A meeting last week with my boss yielded a surprising “all in favor” response to asking about doing research within our job family and using resources other than me to complete it. Not that there is anything in the research that warrants a ‘no’ but I was surprised by the enthusiasm and vision of what this could mean for our job family in terms of training. It also beget a conversation about the things that could be coming down the road for this group. We both left equally excited.

Still there are some other hurdles to overcome.

1. Permission from the regional leaderhsip of the geographic location I intended to use. I am using something outside the Northeast United States to eliminate bias and potential other hurdles related to vision and allowances
2. Letters drafted for each leader to showcase to the various committees and boards needed to earn an approved proposal
3. The finalized proposal and executive summary for the various committees and boards needed to earn an approved proposal
4. Finally, some project planning to implement this. I honestly think we can carry out the research in about 2 weeks of time.

I also have to finish updating my literature review and fortunately, an assignment in my current class hits right on the topic I need to research so bingo.

I must say that for the first time in months, I feel good about this. I wish I’d felt this long ago, I’d be done by now. I need to finish this Spring though. There is some celebrations and plans moving ahead for the Spring, Summer and Fall whether I am done or not.

Image Source: Kristina B

A phone conversation with my mentor a few weeks ago highlighted a problem I am having with my dissertation that is compounded by working full time (and more so in the last few months) and trying to still be present with the family; dropping the ball. My dissertation proposal has stalled in this state of being unsure about the problem, the research, the everything. It was so confusing that I was allowing myself to dig into working insane hours and agreeing to bad projects at work. I was trying to do anything vs. trying to do something.

My mentor and I agreed to speak via phone and talk through what was going on and the feelings I was experiencing of uncertainty, confusion, frustration, and inadequacy. The good news is that these feelings were commonplace at this phase of the process and compounded by the work full time-study full time aspect of going to school as an adult.

I was thankful to hear that I was experiencing something normal and that this was the real point of proving my metal. I was so thankful that I inquired about how I can press on vs. step out. My mentor informed me that sometimes beginning with the end in mind is helpful (who would have thought Covey was right on this? ha). Her guidance was to understand the problem in general and select a sample population then work from there on the design. It seemed like cheating to do that but in the world of being a scholar, practitioner, leader, we need to find a process that is academically and business sound. This might work.

We discussed a few other ideas for my project like using only podcasts or linking blogs and podcasts through a literature search. We talked about sample size and the statistical analysis. All helpful conversations. I felt re-energized with the project again.

So I’ve set off to get some initial documentation completed and working a bit backwards to accomplish the while goal. Thanks Maureen!

Did you know I was a Toastmaster?

I’ve been in Toastmasters for 6 years now and have gotten a lot from the experience. One of the regular pluses to being a Toastmaster is getting the magazine each month. Sometimes, like any magazine, the articles lack appeal but most of the time the articles have some value to my work, my life, or my speaking.

This month’s magazine came with many articles on persuasion and one focused on logical fallacies. As a doctoral learner, the logical fallacy is a mine field of critical thought. One is always on guard for these persuasion pitfalls and then looks for logical reasoning to side step the pitfalls. I’d link you to it but Toastmasters holds onto some archaic tenets of play for pay and gives little in terms of members-level insights into the organization for visitors. This should not detract you from joining though.

Logical fallacies are easily defined as arguments that make logic mistakes. Many times these slip up the target audience and that person enters into agreement under some false pretense. It isn’t always tragically negative but it does happen. The article talks about 5 key fallacies.

1. Slippery slope arguments. If we make this school budget cut the children will all drop out and begin taking drugs. It is an argument that draws alludes to some chain of events that has no real proof or reasonableness that the final event will occur.
2. False dichotomy. Either you let me go out or I will just die right here. This is an either-or argument that implies that doing both are impossible or that there is no option (like the example given above).
3. Appeal to ignorance. No one saw Elvis lowered into the grave (in the coffin) so he could still be alive. This is an argument that suggests because there is no definitive proof supporting one side then the other cannot be discounted.
4. Appeal to emotions. You need to finish your food; there are starving children in Africa dying because you have extra food. This is an argument that has no real rationale but draws that the emotional strings of the intended target.
5. Red herring. How can George be good at balancing the books; he can’t even drive a car. This argument diverts the audience with another issue and attempts to draw a conclusion based on the information in that diversion.

- Thanks to Dave Zielinski for the summary article in Toastmasters magazine

These are a few examples of logical fallacies and obviously some extreme arguments made to illustrate the point. Many times the fallacies are more subtle. Picture a fast food commercial showing happy/healthy children playing after having some of that restaurant’s food.  Subtle, right? Who doesn’t want happy and healthy children? Who doesn’t like the idea of children playing? No one, that’s who. But the reality is that those images conjure up an emotional charge within us and so we fall into the fast food must not be bad for kids, look at those kids pitfall. It is an appeal to emotion.

These fallacies happen all around us in the media, our working worlds, our school worlds, our interactions with others. At work it happens often in a simple and common argument: Yanni is not a team player; he won’t do what I tell him to do. False dichotomy.

Critical thinking and logical reasoning are two really important skills to have. Here is a warning for you though. Punching holes in arguments will make you slightly less popular and could be viewed as argumentative or actively disengaged. Suggesting that you either become persuaded or you are a bad seed is a false dichotomy.

What logical fallacies do you see?

How can you overcome the pitfalls of illogical arguments and people?

What benefit can you gain from thinking more critically about the things you see and hear?

For me, this helps me read articles for my dissertation, tackle tough work issues, and build a stronger learning leader mindset.

Image Source: gutter

Last week I was speaking to a few people about podcasting as a form of learning intervention. My research is narrowing to look at the podcasting technology solely and this gives me the impetus to reflect on the tool in terms of learning and other aspects. I began to think about podcasting in the ways the literature I am reading suggests, as a standardized communication of a message to a massive or varied audience. In my experience, though, podcasting serves largely as a 1-way method of communication. I have something to say, I record it, I podcast it, you receive it, done. Podcasting, again in my experience, has not been a 2-way collaborative modality. The quote I delivered twice last week was “no one ever podcasts back”.

This is not entirely accurate. Podcasts often beget other podcasts, some retort from another podcaster but rarely will people interact with a podcast by sending a recorded comment directly to the producer. Instead, podcasts often serve as the front of a large collaborative community filled with blogs, wikis, and other social media. Podcasts alone are like radio stations, you may react but I won’t hear you.

On the other hand, I sit in a lot of teleconferences where I can interact with the hosts. However, I sit in a lot of teleconferences originating from the same source but with different hosts. Along with that, a slightly different message. Sometimes this is valuable and sometimes it is not valuable. Regardless of value, it is interactive and people comment or collaborate back and forth.

Do I see podcasting as an inferior technology for collaborative learning? Not really. Of course, research will bear this out quantitatively. I am truly neutral on this matter; curious really.

I don’t theorize that podcasting needs to be 1-way or non-collaborative in nature. With the advent of microphones, low/no cost recording software, built-in cameras, and the like, anyone can create a recorded comment and podcast back as it were. Podcasts are hot items these days and I wonder about the impact on learning.

Image Source: mag3737

Instructional developers understand the notion of evaluation. Even the most basic ISD model, ADDIE, includes the evaluation phases needed in any deployment of training. As I look into the learning evaluation element of the literature review I am struck by how many people feel testing is the answer.

Student testing is a form of assessment, how much has that student learned, and to some degree can be used in determining the effectiveness of training materials. However, testing is only 1 form of student assessment and student assessment is only one aspect of evaluation.

To be effective training the training needs to meet or exceed the learning objectives developed at the beginning of the process. If you are designing behavioral or performance based objectives then looking at learner performance can help identify gaps in or highlight effectiveness in training. Still another tool to use is aligning training elements to the objectives.

• Does this training element support this learning or training objective?

Testing is such a hot item now that a lot of people want to implement it into the workplace training conducted within their organizations. Why? It is easier to develop tests and score them than actually observe performance. Even Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 – Learning stage focuses on pre and post testing.

Is testing evaluation? No. It is one element that can be used but it is not training evaluation. I will be looking deeper into this as I learn more about how to effectively evaluate training for learning.

Image source: Pragmagraphr

I got my newly revised problem statement, purpose statement, and research questions back from my mentor this weekend. I had also asked for some guidance on what elements to include in my new literature review.  Year 3 residency really set me back a bit with some small changes. Think of it like turning a ship only 1 degree from the course and figure out what that impact is 2,000 miles away; quite a different landing place.

I’ve selected some categories for the next evolution of my literature review:

• Constructivism
• Blended Learning
• Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts
• Learning Evaluation

My mentor thought these areas will serve me well and likely aid in redrafting the problem statement, purpose statement, and research questions. What!?! Again!?! Yes, again. This process is iterative and continues to cycle back on the previous components at every turn. Frustrating to be sure but needed to validate and refine the project.

So the biggest piece of advice is keep reading. I will read. I need to read. First, I need to find some articles. So the remainder of the week is business travel and my regular class, so I will be in the academic frame of mind.

One nice about my research is that it fits my work well. If everything holds out, I will be able to use my work to do my research. That would be ideal.

Image Source: Swamibu

In revising my problem and purpose statement, along with fleshing out Chapter 1 of the dissertation, I got some sage words of wisdom from my mentor.

We want you to graduate

I liked the idea of measuring my dissertation to what Kirkpatrick would call the behavioral level or Level Three. However, as I know and my mentor pointed out to me again, this level of measurement is evasive and lengthy to determine. While I think understanding this is important, I also think graduation is important.

Even Kirkpatrick determined that Level Three is a difficult level to evaluate and can lead to false negatives. In the literature Kirkpatrick proffered that too many factors can mute a behavioral change and lead the researcher to issue a negative statement which might not be accurate. In fact, Kirkpatrick cautioned that influencers like a boss, workplace, personality, etc could give the impression that the training was ineffective when in fact learning took place, at Level Two.

So, I pulled back from work performance to get a faster and more accurate evaluation for the research. Is it cheating? Not at all. In fact, because the literature doesn’t have any determinations of effectiveness, this is a most appropriate level to evaluate. Future studies could include behavioral evaluation. In fact, that would make a nice second book for me…so don’t take my idea

I sent my revisions into my mentor and am looking forward to her feedback on the matter. This does add another component to my literature review but that isn’t going to be too bad. I jsut need to read more.

Sometime overnight, the server that my classroom resided one ended its life, at least this is what tech support told me. They had hoped to rebuild the server in less time but as of Sunday afternoon things were still down. When class isn’t available on weekends things get dicey. All of a sudden, I had last minute questions about the assignment that I knew could be resolved in class postings. All of a sudden, I wanted to check my professor’s notes and lectures. All of a sudden, I wanted to take advantage of the class materials.

It was a frustrating weekend, school-wise, for sure.

Some might say this has to do with the switch to a web-based classroom environment. It might, but the server being down would have impacted the Outlook Express environment too. Although, is OE the older posts would be available offline, making accessing the materials more readily accessible. Still, the new web interface is not the issue. The issue is redundancy. I am sure there are backups somewhere but the IT failure is no doubt giving rise to a series of conversations that ensure up time.

Perhaps most frustrating was that the server meltdown came at the end of CUR/722. I’ve had contentions with this class in the past few weeks and none of them were adeqautely resolved. I still feel as though the assignments and discussion were at Bachelor or Master levels and did not adequately stretch to doctoral level leadership discussions or work. The class being done now, I have little left to harp on. So, it is enough that I have voiced my concern through the end-of-course survey (and here I suppose).

I completed my assignment and like a seasoned UOP student, I emailed it to the professor to make sure the paper got counted. I hope my classmates did the same.

The classroom did come back up on Monday afternoon. It was empty of all earlier posts and materials. A message assuring students the earlier posts would be restored gave little comfort. The class was ending, what do I care if the older materials appear somewhere down the line. Truth be told, the classrooms dissappear after a few weeks, making accessing all older materials impossible.

Just as one class ends, another begins. I am preparing for Year 3 residency. I have a lot to do in terms of drafting chapters 1-3 and I will be buckled down after a short break here.

Image Source: zoomar

I’ve spent the Summer revising and revising my literature review in hopes of getting it to the point I feel it is worth my mentor’s time to review and comment. I understand the function of the mentor is to guide and offer coaching as needed. Perhaps I should have taken her up on this function. In fact, I know I should have.

Still, the revision process takes some time. I spend most of it writing something, then reading it to make sure it sounds accurate, understandable, and scholarly. This is no easy task.

What I have found in my reflection is an evolution of writing style from the Master’s level to this dissertation level. In my MAED program it was appropriate to conclude something based on cited evidence and support from a peer-reviewed author. In the beginning of the EdD program it was appropriate to cite evidence and conclusions that were cited elsewhere adding some transitional text that agreed with the preceding work. At the dissertation level, it is appropriate to academically report the findings and conclusions of others (at least for the lit. review).

My thesaurus and the online thesaurus tools are getting a work out. How many synonyms for report, conclude, said wrote, offer, etc. do you think there are?

Some good news on this front. I am learning to be a better critical thinker and writer. I am also learning more about journalism that I thought I should know. Journalism in the theoretical sense, not the practioner sense.

I am happy with the lit. review so far. The long process should conclude this month with another submission to my mentor and then onto planning the proposal (chapters 1, 2, & 3).

Side note: my APA PERRLA/StyleEase posts have gotten some notice from APA PERRLA. Here is hoping for a speedy release so I can return to my favorite APA tool.

Image source: quartermane

I’ve been laying low for a few days trying to break my Internet addiction and give my mind some rest from the last class (earned a B+, by the way). This morning I popped by the WordPress Stats page in my admin section and saw a spike in hits. What is this spike? It was a bunch of clicks from a recent Yahoo! Finance article by Anya Kamenetz titled Whose American Dream Is It, Anyway?

The article cites my Lit Review on the Millennial generation as substance for the following quote:

Money and security are important, but research says young people really want meaning in their jobs, too.

Anya was kind enough to read my research and use it for her work on Y! Finance. Doing my research Anya has quite a record of speaking and writing on the Millennials and I am impressed she felt my work worthy. Further validation that I am on the right track.

I would like to clarify and extend the quote by adding some important information about my feelings on meaning. Specifically by extracting that section of the lit. review section.

Meaning is an important element in Millennial work expectations (Allen, 2004; Martin, 2005); this generation expects the work being done to be social responsible (Martin) and important to the business (Eisner, 2005). Similarly, Millennials distaste being assigned work considered as chores or menial; preferring tasks important to the success of the organization (Eisner). The expectation of meaningful work relates to the Millennials’ lack of inherent loyalty to employers (Allen; Hulett, 2006). Rather this generation of employees aligns with organizations that best fit the need for balance and meaning (Allen; Hulett).

References can be sent or posted if you would like them, I just don’t want to clutter up the post.

What is seen here is that the Millennials really are looking for things to do that have value and meaning. This does not mean that they are looking for every task to be linked to a global steward level of importance. It means that this generation are looking for jobs, tasks, roles, and responsibilities that are important to the person, the organization (think strategic alignment), and community/marketplace/industry.

Anya, thanks for using my research for your resource.

Image Source: recurrence

It has been a while since my last episode. Here’s what is going on.

• Classwork
• Literature Review Update
• “Sharpening the Saw”

Jessica Hagy at Indexed had a brillant representation of the changing workplace and the impact that has on our economy.

The index card shows a graph with a direct relationship between boomers increasing in management positions and the X’ers starting up businesses. The message here is one of generation differences and the potential ripple effects in both businesses and the larger economy.

Each generation has a different style and the importance of them working together was highlighted in a post earlier on the Doc Blog; Millennials Are Not Alone. My mentor and I engaged in a discourse to study the impact of a new training intervention on the entire workforce population and not isolate the research to one subset or subgroup of the workforce, Millennials. Here is an excerpt of my Literature Review – 2nd Draft - that highlights the interrelationship of Millennials and other generations.

The current workplace is experiencing the presence of four generations that actively participate in organizational operations (Wagner, 2007). Each of these generations exhibit different working styles that result in conflict, change, and organizational growth (Wagner). Bridgers and Johnson (2006) describe the workforce makeup as 10% Traditionalist generation members, 44% Baby Boomers, 34% Generation X members, and 12% Millennials making for a workforce in flux from the employees beginning careers to those exiting into retirement.

What this shows is that a difference exists and the demographics of the varying populations. Hagy’s graph adds to the discourse by suggesting that potential conflict between 2 generations (boomers and X’ers in her case) can lead to an exodus from existing companies and the expansion of smaller startups (for good or bad).

How does this relate to my dissertation? If a solution is not found to satisfy the the bulk of the workforce, meet the expectations of senior generations, and bridge generational gaps through knowledge sharing there might be further exits of junior generations.

However, I would be curious about the X’ers exodus from Boomer managed companies and if these X’er startups appeal more to Millennials than the Boomer-run companies. Alas, this is a research topic for another time or someone else.

Entering Week 5 in the Curriculum Development course and feeling like this course is a review of 2 previous courses. Well, maybe not a review but certainly a lighter recap or culmination. The primary project due at the end of the class is a curriculum development plan, which seems a little underwhelming right now.

It might also be that the project is geared towards people that might not have developed instruction or curriculum through a sound process and implemented a process amongst peers. In the corporate learning and performance world this is far more common. Granted there are a lot of trainers out there that are talking heads and do not have the instructional design skills required to be a top-notch professional.

My K-12 classmates might have a different perspective on this class than I do and I am accepting of that. I just keep coming back to my instructional design processes and resources and seem to be doing fine.

Regardless, I need to keep my nose to the grindstone here. I also need to pick up my lit. review again and make the edits needed.

I’ve found this more difficult than I imagined and I am hearkened back to the advice of my good friend Chris. Who asked how we can get people to do things when no deadline is looming?

The deadline is out there for October of December but I need to be working on it now. I know I have a 6 week break coming after this class to make room for some travel this Summer. I can use that time, but would rather use it for the proposal. This too is a deja vu feeling from my DOC 722 class.

Image Source: Earthwatcher

Class is gearing up for the 6 working weeks of the course and this week our learning team charter is due. Up to this point, I’ve been rehashing the previous versions of the charter and submitting it as the assignment. This class is different. Another member of my team, David, developed an abbreviated version of the charter that hits the main points: contact information, skills inventory, conflict resolution, and ground rules for conduct.

Thanks David!

I am enjoying this lull between class and need to get onto the business of schoolwork including the lit. review rewrite, and the next series of assignments. A shorter charter is the harbinger of a more effective and efficient team.

Here we go!

Image Source: elfis gallery

My literature review 3rd draft is coming into perspective on my most recent re-read. I’ve added comments throughout that all come down to “I said what?“. It would seem that this academic writing thing can lead us down the path of utter confusion and interrupted reading but the audience for academic writing is academics not the general population.

Jessica Hagy at Indexed, a great blogger that captures wonderful idiosyncratic moments on 3×5 index cards had a post today that gets right to the heart of my feelings on the literature review writing phase, academic writing, and Nigerian spam (I am still waiting for my bank deposit )

The 2nd draft of my review promised many great things that need to be toned down a bit (i.e.: commonly accepted opinions expressed as facts), established the birthright of several people in the field (with copious citations), and did so in a manner that was, sometimes, a bit over the top (language use).

The language needs to be academic and the caliber one would expect from doctoral-level writing but it still needs to be clear. While I would love something more readable to the lay person, my audience is academics at this point. I will take the dissertation and parts of it and put them into general use or industry use formats and publish them. That should be easier to digest.

Thanks Jessica for the index card, I’ve got it printed and on my bulletin board as a reminder to not promise great fortune to untold people of given birth rights or give my banking information to some representative of a distant relative.

I’ve been reading, re-reading, writing, re-writing my literature review based on the comments from my mentor and others. It has been a frustrating process bouncing between copies of my paper trying to make the right change in the right places. This is often a problem with a lot of comments (trying to track those little lines is a pain).

That was until this morning. This morning my frustration turned to inspiration and I clicked the accept all changes button in MS Word. Following that, I chose Save As… from the file menu and saved the document as a new file. Miracle cure? Kind of, sort of, maybe.

What I need to do now is read through the paper and decide if I like the change or not. It did clear up a lot of the deleted, changed, added, stuff leaving only the comments in there. I like that. It is a new day in revision mode and I am hopeful for quicker turn around.

Image Source: Luke Edgar Seeley

I am about to begin the next class, CUR/721 – Curriculum Design, and still must maintain momentum with my literature review and subsequent dissertation proposal. I admit that this last few weeks have seen little in the way of focus on school work.

My schedule has seen a few speaking engagements, with the last one (for a while) coming this weekend. Normally, I don’t sweat speeches but I’ve been trying to talk more about my dissertation topic or closely related topics which forces me to take all that research and contain it to a shortened time frame.  So it is a growing pain, or in team building what we call edgework.

Not to mention that I’ve wanted to take a break from the academic go-go-go routine that consumed my last few months. We took a vacation, I brewed some beer, prepared my garden for this year, and generally worked on some home projects.

All of this is well and good but it does need to stop. The road ahead requires me to work on two academic routines at the same time. The one side of the road is my classwork. The other side of the road is my dissertation. While I am beyond the half way point in my schedule do not think of it as the pinnacle of a mountain. Rather it is a base camp type of half way point.

My road ahead is forked and I need to take both paths in order to be successful. To accomplish this I am setting time aside each morning to blog/journal and work on my literature review revisions. My classwork time is reserved for lunches and evenings. Leaving night times for family and recreation. This schedule should help keep the road ahead smooth.

A related note, I pushed my next class out a few weeks to allow for a trip north this Summer. I will use that time to get ahead on my proposal and hopefully be ready to submit that just after residency this October.

Image Source: evilmightyacorn

In this episode I discuss the feedback from my literature draft submission and the changes I am making to bring this document closer to the highest quality it can become.

Discourse this week with my mentor might be changing my dissertation slightly. I’ve been laser focused on Millennials because I feel this is a big concern in the learning and performance industry. This has been supported by recent traffic and comments on the Doc Blog.

My mentor and I discussed the possibility to broaden the discussion about generations prior to Millennials. Her advice was that whatever the Millennial population workforce count, they are not alone in the workplace. Her discussion continued to say that businesses are not likely to adopt new processes unless the processes can be applied to everyone.

This is something that seems so obvious to me but I still missed in my own thought process.

Taking this into advisement, and still wanting to know the impact on Millennials, I responded with an idea to broaden the topic to be ‘Constructivist Learning and Worker Performance using Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts in Workplace Training’. The research questions would include inquiries about the impact on different generations.

Is this a more important problem? Is this change more in line with industry concerns?

I think it might be but what do you think?

Back from North Carolina! We took a little excursion to visit my in-laws and get some time away.

Meanwhile, my mentor’s feedback came back, as well as feedback from my step-mother, Joan. Those of you reading as carefully as these two wonderful mentors likely caught many of the same things. Here are the highlights.

• Taking things for granted.  I tend to use vague terms thinking the audience knows what I am talking about. In academic writing one needs to be specific each time about the topic. For example, use collaborative computing technologies versus these technologies.
• Opinion versus fact. I wrote in an overconfident manner express things as facts when in reality they are not proven facts but commonly accepted opinions. It is a nuance in academic writing of this magnitude I am becoming familiar with quickly. One should be stating this as this study showed,  authors expressed, or commonly accepted.
• Jargon or something resembling jargon. Web 2.0 is full of potential to be jargon-rich. Academic writing needs to be free of jargon. Being careful is important.
• Be concise. I am pretty verbose in speaking and sometimes that bleeds over into writing. Typically, though, I work to eliminate the unnecessary things and make the paper clean and clear. It looks like I slipped here and need to be more concise.
• Small writing errors. I need to clean up some sentence structure and smaller errors throughout. It was a draft and as such was not completely accurate, but I think pretty close.

I am revising my literature over the next week or so and will get a 3rd draft re-posted here for you all (and for my mentor).

Thanks for being patient as I completed other projects (my literature review draft). In this episode I discuss the literature review project:

• Writer’s Block
  • Sage advice from Dan
    
  • Keep writing advice from Foley
• How I did it.
• Slight changes to topic
• Draft
  • Seeking feedback
• Thanks to everyone for visiting the draft section. The sheer volume of views helps validate the topic as important.

The original draft was sent through WritePoint, the UOP mechanics checker, and came back. I made the edits and issued the 2nd draft. As promised, I am attaching the draft for your enjoyment and thoughts. This is the single largest undertaking of my writing life. While this is highly personal to me, there is no room for delicate feelings regarding feedback. I’m sending this to people for there review and feedback. I truly want a great product.

One related note, this type of writing is not for pleasure reading or even slightly academic reading. The purpose is to capture and synthesize literature germane to the topic. As such, almost every sentence is cited. This is very different for me and thus, even more feedback is needed. You are all a valuable part of making me a better leader, thank you.

Constructivist Learning and Millennial Generation Worker Performance using Blogs Wikis and Podcasts in Workplace Training_Literature Review.doc

So, I had a change of thought over the course of the week and finally arrived on it tonight. The original plan was to include a literature review section on training efficacy. In reflecting on the lit. review and purpose of the dissertation it is not to measure training efficacy at all. Rather the intent is to measure the impact of blogs, wikis, and podcasts in training on Millennial work performance. As such, I do not feel (and I’m not 100% sure on this) that an extensive review on the measurement of training is needed. In fact, it seems a little tangential.

This is supported by the UOP literature review checklist which does not call for a review of the measurement devices used in the proposed research. This is something that can be stated in Chapter 3 as I move ahead.

Despite my rationale, I have engage my mentor in feedback to determine if the training efficacy is truly needed. If not, super…if so, I’ll add it. We both want something we can be proud of putting our names on in the coming year.

To this end, I extract the Need for Further Research sections out of the Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts subsections and lumped them together in 1 section called…

Further Research on the Use of Blogs, Wikis, and Podcasts

Researchers are realizing the increasing use of blogs, wikis, and podcasts in learning environments but not much is known about the quantitative impact of these collaborative learning technologies on learning or worker performance (Beldarrain, 2006). This section discusses gaps that exist in the literature and the need for further research regarding blogs, wikis, and podcasts in organizational learning environments.

Blogs

Literature regarding blogging demonstrates a wide interest in the use of blogs to aid in education and organizational knowledge building, like training, and does leave room for quantitative analysis. A review of the existing body of knowledge identifies gaps that provide researchers opportunity to fill through quantitative examination. A large qualitative research gap is an in-depth analysis of the motivations and habits of bloggers which would add to the understanding of the phenomenon (Huang et al., 2007). Quantitative analysis of blogs and blogging is also required. Qualitative claims of blogging cite the tool as an exemplary medium for group work and learner-centric instruction claiming that learners who participate in blogs are more aware and attuned to class activities (Flatley, 2005). Additionally, Ferdig and Trammell (2004) claim, based on qualitative research methods, that blogs in education increase interest and ownership in learning without providing quantitative support for the observed behavior. Another study examined the motivation and online collaboration of students using blogs in learning and claim that the use of blogs enhances learning without quantitative analysis supporting such a claim (West et al., 2006). The qualitative research and literature identify opportunities for organizations to educate and inform people through the use of blogs (Marken, 2006) but quantitative research regarding the blogging phenomenon is still needed (Nardi et al., 2004).

Wikis

The literature supporting wikis provides opportunities for more research, quantitatively analyzing claims, identified themes, and suggestions for continued study. Fleenor and Rego (2005) discuss the potential impact on the quality and quantity of communication taking place within an organization and fail to address what impacts could be realized with implementation of wiki technology. Dearstyne (2007) suggests that wiki implementation promotes efficient communication, reduces costs, and expands business potentials recognizing that no return on investment measurement is established and more study is needed. Initial findings suggest that wikis support more effective and impactful knowledge management and formal workplace learning practices but no quantitative research supports this claim (Raman et al., 2005; Beldarrain, 2006). Bean and Hott (2005) claim that more organizations are adopting wiki technology to enhance learning operations but do not address the quantity of adopting organizations or the impact of adopting wikis on learning and work performance. This gap is acknowledged by Schwartz, Clark, Cossarin, and Rudolf (2004) who call for more research on the impact of wikis in learning organizations.

Podcasting

Beldarrain (2006) suggests that podcasting is becoming a popular technology for learning buts cautions that more research is needed to accurately determine the impact of this technological innovation on learning. French (2006) agrees with the call for more research adding that no measurement exists on the impact of using podcasting on quality of learning. The potential exists for podcasts to change education and learning but no direct studies on learner performance exists (Jensen, 2007; Huntsberger & Stavitsky, 2007). Related to the need for more research on podcasting and learner performance is quantitative study on learner engagement and learner interactivity (Huntsberger & Stavitsky).

The ease of content creation and the potential for positive results makes podcasting a popular tool for organizations to adopt but no quantitative evidence supports the positive impact on performance statement (Vogele & Gard, 2006). Bahr (2006) claims that podcasts enhance return on investment measurements for corporations in terms of reaching a wider audience and quality of contact with audience members; however, no numeric evidence is offered supporting this claim. Qualitative and circumstantial evidence suggests that training operations will adopt podcasts into curriculum which impacts facilitation and student learning but literature does not exist to determine the nature of that impact (Beldarrain, 2006).

Another section of the literature review completed for your enjoyment.

Constructivist Learning

Constructivism is the reflection on innate ideas that yields the exploration of knowledge related to those ideas (Posner, 2004). Social constructivism engages learners in a community of practice designed to create, process, and discover knowledge that is important to the group (Boghossian, 2006; Taber, 2006). Technologies enhance social constructivism by providing convenient tools for learners to participate with, control, and engage information (Beldarrain, 2006). This section explores the constructivism through theory and practice, the application of constructivist thought with Millennial generation members, and finally the use of technology to promote constructivist learning.

Theory and Practice

The purpose of learning is to allow learners to discover knowledge and construct individual or group meanings (Boghossian, 2006; Taber, 2006). Learners develop awareness of the ideas around subjects and use those ideas to create knowledge that is useful to the learning environment and other learners in that environment collectively use that knowledge to construct individual and group understandings (Vygotsky, 1978). Once learners construct knowledge, the new knowledge is the foundation for future learning (Taber).

Social constructivism extends the basic tenets of constructivist thought by placing the individual learner in a collaborative group or social setting (Richardson, 2003; Fiume, 2005; Straits & Wilke, 2007). Students interacting in group settings and at various levels and abilities provide a rich tapestry to reflect and create knowledge (Vygotsky); thus, the group becomes as important as the individual learner in the environment (Vygotsky). The importance of the group setting is underpinned by the establishment of boundaries, rules, and mores (Fiume). Further, to make the group collaboration meaningful there must be a sustained dialogue or interaction around the creation of understanding and discovery of knowledge (Hung, Tan, & Koh, 2006).

Social constructivist settings adhere to basic tenets in order to create a deeper understanding of knowledge (Richardson, 2003). Attention to the individuals and the experiences of the individuals creates group knowledge (Richardson). The group explores information together and engages in meaningful discourse (Richardson; Hung et al., 2006). Opportunities are given for learners to determine, change, challenge, add, or create knowledge through group activities (Richardson). Students must develop metacognitive skills to become aware of their own learning and understanding (Richardson).

 

Constructivism and Millennials

Constructivist theory fits the Millennial generation because the tenets of the theory align with characteristics common to this generation (Skiba & Barton, 2006). Constructivism holds that knowledge is created through learner engagement in meaningful and authentic activities (Jonassen, 1994; Huang, 2002; Hung et al., 2006). Millennials, similarly, require that the task performed, either at work or in learning settings, be meaningful (Eisner, 2005) and authentic (Tapscott, 1998).

While constructivism is both individual and social, the theory requires that learners engage in self-discovery of meaning (Huang, 2002). Tapscott (1998) discusses Millennials’ need to act independently as a chief characteristic of the generation. Further, Millennial generation members enjoy investigative discovery of knowledge to further understanding (Tapscott, 1998). Discovery of knowledge is not solely independent; social constructivism promotes the inclusion of groups in the knowledge creation process (Huang; Goman, 2006) meeting the need for Millennials to practice inclusion (Tapscott) and collaborate (Skiba & Barton, 2006). Social constructivism is enhanced with computing technologies that connect individuals and groups to a larger collective focused on the discovery of meaning and knowledge (Jonassen, 1994; Jonassen, 2000; Huang; Beldarrain, 2006). This technical enhancement creates an innovative environment for Millennials to gather and collaborate fitting the needs for innovation, inclusion, immediacy (Tapscott), interactivity, and connectivity (Skiba & Barton).

Constructivism and Technology

Technologies are not new to the learning theories; most recently the development of collaborative technologies allow learners to engage the computing technology and information provided to become part of a socially constructivist learning community (Jonassen, 2000). Computing technology, when used to foster collaborative learning give users the ability to interact socially, create, consume, and discover knowledge on a wider scale than is available without the use of computing technologies (Jonassen). Commonly in learning environments computing technologies are used in manners that do not promote constructivist principles (Herring, 2004). Jonassen (2000) and Herring (2004) agree that often learning technology is used in one-way, consumption-only, multimedia lectures rendering the learner inactive in the educational process. Collaborative learning technologies promote social collaboration, discovery, consumption, and creation of information that fit with constructivist tenets (Quevedo & Gerladini, 2005) by providing content, community, and technology controls (Beldarrain, 2006). When learners control the learning environment technologies become tools versus resources thus allowing learners to create knowledge (Bellefeuille, Martin, & Buck, 2005).

The Internet is a vast container of information and web-based computing technology like blogs, wikis, and podcasts offers environments that aid individuals in creating communities of practice, create more effective information management tools, and engagement opportunities (Bellefeuille et al., 2005; Fischer & Sugimoto, 2006). These web-based social communities aid in lifelong learning by promoting creativity, innovation, change, and knowledge transition from schooling to workplace learning (Fischer & Sugimoto). Additionally, the Internet learning technologies support constructivist learning by making information available for consideration in accessible, simple-use modalities, that are convenient and powerful (Fischer & Sugimoto).

The specific technologies of blogs, wikis, and podcasts extend the general constructivist and technology discussion. Blogs, wikis, and podcasts create communities of authentic information exchange and collaboration that bypass social hierarchies and create a more constructivist learning environment (Gupta & Pitt, 2004). The three collaborative technology tools provide users the ability to engage in discourse and discovery around meaningful information while providing customizable tools that control interaction, information processing, and content customization (Beldarrain, 2006). Researcher recognize blogs, wikis, and podcasts as collaborative learning tools and the role the technologies play in constructivist learning throughout the lifetime of the student (Beldarrain).

Another section completed for your reading pleasure and my remote backup. These are long posts and so there is no reference section. If you want a reference post a comment for which one or ones you would like and I am happy to respond. The 1st draft of the literature review will be posting tomorrow.

Current estimations cite13,304,000 full-time employees in the United States between the ages of twenty and twenty-four (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008). As workers, this population is technologically savvy, focused, and adept at multitasking (Kyles, 2005). As such, this increasing workforce operates and learns differently than previous generations, requiring more discovery, collaboration and non-linear activities (Howe & Strauss, 2000; Tapscott, 1998). A careful examination of how Millennials learn and work leads to a greater understanding of this generation and the need to adapt work and learning environments to produce sustained success in organizations (Glass, 2007). This subsection defines and describes the Millennial generation members, examining learning preferences and work habits. The subsection concludes with an analysis of the interaction of Millennials and members of earlier generations.

Definition and Descriptions

Howe and Strauss (2000) estimate that the Millennial generation has a population of 100.2 million people. Born from 1982 to 2001 (Shih & Allen, 2007) Millennial generation members grew up in a world that has always known computing technology, faster paced lifestyles, and a host of world events that shape the lives of every person; these triggers define and describe the Millennial generation (Shih & Allen). Tapscott (1998) describes Millennials using themes found in members’ characters: (1) independence, (2) openness, (3) inclusion, (4) strong viewpoints and free expression, (5) innovation, (6) early maturation, (7) investigative, (8) immediacy, (9) consumer savvy, and (10) authenticity. Add to these characteristics the need for interactivity, connectivity, and collaboration (Skiba & Barton, 2006).

Millennials function in a world that is enabled by fast technology and open access that is available around the clock and on every day making the generation members expect instant access and response from many aspects of life (Eisner, 2005; Skiba & Barton, 2006; Shih & Allen, 2007). This always-open world furthers the Millennials’ characteristics of consumer savvy, immediacy, investigative, openness, independence (Tapscott, 1998), interactivity, and connectivity (Skiba & Barton). Because the world is available to Millennials around the clock, members often feel that faster communication is more appropriate; preferring more instantaneous electronic communication over traditional interpersonal communication (Glass, 2007).

Millennials are highly technically literate (Howe & Strauss, 2000; Eisner, 2005; Martin, 2005; Glass, 2007) as a result of living in a world that has always experienced computing technology (Shih & Allen, 2007) and allows for instant electronic communication (Skiba & Barton, 2006; Shih & Allen). As such, Millennials are intelligent and educated (Howe & Strauss; Eisner) fitting the themes of independence, openness, early maturation, strong viewpoints, and free expression (Tapscott, 1998).

The openness of the world surrounding Millennials also means that the group is experience an expansive diversity that previous generations did not experience (Howe & Strauss, 2000; Eisner, 2005). This diversity prepares Millennials to be more inclusive in the approach to schooling, work, and life (Howe & Strauss; Eisner) fitting the themes of openness, inclusion, consumer savvy, authenticity (Tapscott, 1998), connectivity, and collaboration (Skiba & Barton, 2006). The inclusionary nature of Millennials in a diverse world makes the population more focused on the betterment of society versus the pursuit of capital wealth or material goods (Eisner). However, the population as a whole is considered to be more affluent than earlier generations thanks to the inclusionary characteristics and the wealth provided by previous generation members (Howe & Strauss). The combination of affluence and focus on society leads Millennials to value a work-home life balance not sought by previous generations (Allen, 2004).

Millennial Generation Learning Preferences

Traditional learning designs promote a linear approach to the student receipt of information and knowledge; however Millennials do not learn in a linear fashion (Tapscott, 1998; Tapscott, 1999; Prensky, 2005; Arhin & Cormier, 2007). This generation of learners lives in a technology-enabled world that promotes the ability for Millennials to multitask on a variety of items while remaining engaged in learning (Skiba & Barton, 2006). Millennial students are immersed in interactions through collaborative and social technology tools like blogs, wikis, and podcasts that engage the generation’s desire to learn in non-linear modalities (Prensky). Millennials’ adept use of technology creates a population of masterful information collectors and researchers (Shih & Allen, 2007). The inclusion of collaborative computing technologies and the immersion in a technology-enabled world promotes the multitasking behavior of Millennials forcing a shift from traditional learning theories to those grounded in social constructivism allowing for more independent and collaborative discovery and knowledge creation (Skiba & Barton).

Millennial students want to be engaged in learning not only as consumers but as creators of knowledge (Thompson, 2007). This shift to a constructivist learning preference demands that learning environments allow for interactivity, collaboration, and creation (Skiba & Barton, 2006). Blending of traditional instruction activities with experiential activities is essential to keep Millennials engaged in the learning cycle (Billings, 2004). Moreover, the blending of instruction must include the use of computing technology (Gardener & Eng, 2005; Skiba & Barton; Arhin & Cormier, 2007; Wagner, 2007). Although computing technology is capable of doing more than legacy systems familiar to previous generations, the operations of the software and hardware is less complex and offers more to users in terms of consumption and creation (Wagner).

Millennial Generations Work Habits

Most notably, Millennials prefer a balance of work and personal lives (Wagner, 2007). This generation of workers chooses not to commit extended hours in the office while sacrificing important personal lives (Wagner). To facilitate this balanced life, Millennials exhibit resourcefulness in accomplishing tasks through collaboration and the use of computing technology (Martin, 2005; Tapscott, 1998). By accomplishing tasks more efficiently and effectively this generation seeks the flexibility to be managed by accomplishment versus hours spent at work (Eisner, 2005). This expectation of work-personal life balance does not mean that the generation is uncommitted to accomplishing work, to the contrary this generation of workers exhibit the ability to follow rules, guidance, accomplish tasks, and respect authority (Tapscott; Howe & Strauss, 2000).

Millennials express a desire to accomplish work through collaboration with peers (Martin, 2005; Skiba & Barton, 2006) and with members of previous generations (Tapscott, 1998). Additionally, the generation of employees requires frequent and meaningful feedback from earlier generations (Wagner, 2007) while maintaining the ability to complete work in a manner best suited for the individual (Martin).

Meaning is an important element in Millennial work expectations (Allen, 2004; Martin, 2005); this generation expects the work being done to be social responsible (Martin) and important to the business (Eisner, 2005). Similarly, Millennials distaste being assigned work considered as chores or menial; preferring tasks important to the success of the organization (Eisner). The expectation of meaningful work relates to the Millennials’ lack of inherent loyalty to employers (Allen; Hulett, 2006). Rather this generation of employees aligns with organizations that best fit the need for balance and meaning (Allen; Hulett).

The Millennial generation employee also desires continued learning (Tapscott, 1998; Allen, 2004; Eisner, 2005; Sutton-Bell & Narz, 2007). To meet the need for lifelong learning, employers must maintaining workplace training, leadership and management development (Eisner), coaching from more senior employees (Hulett, 2006), frequent performance feedback (Martin, 2005) and job development training and projects (Allen). Related to the need for skills development is the desire for work settings to be enabled with new and innovative technologies (Tapscott; Glass, 2007). Millennials want to be working with technology that benefits the company and themselves and as early adopters of technology the population demands the same from organizations in terms of work accomplishment and workplace learning (Tapscott; Glass). Because Millennials are multitaskers, development and tasks are parallel activities (Sutton-Bell & Narz).

Diversity and inclusion are important to Millennial employees (Glass, 2007; Sutton-Bell & Narz, 2007). This generation adapts to new people, settings, and tasks quickly (Martin, 2005). The Millennial generation exposure to varied populations in terms of sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, creed, religion, cultures, and lifestyles create a workforce that is tolerant, accepting, and prepared to collaborate without prejudicial hesitations (Sutton-Bell & Narz). The preparedness to include a variety of personal characteristics makes Millennials ideal change agents and adept to rely on a variety of experiential input (Sutton-Bell & Narz).

Millennials and Previous Generations

The current workplace is experiencing the presence of four generations that actively participate in organizational operations (Wagner, 2007). Each of these generations exhibit different working styles that result in conflict, change, and organizational growth (Wagner). Bridgers and Johnson (2006) describe the workforce makeup as 10% Traditionalist generation members, 44% Baby Boomers, 34% Generation X members, and 12% Millennials making for a workforce in flux from the employees beginning careers to those exiting into retirement. The exodus of Traditional and Baby Boom generations from the workforce creates a drain on intellectual capital and organizational knowledge (Davis, 2005). The diversity of the workforce and looming departure of 54% of current employee base warrants discussions that stave off repercussions of knowledge and operational gaps (Davis).

The generational makeup of the workforce consists of four different generations. Traditionalists, as 10% of the workforce (Bridgers & Johnson, 2006), are employees born from 1900 through 1945 are more likely to respect hierarchal command structures and the notion that employees earn respect through hard work and proving themselves worthy (Allen, 2004; Sutton-Bell & Narz, 2007; Wagner, 2007). Baby Boomers comprise 44% of the workforce (Bridgers & Johnson) and exhibit loyalty, hard working ethics, and dedication to task and employer (Allen; Sutton-Bell & Narz; Wagner). With slightly less presence in the workforce Generation X members make up 34% of the employment population (Bridgers & Johnson) and transition from loyalty to employer mentalities to a more entrepreneurial spirit that is looking fro reward from equally hard work as previous generations (Allen; Sutton-Bell & Narz; Wagner). Like Millennials, Generation X members are computer literate and expect technology to aid in accomplishing work (Allen; Sutton-Bell & Narz; Wagner). Entering the workforce are Millennial generation members, 12% of the existing workforce (Bridgers & Johnson) and increasing with each passing year (Howe & Strauss, 2000), are technologically savvy, seeking guidance common with newer generations, and looking for a work-personal life balance that produces personal and social gains (Howe & Strauss; Allen; Sutton-Bell & Narz; Wagner).

The differences in working styles lead to opportunity to grow organizations through conflict, change and understanding (Wagner, 2007). Workplaces commonly involve the use of teams and groups to accomplish organizational goals (Skiba & Barton, 2006). Group work for Traditional, Baby Boomers, and Generation X members is not preferred (Skiba & Barton). This contrasts with the Millennials need to collaborate and work in social groups (Tapscott, 1998; Skiba & Barton). Another difference is the use of computing technology in work efforts. Traditionalists and Baby Boomers recognize the use of computers, the preference is to work through more interpersonal and manual processes to accomplish organizational goals (Davis, 2005). Generation X members and Millennials agree that using computing technology enhances work outcomes but differ in the adoption time lines of new technology (Davis). The Millennial generation population are technologically literate and savvy to new and innovative tools that emerge inside and outside the workplace making the population ideal early adopters and frustrated when adoption is not as quick throughout the workforce (Tapscott; Davis; Glass, 2007).

Overcoming conflicts, frustrations, and roadblocks is an integral component of sustained organizational success, something all generations agree is important (Skiba & Barton, 2006). To this point, all generations must accept accountability for actions, behaviors and attitudes while agreeing to develop the wisdom of the other generations (Wood, 2005). Traditional generation members need to engage the organization as mentors and guides capitalizing on a long history of success and experience (Wood; Eisner, 2005). Baby Boomers, in turn, must link later generations to the experience of Traditional generation members; ultimately creating themselves as guides and mentors prior to retirement (Eisner). Successively, Generation X members must continue focusing on the organizational outcomes and provide feedback to employees that sustains success (Eisner). Millennials entering the workforce share much with Traditional generation members, in terms of respect for responsible business and social values, making them well suited to receive the mentorship from Traditional generation employees (Allen, 2004).

Facilitating the blending of generations for continued success requires innovative thinking and systems acceptable for all employees (Billings, 2004). Where earlier generations do not require and are less inclined to provide feedback to later generations and Generation X members and Millennials needing feedback to sustain performance, a system must be developed to bridge the gap (Billings). It must be equally unobtrusive for Traditional and Baby Boom employees while offering meaningful and frequent enough feedback to satiate Generation X and, more so, Millennial generation employees (Billings). More research is required to determine what systems can facilitate the blending and preparations for the future of all generations in the workplace (Glass, 2007).