. This is training.

D. None of the above.

Best answer? D. Why?

A& B are more personal, but you risk leaving something out that could have significant legal or financial implications. A requires a lot of patience and time. B requires you to decide whether to have the entire committee on the call (with some attendees who have heard the information already) or just the newcomers (who won’t gain from the experience of those who served on the committee the previous year).

If planned carefully, a tutorial will ensure you have covered the essential tasks, requirements, legalese, etc. But even the best online training can’t anticipate every question that could come up.

So the best way to prepare this committee is to provide an asynchronous tutorial that gets everyone on the same page followed by individual and/or group mentoring to answer questions that the volunteers might still have.

If you expect your volunteers and members to learn everything from you (as a staffer) and each other via SN/SM, you’re guaranteed to discover gaps and misunderstandings.

There is no mistaking it: online social networking sites (whether they are interal or public) provide for excellent mentoring.

But mentoring is not the same as training, and shouldn’t be substituted for it.

Social networking/social media are not the same thing as training, and shouldn’t be substituted for it, either.

So let’s not let the big discussion (necessary though it is) to cloud over the continuing importance of online training.

eLearning is not the 8-track tape. It’s the electric guitar you could hear on the 8-track and the cassette, and now hear via CD and digitally in other ways. The guitar will likely change over time, and the delivery of how you access it will certainly change, but the instrument itself is here to stay.

SN/SM is the tape deck, the turntable: it’s the platform. It’s another way of delivering content.

Don’t mistake the CD player for the music you hear when you turn it on.

With many thanks to Tony Karrer, the aLearning Blog is being added to the eLearning Learning community. Not familiar with it? Check it out with a simple click in the lower right badge!

Powered by Browse My Stuff, this is a very cool aggregate of all the latest elearning information in one spot. And it aggregates a LOT! Just a few days away and there are dozens of new posts from an array of sites. The set-up makes it easy to view through Google Reader so you can quickly scroll past the items that aren’t of interest or clear all if you’re really feeling behind.

It’s hard to stay up to date on the latest when you there’s so much to keep track of. If you’re like me, I was reading about the foodservice industry  (our association’s industry), membership, training and HR devlopments, elearning, meeting and events planning, management (budgeting and all that), communications and marketing… Anything that makes getting through the morass of information faster was a welcome thing.

eLearning Learning’s feed of information will do that for you!

Dan Pontefract, in his Trainingwreck blog, has a great idea related to his Learnerprise 2.0 model: “Rather than investing 2/3 or more of a corporate learning budget to formal ILT and eLearning, why not flip the model and invest 2/3 on informal and social learning components and initiatives.”

If you buy into these beliefs (and you should):

•  most learning is informal, rather than attained via ILT (instructor-led training) and formal e-learning courseware
• social media (SM) and social networking (SN) are tools that help open the pathways for efficient informal learning
• informal learning has been at the heart of most associations since the day they were founded — “networking” isn’t just about connecting members for business reasons, but what they learn from each other, consciously or not

THEN

You should look hard at your overall educational budget, making sure that you have more invested in informal learning opportunities than formal ones — perhaps at the 2/3 level Pontefract suggests.

Josh Bersin, discussing the results of the Bersin & Associates report, High-Impact Learning Practices: An Operating Guide for the Modern Corporate Learning Function, says, “The shift from traditional training to informal learning requires organizations to retool and develop new skills, add new technologies, and reorganize resources. Our research shows that learning organizations with expertise and skills in areas such as knowledge management, information architecture, community management, and performance consulting outperform those still focused on traditional training solutions.”

So here’s the good news: associations have traditionally been way ahead of corporations because networking, sharing of knowledge, and connecting have been so central to our missions.

Even so, it’s a good idea to ask:

• What role does informal learning play in your association’s education strategy? How are you handling informal learning at face-to-face events? Online offerings? Social media/networking?
• What should you be doing differently? What does this mean for the structure of your annual conference?
• How will doing things differently affect your budget? How your volunteers contribute? Your sponsorship opportunities?

Should you be flipping your budget to divert more funding to informal learning than traditional events?

Are you already doing that?

What do you think?

It’s really very simple, all of this stuff about social networking, social media, collaborative learning, Web 2.0, 3.0, etc. etc:

They are evidence that your members/learners need more than stand-alone events. Focusing solely on “programs” — the way we’ve traditionally provided education to our association members — is just not enough.

But don’t take it from me. Jay Cross, learning expert and author, writes: “The old focus on events such as workshops won’t cut it in the ever-changing swirl produced by networks.”

Jay was the first to address the need to focus on the power and importance of infomal learning — 80-90% of the way someone learns what they need to know professionally is learned informally.

“Learning is formal when someone other than the learner sets curriculum,” he writes. “Typically, it’s an event, on a schedule and completion is generally recognized with a symbol, such as a grade, gold star, certificate or check mark in a learning management system. Formal learning is pushed on learners.”

Sound familiar?

He goes on: “By contrast, informal learners usually set their own learning objectives. They learn when they feel a need to know. The proof of their learning is their ability to do something they could not do before. Informal learning often is a pastiche of small chunks of observing how others do things, asking questions, trial and error, sharing stories with others and casual conversation. Learners are pulled to informal learning.”

And of course, if we attract or pull our members into the learning environment we have created for them, then we have most of the battle won — our marketing is that much more effective, our registrations hit the required levels to meet our budgets, our members stay engaged and are that much more likely to renew….

It’s all good!

Programs have their place, but they are a means — not and end — to your curriculum.

Not familiar with Jay? Check out his Internet Time Blog for more on this topic of “learnscapes.”

It’s simple, really: what if the information you’re getting isn’t reliable?

Don’t we teach others this very thing about accessing information, gaining knowledge, from the Internet? That you have to be careful about the source, that you need to be able to evaluate the validity of what you’ve found out there in cyberspace?

What will we do to be sure our collaborative learning spaces aren’t populated by those who think they know more than they do?

I don’t know who Richard Whatley, is but he said it well: ”He who is not aware of his ignorance will only be misled by his knowledge. “

And herein we have an example of the very issue: if I don’t know who Richard Whatley is, should I risk sharing the quote? Am I — ignorantly — passing on something that’s of no value or maybe even harmful?

Isn’t this the danger of collaborative learning? That those who don’t know — who are in fact, in the space because they need to learn something — won’t recognize misinformation?

Haven’t we all seen it at some time or another on forums and in blogs: a great post with some good comments that add to the original thought, then someone’s additional comments that go way off somewhere, maybe including false or misleading information?

I do know who Hippocrates is, and he said: “There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance. “

But don’t we also say that the best blogs are the “opinion blogs”? Are we advancing ignorance by sharing our opinions? Do we risk misleading people by sharing more opinions than science or fact?

How do you propose we manage the collaborative learning environment to provide a place for opinion-sharing? To temper the loud but uninformed voices that could mislead or misinform?

Haven’t you been in one of those team projects where the weakest member pulled everyone down, risking the project? Or how about back in school — those group projects with your schoolmates where you were all going to get the same grade? They either left most of the work to you, or maybe you took it on because you were afraid for your grade?

Why are we so sure that others won’t have similar collaborative learning experiences — some good, some not so good?

What are we doing to ensure our collaborative learning spaces will be good ones?

Way back in my 20s, I remember reading advice to young women who dreamed of breaking the corporate glass ceiling. Along with dressing for success, we were advised to hone our memories and resist the temptation to carry paper and pens into meetings to avoid being the automatic choice for note-taker. Oh, yes, my young female colleague, that was back in the day when men were made to classes  teaching them to look female co-workers in the eyes, not in the chest.

Not long after women like me started saying things like, “Sorry — I never took shorthand,” the boss faced what seemed to be a sudden shift in office resources: the PC started showing up in offices and on desks, including his. Before long, his secretary was reassigned by the powers that be, and he was expected to turn out his own letters and documents. Steno pools went by the wayside, and the position of “secretary” morphed into “administrative assistant.”

Some bosses took at least one of the many computer courses that came out specifically designed for the “executive” or “manager.” As we trainers know, this is an effective way of creating a safe environment where the boss could try new things and fail without embarrassment. We also know some of the bosses just didn’t show up. They refused to learn the computer, refused to take the classes.

Maybe they couldn’t get past the fear they could fail at something which so many others were succeeding at. Maybe they figured if they didn’t learn how to use that darn thing they would get their secretary back. Maybe they simply lived in denial: ignore that PC and it would eventually go away.

Sound familiar? Though more and more associations are buying into the need to incorporate more elearning into their education curriculums, there’s still plenty of denial floating around.

In his post, “Down But Not Quite Out,” learning and performance specialist Charles Jennings describes how the increased accessibility of training, articles, information — even jokes — on the Web are undoing Learning Tree and Reader’s Digest, two venerable business models now in jeopardy.

Here’s what I think is happening: Learning Tree and Reader’s Digest are like typists in steno pools. Learning Tree, like it or not, is just another training provider in a pool of many others. And just as the PC obliterated the need for the steno pool, the Web and the availability of easily accessible elearning could obliterate the face-to-face training companies as well.

Though steno pools are gone, some people do still dictate and others still transcribe that dictation. Face-to-face training companies won’t entirely go away, either.

Those that stay in business will owe that success to their ability to adapt, to deliver on their strengths and promise, and to provide something essential and valuable. All in a business model that will provide their clients with affordable solutions served up with excellent customer service.

You’re barely inside the South Dakota state line when you start to see them: Wall Drug signs. Many of them sport 5-cent coffee come-0ns. Great idea! Who doesn’t love a bargain? And there’s no other obligation. Drop your nickel in the slot, add sugar and/or powdered cream to your liking, and fill your cup.

We ran into 5-cent coffee at another restaurant and even asked what the catch was. No catch. We even got real cream at this place. We’d stopped in for lunch anyway, but somewhere in our heads was the notion that because we were saving a few bucks on the coffee, we could spend that in another way.

If you know anything about coffee in restaurants, you know that it’s — in a regular coffee season — a real money-maker. (If you doubt my word, calculate out how many cups you can brew from what you buy in the store, then charge yourself a two dollars a cup and see how much money you’d make on that bag or tin of grounds or beans).

So it’s an easy thing to do — 5-cents a cup — it goes along way to curry favor with the customers, and it really doesn’t cost the restaurant much money at all (assuming they can’t break even on the five-cents, what with the water, cream, sugar, washing, and serving that goes with it).

One of the campgrounds where we stayed advertised free horseback rides. I asked my husband if we stayed a week if that got us a free ride, or something like that. He smiled and said, “Get this. If we both pay for a horseback ride, we get a night’s stay free.”

On the surface, that sounds like a deal, right? But here’s how it would have worked in our case: $45 each = $90 for the rides. What were we paying for one night’s stay? About $15. Hmmmmm……

Moral of the story? If you’re going to provide an incentive, work out every angle. In the Web world, they call it a “use case scenario.” The designers imagine every possible user for the site, and work through ever possible thing they might want to do on the site, then design it to include those features.

What are the use case scenarios for your members? Will your incentives hold up to them? Will you have a five-cent cup of coffee, or a free horseback ride?

Thanks, Cynthia, for a great post about what NOT to do when appealing to members for renewals. Trainers will tell you that excellent “non-examples” — examples of what not to do — are as effective, maybe even moreso, than examples of desirable outcomes.

So to piggyback on Cynthia’s post, I offer this membership overture experience.

First: I receive a very complimentary letter from an association telling me I’d been “accepted for membership.” The letter made it sound so exclusive to get in that when my executive director saw it, he was impressed with how my professional reputation was spreading. Indeed, it seemed I’d been recommended, and vetted, and voted on.

I was impressed, too!

Second: I received a phone call from a staffer at the association, asking for a bit of my time. They like to feature new member profiles and I was an ideal candidate. Wow! Of course I had time to answer a few questions. So we talked for about fifteen minutes, all the while I was feeling embarrassed yet honored, and thinking, “This is certainly a tactic we’ll have to remember!” I felt special and appreciated. As if the association was about to fall apart except they now had me as a member.

Third: Then she managed to bring up membership dues. So that I can spare myself the pain of re-visiting one of the most awkward conversations I’ve had since becoming an association professional, she said I qualified for their highest level of membership. Let’s just say that I now have four memberships for less than dues for that one association would have cost. Four!! Per year!!!

Fourth: I went from feeling elated and honored and flattered to feeling bamboozled and insulted (okay, so, yes, pride does goeth before a fall). I’d been schmoozed then railroaded. I was the ultimate mark, or at least I was feeling like one. So I told her — as politely as I could — that as a staffer with a non-profit, we just didn’t invest in professional memberships at that level. Amazingly, she had a lower level of membership. Then an even lower one. Now I was starting to wonder about the credibility and ethics of the group I was dealing with. So I pointed out that their letter had not implied any of the obligations she was describing, and that I was feeling as though a sort of bait and switch was going on.

Fifth: She got irate with me. “Do you know who we are? Really? Have you even heard of our organization?” she asked. I said I had, but it didn’t matter, because clearly we were not a goot match, that I didn’t appreciate their tactics, nor that they had just wasted a lot of very valuable time during my day.

Harumph!

What NOT to do to increase membership. Even if I’m someday able to afford their membership fees, I’ll invest my dues elsewhere.

Wayyy behind on my reading (again, of course)… so while I catch up on that, here are some great blog posts to check out:

Why less is more, by Cathy Moore; note that this holds true ESPECIALLY for elearning : http://blog.cathy-moore.com/2009/01/less-text-more-learning/

The Famous Self-Educated, by Jeff Cobb: http://www.missiontolearn.com/blog/2009/02/famous-self-educated/

How much did K-12’s factory-style education blow the curiosity right out of you? Thoughts on curiosity at  Get Me Jamie Notter’s post on Curiosity (and Jeff De Cagna’s comment) are worth a look.

What if you decided to categorize all the niche sites for social media?!? Here’s an effort to do just that: http://socialmediaanswers.com/niche-social-networking-sites/

Looking for a low-cost LMS? Check out Tony Karrer’s post on his eLearning Technology blog: http://elearningtech.blogspot.com/2009/02/low-cost-lms-help-needed.html

And some actual suggestions about using Twitter for elearning, from Jeanne Meister’s New Learning Playbook blog: http://newlearningplaybook.com/blog/2008/12/31/feedback-from-users-of-twitter-as-a-training-tool/

So much to learn… so little time!

Jeff Cobb at Mission to Learn has got me thinking that it’s time for a sensible defense of the old-fashioned “course.” Jeff usually gets me thinking (thanks, Jeff!) his blog entry, “Learning Set Free” begs a debate.

Don’t get me wrong. I love and buy into the entire sensemaking approach — we actually use it in one of our programs. Anyone who reads this blog knows I’m keenly supportive of active learning. Etc. etc.

But there’s a time and place for the conventional “course.” Like everything else, we need to know when a course is appropriate and when sensemaking and other approaches are better choices.

Here’s a real-world example of when individual instruction is the best choice.  A few months ago I attended an orientation to Second Life. Thinking I’d get ahead of the game a bit, in an attempt to make sense of it on my own, if you will, so I could be a better student during the group session, I created my avatar, and jumped into SL. Suddenly I was immersed in a very foreign place, and was grateful for the SL “launch pad” that gave me a space to learn to walk and fly and get dressed. But then I hit the wrong button (okay, the right button for something, but the wrong button for me at that moment) and transported myself someplace very strange.

Surrounded by odd signs, freaky-looking (okay, they were to me — to each his own) avatars that were almost scary that bumped past me, I suddenly just wanted out. So I exited SL.

I only went back because of the orientation class, for which I had a clear destination and knew someone would be there to guide me.

Here’s the thing. At least a half-dozen people attended this orientation, and the organizer — one of the most patient people I’ve met since my driver’s ed days — guided each person through entering the room, walking, sitting, flying, etc… But it took so much time! As the organizer helped others, we pretty much stood or sat around, waiting.

Each of us needed individual attention and help. One at a time. A “course” is a lousy match for this type of situation.

So when is a course a better choice than individual instruction? Every association staff person who’s seen committee members and faculty/facilitators come and go have experienced what it’s like to repeat the same steps and processes every year or two. Creating a mini-”course” or tutorial to cover things that just don’t change much — like “What To Expect as an Education Committee Member” — and following that up with individual Q&A is the best use of everyone’s time.

Courses are ideal when they deliver content that needs to be consistent across all the learners. When you need to know that each person who attended (live or asynchronously) heard and saw the same policies explained or learned to perform specific procedures in the same way.

Sometimes we need conformity (though we really don’t want to admit it). And sometimes a “course” isn’t just efficient for the trainer — sometimes it’s a more efficient approach for the learner as well.