What's the role of video in e-learning?

Video is beginning to play a big role in education.  Or is it?

The Open University in the UK began to use TV programmes late at night to reach thousands of distant-learners from the early 1970s onwards.  Primary and secondary schools have dabbled with pre-recorded programmes and watching TV for a few decades too.

The cost of video equipment (and skills to edit the recordings) have usually been out of the hands of most educators, however, until recently.  But now, with cheap video cameras, open-source editing software and free tutorials on YouTube, everyone can create a video to use in the classroom or lecture theatre.  

But they still don't.  Most educators, or lecturers, or teachers, will use something that others have made.  The process is still too long, too convoluted.

Even making something decent from PowerPoint (and putting it through Articulate) is beyond the skills of  most educators... and they need the imagination as well as the time to put the learning objects together.

But as I explore video-conferencing with a view to potentially using it in the classroom, for example when the next ash cloud means people can't travel, I learn that high-schools and sixth-form colleges have already been using video-conferencing to teach diplomas across entire education areas, where there may only be one or two students per school who want to take that particular class.

And when you mix that with interactive white-boards and experiments with virtual worlds, it makes one wonder how quickly certain levels of education are leaping ahead of universities and other higher education establishments in terms of the technology used?  Do we need to wait for those youngsters to come through to universities and business schools before implementing the new technology, or are thirty-something and forty-plus executives willing to learn new tricks?

Perhaps one way to get them on board is to use fancy tricks they'll 'ooh' and 'aah' over.  For example, if you're studying internal medicine or engineering, why not have the teacher walk through the intestines, or pistons of a car, and point out the various areas directly?

The technology to do that used to be prohibitive, but now you can get your own green screen for virtually nothing... it's a little bit of training on the editing software that will be the bigger barrier.

So we educators don't need to try and do effects of the quality seen in the video below (which you really should watch. Honestly - only a few short minutes of your life - but you will go 'ooh' and 'aah') ... but why not walk through our graphs of economic collapse or our strategic human resource management models to combine the lecturer and the slides in one lovely package?

The biggest question I'm facing now is what we need from the video-conferencing side of it all.  What's more important?  To share documents or see the person?  Can we do both live with good quality, without having everyone sat at a $250,000 tele-presence unit?

And do we need to see the others? Are we not happier knowing that by telephone people can't see us in our pyjamas, or scratching ourselves or picking our noses (I believe some people do that)?

The death of business travel: the birth of virtual working

Virtual working has been around for many years now, with many people specialising in helping virtual or distance workers to keep connected, helping managers to manage virtually, and helping ensure virtual customers do not suffer from the lack of face-to-face contact.

I am lucky enough to work virtually on a regular basis, and it has its benefits and drawbacks.  It is easier to get things done without the distractions of the office, but the flip side of that same coin is that I can easily go a whole day without saying one word to anyone.

However, the question many have now been asking, is whether or not the problems travellers have experienced throughout Europe recently due to the Volcanic Ash Cloud will affect the way we do business in the future?

Many of us have rejoiced in the peace and quiet of not having planes screaming overhead when trying to enjoy the sunny outdoors.

Many of us have thought about how our lifestyle may revert to the 1950s, with air travel restricted to the very rich and the rest of us mere mortals enjoying the slower, quieter things in life, such as a train journey, or holidaying within our own country.  There are many areas of the UK I have not visited because, sad to say, it is cheaper to fly to Italy for the weekend, for example, than it is to get to the Lake District (quicker too!).

Despite the disruption to friends and colleagues over this period, and wary of the damage to business that the reduced (or removed option of) air travel might bring, it does also suggest a brave new world, stepping away from environmental catastrophe, stepping back from the relentless pace of modern business and leisure, and stepping smoothly over to a more intelligent way of doing things.

Back in the 1950s and since, business people travelled because they had to if they wanted to see their clients. The recent improvements in modern technology, with video conferencing, virtual seminars and virtual worlds allowing users to interact in every way except using touch (and that will surely come) provide the opportunity for technology companies to show what they're made of.  To show organisations of every size that you can save huge amounts of money by not travelling, but without losing those international clients.  To show individuals and organisations that you can trust someone online... not just face-to-face.

The only problem I see (and contrary to what Harold Jarche says) is that too many people have no idea what virtual worlds are, they don't concentrate on virtual seminars (because they carry on working on the computer) and they haven't properly tried video conferencing.  The majority of people I meet through business are not techies.  They don't use modern technology unless provided to them by their IT departments (despite having all the latest gadgets at home).  They certainly aren't 'power users'.

Consequently, there is a great opportunity here for both the tech. companies to provide the means for virtual working and virtual business; but also a great opportunity for those involved in training and education to help organisations embrace the new technology; to change their working methods and their mindset so that they understand the value of it in the same way they understand the value of a telephone.


The biggest opportunity of all is when you get the complete solution: new technology with coaching and change consultancy combined, to make sure the new stuff sticks.

Cinema needs 3D like a fish needs an avatar

The fashion, once again, is for 3D films.  Three dimensional imagery on the big silver screen.  People sitting in cinemas with ridiculous-looking plastic or cardboard glasses to be able view the impression of three-dimensional depth on a two-dimensional projection.

Why?

When cinema began, as everyone knows, it was short films of black-and-white imagery, with no sound.  Music was provided to accompany the images later on.  And then they discovered 'talkies' - where the audience could actually hear the dialogues and not have to judge the miming qualities of the actors.  This was clearly an obvious and essential improvement to the cinematic experience.

The next stage, of course, was colour.  Was it necessary? No - not for story telling... some of the best films were black and white (Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Third Man, Les Enfants du Paradis), but it did give the audience a greater experience in being able to see colour - to appreciate if it was a sunny or cloudy day other than by shadows, to see the colour of the ball-gowns worn by the actresses.

It's a shame that so many audiences today refuse to watch black and white films and the old masterpieces are now being corrupted with false colour to meet modern tastes.

But why have 3D?  In what way does that improve the cinematic experience?

It doesn't make you feel like you're there.

It doesn't improve the story-telling.

It doesn't help one identify with the characters.

It doesn't allow new environments to be painted for the audience - false or fantasy worlds have been made on screen for decades... all it gives one is the impression that one character is in front of another character.

Furthermore, am I alone in finding it hard to focus with the 3D specs?  The eye easily adapts to a shallow depth of field on a normal film, accepting the blurry bits were blurry for a reason. But my eyes kept trying to refocus the blurry bits of the bum-numbing Avatar... and I know I'm not the only one who left with a headache.  3D films on a 2D screen are a waste of time.

This is shouting into the void, but directors and producers of Hollywood, please desist from wasting your time and money on 3D.

Wait until we have 3D surround-vision virtual reality goggles.  Then everything we see (not just the screen on one wall) will be 3D and I can accept that then the viewer will feel like they're in the film. They will feel part of the action.  They may even feel like they're a character.

When those goggles are ready...roll on.  That will add to the cinematic experience.  But until then, spend more time on script development. Spend more time on the cinematography. Spend more time on editing (no film needs to be 3 hours long). Spend more time getting the story right.

The rest, after all, is secondary.

The same, it should be said, must be said for education in virtual worlds.  It's never going to completely take-off until the user is able to feel that they are in the world, rather than sitting at their desk looking at a screen... and hopping between one application and another, answering the phone and so on.

Immersive reality is what is required. Until computers and entertainment providers can, um, provide that, we should just let stop wasting time thinking this is going to change our lives.

Learning through Advertising and Porn

Following a conversation yesterday with someone very interested in online learning, particularly leadership etc., and following the Future of Technology in Education conference today (well, in fact, a Tweeted comment on virtual worlds I picked up after leaving the conference) I feel that the two conversations (if reading someone's Tweet is, in fact, a conversation) are indelibly linked.

The first conversation was on why advertisers are so good at producing messages that get through to us so effectively and efficiently. Minimal time... but you remember the brand. You know what the brand values are. You know what the brand stands for. You know what it doesn't stand for... or what it stands against. So, the crux of the first conversation was, 'Why can't educators find ways of doing that?'

Is that the Future of Learning? We just create 'blipverts' of a couple of minutes in length that tell us all we need to know on a subject? We may need to go through hundreds of these blipverts, but if they are carefully crafted, surely they are going to be more effective than reading a text book, or a Harvard Business Review article, or a case study. After all, most business or management books don't really need an entire book to get their message over. I saw Professor Kim, author of Blue Ocean Strategy, talk about the book when it first came out. He gave a one hour seminar in a conference. Within 30 seconds he'd explained the concept, the rest of it was examples of what Blue Ocean Strategy is. This is in no way denigrating the importance or otherwise of BOS, but merely stating that it didn't need a full hour to explain the concept. I've read most of the book... it doesn't really give me much more. Is that just me?

Same could be said for Chris Anderson's 'The Long Tail' and his latest 'Free'. And Jim Collins' 'Good to Great'... and so I could go on.

My point? These 'important' management books may have been the product of much research and certainly many hours of hard graft, but one doesn't have to read them to understand the basic concept they're trying to explain.

I think, also, that the same goes for large amounts of knowledge in all areas of learning... not just management and business.

So how can we distil the important concepts into 1 minute easy-to-absorb 'bites'...dare I say...'Learning Bites'? One would need hundreds of them to get complex issues with all the necessary appendices, but that must still be easier to learn and retain than reading a text book or a journal article or even a 3 hour lecture.

Now the second point which comes from a Tweet today at the Future of Technology in Learning conference was to do with virtual worlds and the eventual development of gloves (and other clothing) that are able to replicate the texture or tactile sensations relating to particular things.

On the most basic practical level, this will help surgeons practice with 'hands-on' practical experience, with no dangers to the patients.

However, it obviously wouldn't be long before this was subverted by the sex industry to enable online sex to be more than looking... one would, combined with a multi-user virtual environment, be able to feel as if the...ahem...touching was really happening.

And pornography, distasteful, exploitative and seedy though it is, has always managed to be popular and retain people's attention. Perhaps not for long periods, but on a repeated basis.

So here's the idea. We create learning objects and edu-blipverts which are able to educate through sex. Sex brings in the learners and keeps them coming back. The educational element is somehow combined in the video (or virtual environment).

Perhaps better if we just went for educating through the medium of advertising.

After all, which is more important? That people learn, or that people study? It would be nice if the former came through the latter, but surely the main issue is to educate. By whatever means necessary.

This isn't the future, this is the now

The Future of Technology in Education conference is now post coffee break and Leeds Metropolitan Uni are talking about how wonderful Google Apps have been for them.

As a business case, it's difficult to argue with avoiding licensing fees, avoid support issues... but what's surprising is that Robert Moores (from Leeds) says that everyone seemed to accept the downtime. Perhaps that's OK for students on undergraduate programmes (tho' it surprises me.... I find it difficult to believe that people are happy to wait to finish their essay/dissertation when they're in full flow and against a deadline, just because the system is down). Perhaps this is more because everyone now has a laptop and is able to do everything offline... so very few students are actually using GoogleDocs and Apps through LMU as their primary source of computing?

James Ballard (or is it Richard Davis?) from ULCC are now talking about Moodle and connecting it to Flickr, Google, YouTube and having central repositories etc. so on and so on and ... greatest respect to James and/or Richard, but this is all nothing new.

I was hoping to learn how educators are engaging in MUVEs (Virtual Worlds). I was hoping to learn how educators are engaging with technology in the classroom, but getting students to use handheld devices or interactive whiteboards and how they are taking the classroom out of the classroom.

That was James, we're now getting Richard... talking about further repositories. All are essential, but these are issues of knowledge sharing and knowledge management, and as far as I can tell they have very little to do with education specifically.

We're now hearing specifically about repositories in Moodle... but as we discovered recently, Moodle is fine up to a point, but it is severly limited on any kind of Social Networking facilities. For that you need to plug-in Elgg, or similar. Then you probably need another system plugged in to actually do such things as blogging or online creation.

This is great for small institutions which don't have money for licenses and can grow as they go, but if you are a little bigger, and you want an all-singing all-dancing system that will work, more or less, out of the box, without any extra configuration to get things to fit, unfortunately you have to go for the big boys...such as IBM or MS.

Tim Marshall: "Progress: Tube staff man in perfect uniform with mohican. He's delivering a service but personalising his engagement."
True - this wouldn't have happened 20 years ago... and I agree that that certainly is progress. But more importantly, Tim is finally a good speaker... he's natural and relaxed at talking to the audience (he's chairing the panel) and, wonderfully, left his mobile on which just went off while he was by the microphone.

Unfortunately, when the others start talking, I switch off. They're not too coherent, they don't ENUNCIATE enough, and maybe it's because I'm stuck at the back of the room, but I have to strain to hear it over the click of my keyboard.

The law related to Cloud Computing is not the most pressing issue. Simone from Amazon explained how users can define where they want their data held, to ensure it doesn't breach regional data protection issues.

Now they're discussing whether or not there are issues related to others controlling your data... so if you run out of money (and can't pay the bill) can you access your data? Perhaps this is also a red herring. If you run out of money and can't afford a new server stack or have to sack 90% of your IT team, then you will probably also not be able to access your data. So the risks and benefits on this issue cancel each other out.

But I want to shout loudly (shame I'm too shy to do so) - WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOUR CONNECTION IS DOWN?!?

Perhaps I should be patient and see what happens, but no...morning session over and no one addressed the question at all.

Very big harumphs all around!

Technology everywhere, and ne'er a drop to drink

I co-ran a session this morning looking at 'E-Nabling the Operation' and (OK - it was 2 sessions) the 'Future of Operations'. Looking at production processes, procurement, planning and capacity, supply chains and so on; and:
a. how they can be improved now with Web 2.0 stuff; and
b. what the future brings.

A fun session as:
i. 'twas a good class - not too big - enough loud-mouths tho' to make it interesting and have a bit of an argument; and
ii. it's an interesting subject. 'The Future'.

So perhaps that's what I'd like to be when I grow up - a 'Futurist'. There are a couple of videos on Youtube which I can highly recommend - in particular: 'Shift Happens':

... but... big question here... how do you become a Futurist? It must be the ideal job - dream about what might happen and never be proved wrong as the future never comes...

Anyway - the big problem with the class was, ironically and most irritatingly, technology not working. So one can lead an organisation to the trough of technological innovation, but if you can't show them how the stuff works there and then; they are just as likely to dismiss the idea out of hand and never try again.

And this wasn't 'amazing' technology - just a simple private Wiki that they had already been playing with - but which we were hoping to continue on during the session. So, in the end, we had to 'fire up the flipcharts' and use the ancient technology of pen and paper... a shame... but it is more reliable and works first time around (well... as long as the pens have ink and there's enough paper).

So my dilemma for today... or if you prefer it... my challenge to you dear reader:

How can we teach technological innovations and encourage people to use said technology through the medium of technology?

If we can get them online to do these sessions in Virtual Worlds or WebEx or any other collaborative system, surely the battle is over? They know what the technology is, and they know how to use it.

So it comes back to the same-old same-old... we need to have a pre-Internet; pre-computer technology session in real-time with real people in a real classroom, to teach those real people about new technology, how to use it, what the business benefits are and why they need to get on board.

One more question that does keep coming around though is whether any research has been done thus far on when is the best time for a company or organisation to jump on board the new technology bandwagon?

Answers, as always, on a postcard to the usual address please. Correct entries will be pulled at random and be given the prize of ephemeral fame.

Ray Kurzweil... the original futurist

Some of what I write and talk about... and present on... one could, conceivably, refer to as 'futurism'. Talking about the use of existing technologies and the probable development of them and integration in the near to medium-term future.

Well I just read an interview with Ray Kurzweil in Saturday's Guardian and realised that 'futurism' has been around for decades.

I'll not repeat the interview here... suffice to say I'll be quoting Kurzweil in my next presentation... in particular his idea (which I had vaguely thought of but he seems to have proven) that the trajectory or development of new technology is exponential.

From this he suggests that if current growth rates continue, we could deliver 100% of our electricity needs by solar power in 20 years' time. Just 20 years!

It certainly encourages me that things might change for the better... and blends nicely with the Gartner Hype Cycle (below) in seeing through the hype to probable growth.

What I may try and do (or find if someone has already done it) is plot usage rates of virtual worlds against the exponential graph to see when they will reach criticial mass... if I do... it'll be here.

Education in Second Life

I was presenting at a conference last week, talking about Web 2.0 and other emerging (or emerged) technologies, where one of the other presenters was a specialist in Second Life and virtual worlds in general.

The audience was universities and business schools from around Europe, some already undertaking some kind of e-learning in Second Life, with others unsure as to whether or not they should start.

There are, I think, three areas where a business school or other educational establishment can gain value from Second Life:

a. by getting residents of the virtual world to sign up to courses in Second Life (etc.) and for all the classes to take place within that environment (of course there is a huge issue of how one can be sure who they are teaching/assessing/examining?)

b. by using the virtual world to hold some (all?) sessions/conferences/classes that have been signed up to in the real world. This option allows the possibility of conferences, etc., to be held without the need for participants to cross the globe physically.  But what value can be gained from this compared to using a simpler 'WebEx' facility, with VoIP communications?

c. marketing - simply to have a marketing representative and/or marketing collateral in the virtual world to help sell the real-life services to people who are inhabiting the virtual world.

I can see the potential of all three options, but am not endeared to undertaking classes in that way myself. One of the problems is that my perfectly good computer is unable to show Second Life (I've tried. It crashes).... and I am not keen to update the computer for the sake of one application which is by no means critical.

And perhaps I am out of the age group (the digital natives, or Gen Y) who will eventually adopt virtual worlds as completely natural obvious things.   I have a real life.  I like to meet my real friends (such as they are) in real spaces to drink real drinks, eat real food and watch real theatre or other shows.  I spend all day in front of the computer, do I want to spend my free time in front of the screen?

No.

But when cheap TVs also are able to adopt the role of computers (wireless keyboards etc.) and one can indulge easily (i.e. without buying the latest kit) in exploring virtual worlds as a leisure activity - as something you can do with others (two people using the same computer from the same sofa?) - then I think things will change. 

At the moment virtual worlds encourage the paradoxical situation of deliberately isolating yourself in the real world to be able to mix with people in the virtual one.  If you're already alone, fine, but if you're not, what on earth would bring you to play in such an environment?