The Pros and Cons of Podcasting

I have never been one to get too excited over podcasts.   I know there are a good number of people who like to listen to audio content on their mobile devices or while driving in the car.  Me?  I prefer to listen to something like Pink Floyd or the Grateful Dead when I have a little down time, so podcasts have never been my thing.   That being said, they do have their place among delivery media.  And since most of my learners are sales and service professionals who do spend a lot of time in their cars, I have had my team create a podcast library of downloadable resources for "learning on the go."

This week in the class that I'm currently taking at FSU, we discussed the benefits and limitations of podcasts as a medium for learning.  As good collaborative learners do, we created some very nice lists.   I thought they had a lot of good points, so I'm reprinting them here:

Potential Benefits of Using Audio Podcasts 

1. Portability e.g. easy to load on an iPod or similar device and consume content on the fly
2. Well suited for distributing content that doesn't require visual support e.g. facts, opinions, and the like
3. Good for audiences who need information on the fly - salespeople and service people who spend a lot of time in cars can listen as they drive
4. Good for content that is audio-oriented, such as learning a language, subtle or sensitive communication topics, learning how to play music, or create sound effects
5. Make better sense of computer images when accompanied by audio by providing an explanation
6. Encourage deeper thought when providing audio instruction by asking questions. (Not a benefit unique to audio podcasts?)
7. Audio-only podcasts can be fairly inexpensive to produce (microphone, software)
8. Audio-only podcasts allow students who have dyslexia the opportunity to learn material without being hindered by the challenges of reading words on a page (this was from our reading of Harris and Park, 2008)
9. Can Provide specific customization of information to be learned by the learner as a stand alone, or in addition to original instruction
10. Audio materials can be presented in multiple languages, to target a larger, more diverse audience of learners
11. Podcasts can be used to reinforce lecture concepts
12. Students can work at their own pace, starting and stopping when necessary, and replaying key points of the lecture/podcast as they deem necessary
13. Good for relaying repeated information, leaving teachers more time for higher level instruction (i.e. podcast library or museum tour, as mentioned in the Harris and Park article)
14. Podcasts are a medium that teens/younger students can identify with and be motivated to use
15. Because sound effects are accessible in the public domain, you can create a unique environment that matches the sound and feeling of the content being taught fairly inexpensively vs. trying to create a classroom or video experience
16. Hearing a voice and providing an "eye" break is a huge benefit to online learning. With all the book, article, online reading, sometimes it is nice to have a voice and a "eye" break
17. Provides learners the opportunity to review and re-review information an unlimited number of times 

Potential Limitations of Using Audio Podcast

1. Not well suited for complex subjects that necessitate visual support to fully comprehend e.g. mathematics for example
2. Violates Mayer's multimedia effect when not designed correctly
3. Can only be effective for short topics
4. Passive medium
5. Does not support learning if students are not attentive, therefore the audio must keep the student involved, e.g. asking questions (similar to & elaboration of item 4)
6. The loss of non-verbal cues (body language, supportive material)from the speaker may affect the intent of the message/speaker
7. Aural memory is limited in the retention of information, but this can be overcome in audio-only instruction by the learner being able to control the audio presentation by pausing and replaying the information
8. Audio files take up a lot of space on a computer's hard drive
9. Some people are visual/kinesthetic learners, that is they learn primarily by seeing someone do something or doing it themselves
10. Audio output quality is only as good as its weakest component, which is often the system's speakers. It was pointed out that high quality sound it a necessity for us aging listeners and for those with other hearing losses
11. Lacks feedback. Learner is unable to ask questions or clarify information being presented
12. If targeted toward a specific audience, some previous knowledge of the subject matter is assumed(Difficult to gear toward a universal audience)
13. Does not allow for multiple representations of the material, only auditory
14. Audio only podcasts may be longer than necessary if using words to describe a concept that a picture could teach faster
15. Requires an audio output device, which may not be present on all computers (no speakers on some public-access machines in offices, libraries, etc.)
16. If the learner is not as proficient in the spoken language, it could be limiting especially when accents and territorial dialect are added in to the mix
17. Does not allow for nonverbal cues (already listed in item 6)

This list comes to you courtesy of the Fall 2010 EME6415 class at Florida State University.

Using Social Media for Learning

I put together this presentation for a Web 2.0 class I'm taking at Florida State University. It presents a process for learning through social media, an example of how the process works based on my personal experiences, and an invitation to connect with me to share bookmarks on del.icio.us. Check it out and let me know what you think. If you want to add me to your network on del.icio.us you can find me here.

Using Social Media for Learning

View more presentations from Mike Petersell.

A Good Read: Here Comes Everybody

This summer I'm taking a class on Web 2.0-based Learning and Performance at Florida State University.  As part of the course requirements, I'm currently reading the book Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations, by Clay Shirky. So far it is a great read.  I wish I had it on my radar screen sooner. The first few chapters are interesting. Shirky uses sociological and economic points-of-view along with common sense examples to explain the growth of online communities.  I'm not even half way through the book yet, but what I've read so far has really brought into perspective how large an impact Web 2.0 tools have had, and will continue to have on how we organize and interact with each other in online communities.  A few key points, I've found interesting so far:

• Levels of involvement in the Web 2.0 world can be viewed as rungs on a ladder.  The first rung is sharing, the second is cooperation, and the third is collective action.   Collective action empowers communities to bring about change.
• Groups grow in levels of complexity faster than they grow in size.  The more people there are in a group, the more relationships there are among those people.
• The growth of personal publishing and communities in the Web 2.0 world can be largely attributed to the drastic collapse of costs that have previously made it impractical.  Think about the effort it would take to organize photo sharing around a specific event.  Now people take their pictures and post them and by using common tags they can all be brought together.
• Social media used in the workplace fosters a knowledge sharing that is neither directed by management nor driven by profit motives. Instead it is driven by personal interest, which may sometimes benefit a company economically. 
• Personal communication and formal publishing are blurred in the Web 2.0 world.  I'm a huge hockey fan, I get a lot of my news from following hockey writers on their blogs and on twitter along with reading their articles published through formal media outlets.
• In the past, organizations could only do what was practical. There options were limited to taking institutional action on something or no action.  Social media tools provide a new alternative; action by loosely structured groups.
• Web 2.0 tools have enabled the mass amateurization of fields such as journalism and photography.  Someone who is in the right place at the right time may be able to capture a great picture or a story to share even though they are not a professional.
• Sharing proceeds gathering in the Web 2.0 world.  Traditionally it was the other way around. Communities were formed by people gathering together and then sharing information.

Some of these points may seem obvious, but I find a few of them to be quite profound.   They are helping me reframe my thinking around how I might foster online communities and informal learning opportunities in my work.  Although I haven't finished the book yet, I was too excited not to share some of what I read so far.

Instructional Design: To Degree or not to Degree

While cruising through the blogosphere this week I stumbled upon a debate about whether or not people who practice instructional design should have an advanced degree in the field. The two points of view are well represented in writings by Cammy Bean - Learning Visions (not necessary) and Karl Kapp – Kapp Notes (should have it).

Reading their arguments caused me to reflect on my own career path and choices. I have held a variety of positions in learning & development over the years. On my blog, I identify myself as a “Learning Generalist” but at heart I am an Instructional Designer.

Early in my career I began writing training programs using instincts and intuition. I made instructional design choices that made sense to me about how one would learn and internalize new information or skills. For the most part, I made good choices and my learners were successful. Publications such as Training magazine, T&D (as it is now called) and the InfoLine provided me with an informal “101” education. Later on I supplemented those readings with books on instructional design and courses from Darryl Sink & Associates, Langevin Learning and Bob Pike’s Creative Training Techniques. Through these vehicles and a lot of trial and error I sharpened my skills.

When e-learning appeared on the horizon and I was scared to death. I never was much of a technical person and I was sure my career was over. Eventually, some user-friendly tools came on the market and I was able to avert this crisis by learning how to use Lectora and Articulate Presenter software. It was a new medium but still required sound instructional design.

As my career progressed, I found myself wanting to know more about my chosen field. I decided to pursue a graduate degree in Instructional Systems at Florida State University. Participating in the program had its pros and cons. On the pro side, it opened doors to new resources, sharpened my course development skills, and deepened my understanding of how people learn. I gained a better understanding of what motivates learners and how I could attend to their needs and motivations through instructional design. On the con side, I was a victim of the learning trends. I had to endure every new learning trick, tool and pet project my professors threw at me. But in the end, I am better off for this experience.

The bottom line is that the program has made me a more competent and confident learning professional. What I once did on intuition I now do deliberately and my results are consistently better. My company (which is paying for my education) has benefited greatly. I have success stories to tell about learning projects that I don’t think I would have even attempted prior to participating in the program. I am sought after as a learning strategist inside my company and my career satisfaction is much higher now.

But here’s the thing: Would I have had this success if I jumped right into graduate school early on? I don’t think so. Years of self-development and practical experience helped me to get the most out of the program. So I don’t believe it is necessary to have an advanced degree to be successful in this field… but it sure helps.