Managing The Creep!

While reflecting on the topic of "managing the creep", the term has a double meaning that evokes vivid memories of my all time worst Project from Hell. I was a fairly new senior instructional designer, also acting as the ISD Project Manager, when I was faced with an absolute nightmare in terms of scope creep. The project consisted of approximately 80 short courses that contained close to 200 Adobe Captivate simulations. The client/sponsor – a director from a business sales organization – was seasoned, smart, reasonable and would defer to the “training professionals” when it came to the training plan. The negotiated timeline, at the beginning of the project, was attainable. I had an extremely talented developer (contractor) working with me on the project. While the project was daunting and slightly complex, I felt confident that we could meet or exceed our client’s expectations. All was right with the world! My developer and I were excited and motivated to “knock it out of the ballpark” for this client, who was such a joy to work with. We were equally committed to creating a dazzling product for her! Then the shoe dropped. There was a reorganization that was taking place and downsizing was imminent. Our sponsor had to deal with more pressing business issues. The client hired a contractor (previous employee) to manage the project for her. She gave total control and authority to the PM. This was when our lives changed. Our previously stable timeline and steady progress became a daily battle in an effort to “manage the creep”. The new PM insisted on adding audio to the simulations – and declared that she would narrate them! Her voice was less than professional sounding. (I’m being kind) This was exacerbated by constant changes and moving targets created by the PM. What was a stable training plan and scope of work, became a constant wrestling match to deal with the PM moving the targets. When I tried to reach out to the project client/sponsor for help and a voice of reason, the PM became a wedge between us and put her spin on the message. So much so that the client would simply defer to the PMs decision because she was simply overwhelmed with the well being of her organization. And as the client deferred to her, the PM became more aggressive and demanding. This nightmare culminated in a weekend that brought some professional regrets on my part.

It started when one last round of changes required that my developer and I work around the clock to meet the deadline. We started early Friday morning – he in Chicago at 8am CST and me in San Francisco at 6am PST – and we worked around the clock adding the narration audio files that she had continually revised. We spent hours adding the audio files and adjusting the Captivate simulation timelines… a tedious and time consuming process as some of you might know! We finally finished at 3pm PST on Saturday afternoon… after working through the night. I think I developed carpel tunnel syndrome in a single weekend as a result of manipulating those simulation timelines! But, we were so proud of ourselves at that point – we had met the challenge! We agreed to regroup on Sunday morning after getting some sleep. At that time, we’d fine tune and polish up our final products. And we did. And we were proud of the dedication we’d shown in meeting the deadline, despite the changes.

Next… a meeting on Monday morning with the PM… and we couldn’t wait to say “We did it! We busted our behinds… but we got it done!” [What was unsaid: “Despite your ridiculous demands, your disrespect and ignorance of the process and the unreasonable timeline, we’ve produced something good… even if your speaking voice sucks!”] So… we “arrive” at the virtual meeting (audio conference call)… and announce that we had completed adding the narrations to the simulations, meeting the project deadline. And without acknowledging our effort and achievement, the PM begins browbeating my developer. She begins complaining about some insignificant document that he hadn’t updated or sent to her. She said she had additional changes – she had rerecorded audio over the weekend – and expected the updates to be completed within the week. This was the last straw for me. A quiet storm came over me and I calmly asked her not to speak disrespectfully to [let’s call him Jason] and that we both had worked tirelessly – for 33 hours straight on Friday/Saturday – to integrate the audio files that she had insisted upon and were outside the original scope of the project. The call duration was up and the call ended. I wrote a scathing email to my boss, her boss, both our bosses’ boss, and hit send. [Always good to calm down before hovering and plowing down on that SEND button!]

I won’t go into the coaching I received from my boss nor the drama that ensued as a result of the escalations. Quite honestly, it was worth it! The PMs abuse and misuse of power had become too much to bear. However, I am sad to say that later that day my dedicated, talented developer walked out on the job. I had never experienced that nor have I experienced it since. He called me later that evening and said he was sorry and that he loved working with me but he wouldn’t work with her any more.

Bottom line: I will always see this as my failure. I was a naïve, new ISD PM and I didn’t know how to say “No” or deal with the dynamics of a very complex situation. If I had it to do over again, I would have implemented a change management plan and communication plan (Stolovich, 2010). I would have managed the scope creep much more aggressively and methodically. This was a huge learning experience that matured me professionally. It was painful, but it made me stronger as an instructional designer and project manager. Portny, et. al. define scope creep as: “The natural tendency of the client, as well as project team members, to try to improve the project’s output as the project progresses.” What Portney, et. al. don’t say in this definition is the power and importance of … “Just say NO!”

References

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Stolovich, M. (2010). Creating a resource allocation plan. [Online video]. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4744643&Survey=1&47=6446186&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Estimating Training Project Costs

Don Clark’s Big Dog & Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition – Performance, Learning, Leadership, & Knowledge site has a lot of great information on it – from the basics of Instructional System Design (ISD) to topics like estimating costs for training programs. This site provides a variety of ISD related information with details that you may find helpful when building a budget. The Estimating Costs and Time in Instructional Design page presents design ratios and case studies that are helpful. Design ratios are invaluable in estimating costs associated with training projects. Keep in mind that design ratios are estimates and you can find a variety of them by different resources. One of the most comprehensive and accurate that I’ve seen is by Brian Chapman. His blog post, How long does it take to create training?, is available on a great Training & Development research site called Brandon-Hall.  (Also see the Brian's blog on the Chapman Alliance website. The Cost Estimator tool, on Clark's site, is a very basic tool that assists with estimating and tracking costs for training projects.

The Project Smart site presents the “Three Point Estimating” technique that offers a more accurate method of estimating costs using Best Case, Most Likely Case, and Worst Case estimates (Haughey, 2010). The formula is:

Estimate = ( B + 4 M + W ) / 6
• B = best case (1/6)
• M = most likely (4/6)
• W = worst case (1/6)

Another great nugget found on the Project Smart site is the Project Management Proverb: The same work under the same conditions will be estimated differently by ten different estimators or by one estimator at ten different times. Estimating project costs is as much an art as it is a science. There are methodologies and tools that can guide the exercise of estimating project costs and building budgets, but there is usually that element of adding our “best guess”.

References

Chapman, B. (2007, December 5). Estimating development times. Message posted to http://brandon-hall.com/bryanchapman/?p=7

Haughey, D. (2010). Estimating project costs. Retrieved from http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/estimating-project-costs.html

Phillips, J. (2010). Project cost management. Retrieved from http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/project-cost-management.html

Piskurich, G.M. (2006). Rapid instructional design: Learning ID fast and right (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Copyright by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Used by permission via the Copyright Clearance Center Retrieved from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/courses/56607/CRS-CW-4744643/EDUC_6145_readings/6145_Wk5_Piskurich_39-47.pdf

Sommers, A. (2010). 12 tips for accurate project estimating. Retrieved from: http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/12-tips-for-accurate-project-estimating.html

The Art of Communicating Effectively

In this week's communication exercise, “The Art of Effective Communication”, the same message was delivered in three modalities: via email, voicemail, and face-to-face communication. The intention of the exercise is to interpret each message and the potential nuances. What are the subtle differences in how the message, delivered in three different formats, might be interpreted by the recipient?

The email version evoked images of a slightly desperate and stressed sender. While the tone seemed understanding that Mark (the recipient) was legitimately busy, I projected an image of sender that was a little stressed out. The same message delivered via voicemail came across as no nonsense, direct, with a slightly edgy or perturbed tone. It was the least “friendly” sounding of the three. The face-to-face delivery portrayed a woman who conveyed a message that was much less stressed; perhaps even low key. She was direct and clear about what she needed, but her message seemed the friendliest and the least stressed about the situation. A big plus: you could see her smile. I didn't "hear" a smile in the voicemail. Nor did I "read" a smile in the email version.

This exercise provided an interesting and effective way to prompt consideration of how the same message may be interpreted through different delivery modalities. In fact, it made me think of a recent work experience. In my professional world, 95% of my work is conducted virtually – via email, voicemail, instant messaging, or virtual web-meetings. (5% being occasional long distance travel for face-to-face meetings, etc.) Last week, I was invited to a three day, offsite meeting that was held at the home of one of our organizations Directors. The intention was to provide a creative space that would inspire open, creative and innovative thinking. At one point, during day two of the face-to-face session, one of the participants said to me in a surprised voice, “I never realized how comical you can be.” I said, “Really? I guess I can come across as pretty serious on some of our calls.” She replied – with surprising emphasis, “Yeah, you can be pretty intense on some of those [project] calls!” I was really taken aback by this because I consider myself very approachable, funny, positive, but always strive to be professional in my interactions. It seemed I may have been misunderstood or that my complete personality hadn't been coming through during our project interactions. At the end of our third day, we all debriefed and shared our ideas regarding the value of meeting face-to-face versus the usual virtual communications. Several of us commented enthusiastically on how valuable and effective it had been to be able to work together face-to-face … including the woman who had commented on her different perception of me since meeting for the first time. The exchange made me realize that it is very difficult to get a well rounded sense of someone (or their message) strictly via email, voicemail, or conference call. There truly is something refreshing about good old face-to-face meetings once in a while! The key learning is: Be mindful of how your messages/interactions may be interpreted by others who don’t know the whole you!

Reference

Media: The Art of Effective Communication was retrieved on 01.20.2011 from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/EDUC/6145/03/mm/aoc/index.html  

Learning from a Project “Post-mortem”

One of the most challenging projects that I’ve been involved in was a technical sales certification program that I was called upon to manage in partnership with another Project Manager. This PM had successfully implemented a similar certification program for another client group (prior to a merger) on another technology and the client wanted to replicate it for a specific technology certification in the merged company. Since the goal was to replicate his approach, he acted as the lead PM and was chartered with managing the project charter, project scope, communications plan and all of the key PM components of the project. The program was comprised of web-based training, synchronous virtual training elements and some leader led face-to-face workshops. I was asked to manage the development of the web-based training.

The situation was complicated by the fact that our company had just gone through a significant merger. The lead PM was from the new company and I was in the learning organization they were being integrated into. As a result of the merger, our organization was going through a painful cultural struggle wrought with power struggles, fear, resentment and distrust. This impacted the project and complicated the relationships amongst project team members. As the project progressed, the lead PM and I found ourselves disagreeing on many of the tasks that needed to take place in terms of instructional design approaches, the standards and processes of the organization, and the tracking of certification testing results – most of which were new to the lead PM. Eventually, rather than deal with the realities of the new organization, he began negotiating with the client and making decisions on his own. Many of these decisions were not communicated across the functional teams and this resulted in confusion, missed dates, diminished quality and integrity of the instructional design, problems with the assessments and tracking of the certification, and missed dates. Additionally, many of the agreements he made with the client he could not come through on and he had to reach out to me later to create fixes and come up with last minute solutions. There was no structured change management plan, the client was very aggressive and she wouldn’t take “no” for an answer, and the lead PM was intimidated by her. The scope creep went completely out of control (Portny, et. al., 2008).

Overall, if I was faced with this same situation again, I would have made clear agreements with the lead PM. This would include clearly defined roles and responsibilities, project charter, statement of work, project scope, work breakdown structure, communication plan, and change management process. I would follow the phases of ISD Project Management more closely. This would include the standard ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation) approach to managing instructional design deliverables – as well as Allen & Harden’s approach that includes Project Initiation, Project Definition, Project Planning, Project Tracking and Project Closeout. (Allen & Harden, 2008). While there are many valid approaches to Instructional Systems Design (ISD) and project management, deciding on and consistently applying a methodology, throughout the lifecycle of the project, ensures that all aspects of your project will be cared for. This provides clear expectations for all stakeholders and truly helps to keep the project on track through completion and project close.

References

Allen, S., & Hardin, P. C. (2008). Developing instructional technology products using effective project management practices. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 19(2), 72–97. Copyright by Springer-Verlag, New York.

Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects. Laureate International Universities.

Portney, S.E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J.R., Shafer, S.M., Sutton, M.M. & Kramer, B.E. (2008). Project management-planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, NJ.

Reflection on Distance Learning

There still may be some misconceptions about the value, validity and quality of distance learning and online degree programs. However, I believe we are on the road to changing those perceptions. As a student of an online graduate program, the reservations and concerns that I originally had – and that are shared by many individuals who have no firsthand experience with distant education – have largely been put to rest. When considering an online degree program, my biggest concern was what I thought would be lost by not being in a face-to-face setting. That is the perceived lack of discussion, human interaction and connection in an online environment. What I have found is that interactions and discussions are much more relevant, thoughtful, and scholarly than in a spontaneous face-to-face discussion.

The emergence and application of Web 2.0 technologies has produced an equivalent learning environment, through the use of asynchronous discussion threads. (Beldarrain, 2006; Hill & Raven, 2000; Simonson, et. al., 2009; Tam, 2000). It is through these collaborative interactions that thoughtful, provocative dialog and exchange of ideas takes place. In some respects it is preferable to the face-to-face environment because it allows the learner the time to be thoughtful and complete scholarly research before responding. This raises the level of quality due to the opportunity for thoughtful and relevant response. It also acts as a social equalizer because it provides more introverted or socially nervous students to participate as actively and thoroughly as those who might be more vocal or over bearing in a face-to-face setting.

As our technologies continue to evolve and our society continues to embrace and apply them, the more society will trust and become comfortable with virtual life and online exchanges. (Siemens, 2010). The technological inclination of digital natives and younger learners/employees will continue to drive the movement towards technology-oriented learning. (Prensky, 2005). I anticipate that this will include increased use of multimedia and immersive, virtual learning environments and methods of communication. “Our young people generally have a much better idea of what the future is bringing than we do. They’re busy adopting new systems for communicating (instant messaging), sharing (blogs), buying and selling (eBay), exchanging (peer-to-peer technology), creating (Flash), meeting (3D worlds), collecting (downloads), coordinating (wikis), evaluating (reputation systems), searching (Google), analyzing (SETI), reporting (camera phones), programming (“modding”/modifying), socializing (chat rooms), and even learning (Web surfing).” (Prensky, 2005). The youth – these technology driven members of society – are our future.

I believe technology will drive transformative changes in the realm of education. Not only in our teaching tools and delivery methods, but in how we define learning and the theory and methodology of our approach. As instructional designers, we have a significant responsibility in that transformation. As professionals, we must continue to evolve and become proficient in the current and emerging technologies. In addition, we must continually look for ways to enhance our online learning events and keep them relevant while utilizing contemporary tools in our instructional design.

Through this commitment to quality instructional design and by keeping learning events challenging, relevant and meaningful, we will continue to elevate the perceptions of distant education. By emulating the highest level of ISD professionalism and socializing our alumni status of an online graduate degree program we can also elevate the perceptions of online degree programs. The truth is we get out of life what we put into it. Education is no different! Whether you are an online learner or a student sitting in a classroom, your drive will determine how deep and how wide your learning goes. (Gambescia & Paolucci, 2009; Hill & Raven, 2000). Distant education provides incredible opportunities for expanded, deep learning through the technologies, tools and powerful interactions that are inherent in the online environment.

References

Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.

Gambescia, S., & Paolucci, R. (2009). Academic fidelity and integrity as attributes of university online degree program offerings. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring121/gambescia121.html

Hill, J.R. & Raven, A. (2000). Online learning communities: If you build them, will they stay? Retrieved on 12/15/2010 from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper46/paper46.htm  

Piskurich, G., & Chauser, J. (2010). Facilitating Online Learning. Video. Retrieved on 12/24/2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6262944&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants – Part I. Retrieved on 12/24/2010 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf  

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants – Part II: Do they really think differently? Retrieved on 12/24/2010 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part2.pdf  

Prensky, M. (2005). Listen to the natives. Retrieved on 12/26/2010 from http://www.siprep.org/prodev/documents/Prensky.pdf

Schmidt, E., & Gallegos, A. (2001). Distance learning: Issues and concerns of distance learners. Journal of Industrial Technology, 17(3). Retrieved from http://atmae.org/jit/Articles/schmidt041801.pdf

Siemens , G. (2010). The future of distance education. Laureate Education, Inc. Baltimore, MD.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Tam, M. (2000) Constructivism, instructional design and technology: implications for transforming distance learning. Educational Technology & Society 3(2), 50-60. Retrieved on 12/24/2010 from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.36.623&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Transitioning to Facilitating Distance Learning Events

There are wonderful advantages, for both instructor and student, to the distance learning environment. As an instructor, you will not have to travel or contend with the physical and logistical challenges of teaching in a “brick and mortar” setting. Additionally, both instructor and student benefit from a focused, methodical approach to distant education. This includes the flexibility and convenience of Web 2.0 technologies that can be typically be accessed 24/7. (Simonson, et. al., 2009).

New responsibilities, and significant changes in teaching approach, are required when facilitating an online distance learning event. As an instructor, one must move from an Instructor-Centered Model to a Learner-Centered Model in which learning environments are cooperative, individualistic, collaborative and supportive. (Simonson, et. al., 2009).  This means shifting from delivery of a lecture oriented course, in which you cover specific materials, to being a coach that guides the learner through the process of self-directed exploration of learning environments.  The students play an active role in their learning and a big part of that is sharing thoughts and ideas through collaborative discussion boards.

Web 2.0 technologies – for example, wikis/discussion boards and blogs – play a critical role in the distance learning (DL) environment. While we cannot duplicate the desired elements of face-to-face (F2F) learning, through well designed DL courses and utilizing Web 2.0 tools we can create equivalent learning outcomes. (Simonson, unk).  We must create an interactive forum to facilitate social learning for our online learners. (Berg, Z. & Collins, M., 1996). One of the most powerful tools used to create collaborative, shared learning communities is the discussion board or discussion thread. (Lambert, et. al., 2009).

As an instructor of distant education programs, you must become proficient in the tools used in your program. Managing these tools should be seamless, elegant and you must be able to easily support your students. The technology and tools must not be a distraction nor a hindrance to your students learning experience. Take the time (or the classes) necessary to become skillful in navigating and managing the tools of your course!

In addition to learning the technologies and tools you will use to manage the class, you must also shift your teaching approach.  The distance learning environment requires equal responsibility – from instructor and student – in achieving learning outcomes.  How do you, as the instructor, support behaviors that will ensure your students success? How will you motivate, guide, and encourage your online students?

As an instructor, shifting from face-to-face synchronous training to facilitating an asynchronous distance learning event requires significant shifts in perspective. You must change the way you teach and you must change your expectations of your students! According to Oblinger (1999), some of the more significant shifts for you and your students include changing from:

• Lecturing to coaching
• Taking attendance to logging on
• Distribution requirements to connected learning
• Credit hours to performance standards
• Competing to collaborating
• Library collections to network connections
• Passive learning to active learning
• Textbooks to customized materials

It is critical that you define and communicate clear expectations to your online students. This should include:

• Engagement guidelines and “Netiquette”
• Course syllabus
• Rubric(s) for grading
• Clear communication of expectations for:
              • Behaviors
              • Participation
              • Assignments
              • Discussions

As an instructor in a distant learning environment, there are several ways that you can engage students and create connection to enhance their learning experience.

• Discussion Boards
• Blogs
• Instant Messaging/Online Chat
• Traditional tools such as email, phone calls, and conference calls.

Creating a learning community - in which deep, meaningful learning takes place - is the responsibility of both teacher and student. As an instructor it is your role to continue to find ways to engage and challenge your students, expanding their self-directed learning and lifting them to higher heights.

References


Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2),139–153.

Berg, Z., and Collins, M. (2006). Facilitating Interaction in Computer Mediated Online Courses. Retrieved from http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/flcc.html

Hill, J.R. & Raven, A. (2000). Online learning communities: If you build them, will they stay? Retrieved on 12/15/2010 from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper46/paper46.htm

Lambert, J., Kalyuga, S., & Capan, L. (2009). Student perceptions and cognitive load: What can they tell us about e-learning Web 2.0 course design?. E-Learning Vol. 6 (2). Retrieved 12/14/2010 from www.wwwords.co.uk/ELEA

Ng, K. (2010). Availability of technology does not ensure accessibility. Retrieved on 11/06/2010 from http://www.digitalopportunity.org/comments/availability-of-technology-does-not-ensure-accessibility 

Oblinger, D.G. (1999). Hype, hyperarchy, and higher education. Business Officer, 33(4), 22-24, 27-31.

Piskurich, G., & Chauser, J. Facilitating Online Learning. Video. Retrieved 12/14/2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6262944&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Simonson, M. (unknown). Equivalency theory and distance education. Tech trends, Vol. 43, Issue 5. Retrieved on 12/18/2010 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/q39k5017415q8621/fulltext.pdf


Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.


Wikipedia: Communities of practice. (2010). Retrieved from 12/15/2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communities_of_practice

Wikipedia: Online learning community. (2010). Retrieved on 12/15/2010 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_learning_community

Multimedia Program: Week 1 "Distance Learning Timeline Continuum" (2010). Retrieved on 12/19/2010 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603379&Survey=1&47=6390536&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

The Impact of Open Source: Open Courses, Opening Doors!

       In exploring the world of open source courseware this week, I was excited by the prospect that I could actually be a student of ivy league professors and enter the classrooms of Yale and Stanford Universities!  This is, in my opinion, an incredible opportunity!  So I sought out the list of available open source courses from Stanford University on iTunes and Open Yale Courses.  I chose an Open Yale course named “Death” (Philosophy 178).  I was quite excited to enter into this icon of academia, Yale University.  So I must begin by acknowledging that open source courses bring the best and the brightest, the most exclusive and expensive, and the most brilliant minds of our times to the living room, office or classroom of anyone with internet access… 24/7 and free of charge! What a gift to those of us who cannot afford or perhaps are too academically average to ever hope to be educated by such legendary institutions.

     The course I chose was a Yale College course, taught on campus twice per week for 50 minutes, and was recorded for Open Yale Courses in Spring 2007. It was originally delivered synchronously in a face-to-face, classroom setting with a lecture style presentation. I found it profoundly interesting… perhaps because of the offbeat topic or the quirky nature of Dr. Shelly Kagan, the professor.

     The course included a syllabus which explained very simple expectations and requirements. They included the requirement of attending all sessions and participating in all discussion sections. Expectations were stated: “poor attendance or non-participation will lower one's grade”. Beyond that, three short papers would be due. Each would be 5 pages, double-spaced. There was no final exam or assessment. The filmed lecture/course did not have all of the components that I would design for in a distance learning environment. For example, there was no way for an online, asynchronous student to participate in discussions or be a part of a learning community. (Simonson, et. al., 2009; Beldarrain, 2006). That would have enhanced the experience greatly. However, that said, I am simply grateful that these kinds of courses are available to all!

     Another wonderful site for open courseware is Open Culture which acts as a clearinghouse, of sorts, for many of the free courses available from Stanford, Yale, MIT and other resources. I found a powerful video there, “Hans Rosling's 200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes - The Joy of Stats”. I mention this video because it is an exceptional demonstration of how a very complex topic, referencing over 100,000 statistics, can be presented in an engaging and entertaining way. This video is worth watching for two reasons: 1. It is fascinating to see how our global health and economic development has evolved over the last 200 years. 2. The way in which the content is presented. It is a compelling 4 minutes and I think all instructional designers could benefit from watching it.

     The beauty in all of this is the realization that education is available to all. We may be limited by accessibility, bandwidth, hardware, software and other challenges… but if you can get to it, it’s there. (Ng, 2010).

References

Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153.

Ng, K. (2010). Availability of technology does not ensure accessibility. Retrieved on 11/06/2010 from http://www.digitalopportunity.org/comments/availability-of-technology-does-not-ensure-accessibility

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

Open Course Resources

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Open Courses. http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html

Open Courseware. http://www.openeducation.net/category/opencourseware/

Open Culture. www.openculture.com/

Open Yale Courses. http://oyc.yale.edu/

Stanford on iTunes U. http://itunes.stanford.edu/

YouTube. www.youtube.com/