Pervasive Learning

Pervasive LearningIn his book, Flat Army: Creating a Connected and Engaged Organization (Wiley, 2013), Dan Pontefract defines ‘Pervasive Learning’ as:

“learning at the speed of need through formal, informal and social learning modalities”

(I got the above definition from Dan’s blog, the book is still on my ‘to read’ list.)

A powerful thought indeed. The idea of pervasive learning has been around for sometime and makes perfect sense as more and more of us become concept workers and work and learning merge. I believe emerging technology is helping pervasive learning to happen more effectively and will continue to impact positively. I have noted this in an earlier post on how mobile enables informal learning.

 

Dan likens his idea of Pervasive Learning with Charles Jennings’ 70-20-10 Forummission. To me the two look well aligned until you take the ratios in the 70-20-10 method too seriously. As Donald Clark points out in this article, the 70-20-10 model may not be universally applicable to all staff and there’s not enough research to back the exact percentages. He talks of the ‘10% amplifier effect’, emphasizing the importance of formal training.

“This amplifier effect works because each hour of formal learning spills over to four-hours of informal learning for a 4:1 ratio (Cofer, 2000). Bell (1977) used the metaphor of brick and mortar to describe this relationship of formal and informal learning—formal learning acts as bricks fused into the emerging bridge of personal growth, while informal learning acts as the mortar, facilitating the acceptance and development of the formal learning.”

Not surprisingly Donald and I prefer Dan Pontefracts’ 3-33 Pervasive Learning modelover the 70-20-10 model. Donald writes –

“…3-33, which stands for 33% of the learning is formal, 33% is informal, and 33% is social. What is most interesting is that the research behind his model revealed that when the learners were asked to give the percentages on how they thought they learned, the numbers were very different than when the researchers actually discovered how the learners did indeed learn. This coincides with other research that indicates what learners are able to judge about their learning experiences (see Learner Self-Assessment Ratings). Pontefract 3-33 approximation is a Pervasive Learning model – learning is a collaborative, continuous, connected, and community-based growth mindset:”

Pervasive Learning

Courtesy : Amit Garg Amit Garg  |  eLearningeLearning Development 

Advertisements

How to Take Control of Your Business Online Reputation

Image

Potential customers are increasingly turning to dozens of review websites to view others’ opinions before trying a new product or service. According to two recent Nielsen studies, 85 percent of consumers polled go online for information and reviews about local businesses, and 70 percent of consumers said they trusted online reviews. 

We spoke with Michael Fertik, founder and CEO of Silicon Valley-based online reputation management company Reputation.com, to find out how business owners can take control of their online reputation today.

 

1. Ask customers for an honest review.
If a business has been around for several years, it’s doing something right, as evidenced by repeat customers, Fertik says. “Collect real tips from real customers,” Fertik suggests. Don’t pay for reviews (that’s unethical), but make it as easy as possible for customers to review your business. Have a laptop available near the register and ask customers if they’d mind writing a quick review about their experience.

2. Don’t obsess over social media – unless, of course, you want to.
Most businesses don’t need to spend a lot of time on Facebook and Twitter, Fertik says. If you run a cupcake shop, Facebook makes sense because you can list flavors of the day and the product is something people want to talk about. If you own a tree cutting business, Facebook doesn’t do as much for you, Fertik notes.

Related: When Bad Online Reviews Cost Business

At minimum, Fertik suggests business owners set up Twitter and Facebook pages with their business’ logo and contact information, and treat them as digital business cards. If you do want to engage in social media, don’t worry about constantly promoting your business on your Facebook page or Twitter feed. “Include information about the industry or articles of interest to customers; you want to keep the conversation going, [but you] don’t have to promote, promote, promote,” Fertik says.

3. Think before you respond to hostile criticism.
“Be very careful before you respond to a hostile critic [on a review site],” Fertik warns. You may not want to respond at all. “If you respond, respond only if they’re getting a specific set of facts wrong.” It can be hard to resist responding to negative feedback, so before deciding what to do, take a breather. Fertik says the best course of action is to ask customers for honest feedback and get them to review your business over a period of time.

4. Set up Google Alerts.
Small businesses can benefit from setting up Google Alerts, Fertik says. Google Alerts are free e-mail updates sent to your inbox any time your search terms are mentioned on Google. Fertik suggests setting alerts for your name, your business’ name, and any way people know your business. For example, if your name contains common search terms like “Bob’s Best Towing,” add the location to narrow your results so only the most relevant ones appear

Courtesy : entrepreneur

Wi-Fi in cars a bad idea: Research

Image

 

Providing Wi-Fi in cars may not be a good idea as it can distract drivers and threaten their safety on the road, a new study has warned.

“Many people assume that talking to a voice-operated device will be as safe as using a hands-free cell phone, but neither activity is safe,” said Professor Ian Spence, Department of Psychology at the University of Toronto, and author of the new study.

The study raises safety concerns about plans announced last month by Canadian telecommunications company Rogers Communications, along with US provider Sprint Corporation for providing high-speed Internet access in vehicles.

In the study, Spence and a team of researchers asked subjects to perform an attentional visual field test in which they repeatedly identified the random location of an object in visual clutter displayed on a computer monitor.

Poor performance on the test is known to be a good predictor of unsafe driving. Subjects performed the test while carrying out a range of listening and/or speaking tasks or in silence.

An example of an easy task was listening to recordings of news items, much like listening to a car radio. More difficult tasks required subjects to answer simple yes-no questions while performing the visual test.

Subjects answered by either speaking out loud in some experimental conditions, or merely thinking of the answer in others. The most-demanding questions required subjects to take the last letter of a presented word (eg apple) and speak another word beginning with that letter (eg elephant).

Subjects who completed the test of visual attention coupled with the listening/speaking tasks were as accurate as those who completed the visual test in silence.

However, they responded much more slowly as the difficulty increased ? as much as one second slower with the most demanding tasks.

“It did not matter whether the subject spoke the answer aloud or simply thought about the answer. It was the thinking, not speaking, that caused them to slow down,” said Spence.

“At 50 kilometres per hour, a car travels 13.9 metres in one second. A driver who brakes one second earlier than another driver to avoid a collision, will either prevent it completely or be travelling more slowly when it occurs, lowering the probability of severe injury or fatality,” Spence added.

“A delay in braking by as much as one second presents a significant threat to safe driving and casts doubt on the belief that hands-free voice-controlled devices reduce driver distraction,” Spence said.

The study appears in the journal Applied Cognitive Psychology.