The Google of Learning – Part I

The Google of Learning – Part I Dr. Balasubramanian Krishnan Chief Executive Officer NuVeda What follows is a vision and a dream of mine. I have been an unabashed admirer of Google and its efforts – not only in its technologies, but also its philosophies. I believe with some of Google’s technologies, online universities and schools can be created that are unparalleled in depth, breadth and impact. Articles and contributions In a series of articles, I will outline what I wish to create in my lifetime. I admit that I tried to create this on my own and did not succeed, for a variety of reasons – for one, it is not an easy one to create. I am happy to contribute my time and energy in creating this space for people interested in this effort. I mean Google itself, if it is interested. I invite comments from one and all. Why? I am a firm believer in that Learning began when Nature began. Plants learn, animals learn, human beings learn. Learning continues even where electricity doesn’t. I feel that if there is a way to capture, deliver, synthesize, personalize, collaborate and innovate on all things we know about, it can be good for all of us, not only to leverage for business needs, but personal needs of humanity as a whole, and who knows – one day perhaps, more than humanity. I look at this as the ultimate innovation engine, if ever something like this should exist. It would become the ultimate open university. It would also create his-tories or her-stories – a story-telling of a kind yet untold. How? I’ve decided that this needs to be an open-source project – one that invites collaboration, research, experimentation and more (just like the Google of Learning itself). I am looking for volunteers to suggest, participate and develop the system. I am also looking for companies, universities and organizations to contribute to the effort with software, and more. Definition A system or space with the following characteristics Content-rich : Leverages freely available resources, organizes and structures them continually. Personalization: Personalized & structured according to ability, when required; allows to create learning universes, when and where desired. Collaborative: is collaborative & facilitates contributions Feedback: Provides continual feedback automatically; encourages feedback from others, when desired Gaming & Experimentation: Provides a fun environment – one that encourages Gaming and experimentation Research: Provides opportunities to research any item in the learning process always; refines research where and when appropriate Nuggetization: Allows for collective synthesis and sharing; creates stories for re-telling Sense-itive: Appeals to all senses – visual, auditory, touch, smell and taste; automatically reconfigures for maximum efficiency if one or many of the senses are absent. Continuous Learning: Is always learning – therefore intrigues the learner in the process to learn more; Fault-resistant – i.e., learning continues even if mistakes are made. Analytics: Metrics continually guide the learning process; offers techniques for correlation analysis, across objects, time, and learners Delivery: bite-sized nuggets of learning for continual improvement Is available 24x7x365 Is device & space agnostic – mobile, desktop, brick-and mortar or otherwise Leverages all available and relevant technologies – SCORM, videos, webinars, virtual classrooms and more Base Technology There are a variety of learning technologies – including excellent learning management systems (LMS-es) that do a portion of what I envision above. Over the course of these articles, I will start to inventory these systems for widespread application. Google+ or Facebook can be a prime candidate for the base system of this project. One can also argue that the University or a school is one such space. If such a University exists, I would like to know about it and contribute to its growth! Explore our thought leadership Similar articles on learning management Top 10 Must-Have Features You Should Look for in Your July 26, 2021 Top 10 features LMS Read more 8 Must-have Features for any Online learning platform along with July 26, 2021 8 Features of online learning Read more Are Zoom, Google Hangouts, WebEx & Livestream really enough to July 26, 2021 Livestream Read more

The Google of Learning – Part III

The Google of Learning – Part III Dr. Balasubramanian Krishnan Chief Executive Officer NuVeda In the original article on this subject (The Google of Learning – Part I), I defined a set of attributes for the online learning university I called the Google of Learning.  In a prior article (The Google of Learning – Part II), we talked about content, what content-rich is and what automatic categorization is about.In this article, I explore Personalization – what such an online university system should do for me. We all know of many organizations that subscribe to thousands of e-learning courses but very few of them are actually used. Why? They simply aren’t personalized to the individuals. In other words, there is a library, but that is not of interest to me because it doesn’t serve my needs and interests. There are a few attributes that come to mind, in no particular order. They are related to the “what, when and how” of the learning elements. In order to demonstrate the points, I take a non-corporate example such as cooking a vegetable lasagna. Just-in-Time i.e., Provide me with the learning elements at the right time This is now a commonly expected behavior of many applications – that the notifications and learning elements are delivered when you need them, not too much earlier or later. It’s like performing any task – be it mountain climbing or swimming or bicycling, for that matter. Unless the key tips for doing the job are learned closer to the time of the actual event, the tips may well be irrelevant, because we may well forget. But Just-in-Time also means the ability to replay and re-learn things when we want it. For example, in Mathematics or in Physics, we might want to hear the techniques a couple of times before we actually perform the mathematical task or the physics experiment. For example, in the case of a vegetable lasagna, can a simple recipe be delivered when I want it (yes – today!); Watch a video of a cook making it (yes, probably!); but real learning happens if I get asked a question: “What would happen if you added coriander to this lasagna sauce?” Contextual i.e., Provide the right learning elements at the right time We all know of many organizations that subscribe to thousands of e-learning courses but very few of them are actually used. Why? They aren’t personalized to the individuals. The contextual characteristic goes hand-in-hand with the “Just-in-Time” requirement. What is relevant to me at a particular time differs from what another employee needs at that time. The ability to distinguish that comes from an understanding of the historical perspective of my needs and actions. In many ways, this is similar to the Google search – how it anticipates what you are likely to type. That is, the system must be smart enough to provide me with the next learning elements based on historical experience. One could stretch this further and ask the system to anticipate the learning elements in the current context – i.e., literally “just-in-time”, but that simply destroys the joy of living and discovery, in my humble opinion – that would be more suitable for robots. In the vegetable lasagna example, one context might be that I do not have much time. In such a case, I might actually appreciate learning about whether there is a quick and dirty way to make a vegetable lasagna? Or are there other alternate dishes that are easier to cook and have a similar pasta-cake like feel? Discovery versus informational i.e., Allow me to discover versus simply provide information One of the biggest drawbacks of general purpose courseware is that they lack the fun elements of learning. When courseware becomes fun, it becomes learningware. It is well known that discovery fosters learning and that puzzles and games accelerate learning because there are many elements to discover. Even physics, chemistry and biological experiments may be considered as games, in some extreme cases. It is therefore meaningful to structure learning elements in various puzzle and game-like methods for effective learning; the easier it is to do, the better the Google of Learning will be. In that sense, the Socratic method (asking questions) is supreme for learning effectiveness. This begs the key question: What kinds of puzzles, games, simulations and other such methods must be possible in the Google of Learning? In the vegetable lasagna example, I might appreciate learning more about what vegetables can go in a vegetable lasagna, and what not. And more importantly, why! Sensory i.e., Allow me to leverage the right kinds of sensory behaviors for effective learning. This characteristic is a little tricky and necessarily complex. It is well known that the learning styles of people differ and many people may call themselves visual, auditory, etc. With the advent of the touch-sensitive devices such as iPad and Tablets, the number of possibilities to deliver learning elements compound dramatically. What then is the right approach? The Google of Learning may itself have to discover the user’s learning style using a combination of methods, and senses, when and where they are applicable. For example, learning how to cook a vegetable lasagna well by reading a recipe is very different from learning from an accomplished cook – learning by watching and doing. This explains why the iPad is a big hit with the young children – they tend to learn by feeling, touching and tasting, in addition to seeing and hearing. When the opportunity to play with the iPad presents itself, I have never seen ANY kid shy away. Now, that is saying something! In the case of the veggie lasagna, I might be interested in a learning element that allows me to touch and feel the lasagna – I for one like the top crispy! Do we have ANY devices that allow us to experience that kind of feel? Probably not! Probably soon to come! Explore our thought leadership Similar articles on learning management 10 Key aspects

The Google of Learning – Part II

The Google of Learning – Part II Dr. Balasubramanian Krishnan Chief Executive Officer NuVeda In the original article on this subject (The Google of Learning – Part I), I defined a set of attributes for the space I called the Google of Learning. In this article, I explore the meaning of Content and structure for such a Learning Universe. Content-Rich In the context of the Google of Learning concept, content acquires a holistic meaning – that of an object that can be consumed by the senses. Let me explain. Today content is generally understood to be text, art or images, sounds, songs (audio sequenced over time) and video (audio & imagery sequenced over time). All of these are stored in computers in a boolean sequence (ones and zeroes) and retrieved when required, for example – clicking on this web page. Therefore, you can now begin to imagine the scale of the content to be managed. Video is rich because two different senses are combined over time. Now, when you coalesce video and the sense of touch over time, a whole new sequence of content is created which is easily richer than video itself. Now, that is still only 3 out of the 5 senses. I will let you imagine the size and scale of the content to be managed when you include all senses (see Sense-itive, as part of the Google of Learning – Part I). When I talk about content-richness in the Google of Learning concept, I am talking about content that can be assembled and dis-assembled, aggregated, disaggregated and presented to the learner. But this assembly and dis-assembly is possible only when the content is structured – not just in terms of tagging, which addresses relevance to some extent, but also organized in a logical fashion that is appropriate for the needs of the learner. Why is organization and structuring of content important? In some ways it is exactly like a product and the buyer. When the need is there, the product gets bought. If the need is not there, the product may get bought, just like a search might yield the results that you want. Similarly, the question to ask is – how can content be structured in a fashion that the learner wants. Even better – how can content be automatically structured? Note that this is more than meta-tagging. It is more than Web 3.0 – the Semantic Web. How the content needs to be structured is dependent on how the learner wants it. Therein lies the challenge. A kid learns differently from a teenager who in turn learns differently than an adult. But what really distinguishes a kid’s learning ability from that of an adult? We all know of many whiz kids who qualify for Ph.D’s at a young age, etc. It all depends on their abilities – assessed by a well-accepted set of independent measurement tools. These tools are called tests or assessments. In effect, one needs ways of creating steps or mini-steps of learning along the way which assesses an individual (see Nuggetization – as part of the Google of Learning – Part I). Let’s be sure that Meta Tagging is a fantastic beginning. It addresses elements of the What. Automatic Meta Tagging is something Google does reasonably well, today. Therefore, one can easily categorize learning subjects and find subjects of interest to us. However, consider these scenarios: You want to learn piano lessons for free – search the web and search youtube. What do you find? How do you choose? Does it have the right structure for you? Assume you want to learn in 5-minute segments: what can you find? What if you wanted to learn in 10 minute segments? 20-minute segments? Can you break up a 20-minute lesson into 5-minute segments? Take the example of a book having 200 pages – you can read it one page at a time, 10 pages at a time or a chapter at a time. However, one could argue that it makes sense probably to read it only one chapter at time, but still the choice is available to me. Provides continual feedback automatically; encourages feedback from others, when desired You might also want to aggregate their lessons, based on their time availability – i.e., aggregate 5-minute lessons to create a 30-minute segment, for example. Are these offerings available to you? Now think of added complexity. Assume that you have completed basic piano lessons and are now ready to do more. What should the Google of Learning do for you? Where should you begin? Allows for collective synthesis and sharing; creates stories for re-telling There is more. You might be a piano aficionado and you might actually want to learn from certain Masters, specific ones. And….more! More need for structure. I am sure there will be more such needs, as it develops. The key question is: are such choices available to me today? The answer is – it is available, partially. But learner demands dictate how the content must be structured, automatically. Are you able to set up a start point and and end-point for your learning – i.e., goals? Can the Google of Learning determine the right goals for you, based on your profile? And that brings us to the next article on the The Google of Learning – Part 3: Personalization. Stay tuned – and please do let me know what you think! Cheers, Krishnan. Explore our thought leadership Similar articles on learning management Are Zoom, Google Hangouts, WebEx & Livestream really enough to July 26, 2021 Livestream Read more Training Company demonstrates ROI of Leadership Programs using CALF™– A July 26, 2021 ROI of Leadership Read more Are your teams competitive enough in today’s world? Most organizations July 26, 2021 Competitive team Read more