Comments on: e-Learning templates and standards…at what cost? http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/e-learning-templates-and-standardsat-what-cost/ Performance by Design Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:59:01 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Tom Gram http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/e-learning-templates-and-standardsat-what-cost/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Tom Gram Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:41:30 +0000 http://gramconsulting.com/?p=388#comment-8 >>Harold: Thanks for the link. The “rocket builder” post is very funny. I think Don Clark misses on just one point--that rapid development tools are money losers. Articulate for example, is one of the fastest growing companies in North America and doesn’t seem to be slowing down. Adobe’s Connect and Captivate…also very popular tools that have now been around for a while, not to mention the LCMS’s that are growing. Microsoft’s (now free) Learning Content Development System also seems to be getting good traction. (http://www.microsoft.com/learning/tools/lcds/default.mspx). >> David: Thanks for your post. I agree that that rapid tools are making e-learning available to everybody. But I don’t think more training means better training. There is a glut of powerpoint + narration programs being produced that are labeled “e-learning” but are really nothing more than …uh…PowerPoint with narration. I do agree rapid tools can be used to create meaningful e-learning (Tom Kuhlmann at the rapid e-learning blog often has great ideas for how to do that). My argument however is that there are other less clunky and more effective ways to avoid the “dizzying” high-end e-learning you mention and provide learners with more information and collaboration oriented tools. Stay tuned. I’m working on another post with an example of what I’m getting at. >>Harold:

Thanks for the link. The “rocket builder” post is very funny. I think Don Clark misses on just one point–that rapid development tools are money losers. Articulate for example, is one of the fastest growing companies in North America and doesn’t seem to be slowing down. Adobe’s Connect and Captivate…also very popular tools that have now been around for a while, not to mention the LCMS’s that are growing. Microsoft’s (now free) Learning Content Development System also seems to be getting good traction. (http://www.microsoft.com/learning/tools/lcds/default.mspx).

>> David:

Thanks for your post. I agree that that rapid tools are making e-learning available to everybody. But I don’t think more training means better training. There is a glut of powerpoint + narration programs being produced that are labeled “e-learning” but are really nothing more than …uh…PowerPoint with narration. I do agree rapid tools can be used to create meaningful e-learning (Tom Kuhlmann at the rapid e-learning blog often has great ideas for how to do that). My argument however is that there are other less clunky and more effective ways to avoid the “dizzying” high-end e-learning you mention and provide learners with more information and collaboration oriented tools. Stay tuned. I’m working on another post with an example of what I’m getting at.

]]> By: David Fair http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/e-learning-templates-and-standardsat-what-cost/comment-page-1/#comment-7 David Fair Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:02:04 +0000 http://gramconsulting.com/?p=388#comment-7 The emergence of so many rapid elearning development systems is a good thing in my opinion. They are making elearning readily available to everyone. And as you say, "talented instructional designers have worked around the templates to produce interesting and effective simulations, case based scenarios programs, and problem based learning programs". You can work within the framework provided by rapid elearning tools to create inventive learning scenarios. I wonder if we in the learning industry are becoming "desensitized", so to speak, by the proliferation of technology to the point that each successive elearning project has to be a new dizzying high, showcasing our elearning development and instructional design skills. At last week's DevLearn 2008 in San Jose, CA, Ruth Clark's session "Learning by Viewing vs. Learning by Doing" shared "research evidence showing that more passive instructional environments actually led to more learning than their active counterparts." Just food for thought. The emergence of so many rapid elearning development systems is a good thing in my opinion. They are making elearning readily available to everyone. And as you say, “talented instructional designers have worked around the templates to produce interesting and effective simulations, case based scenarios programs, and problem based learning programs”. You can work within the framework provided by rapid elearning tools to create inventive learning scenarios. I wonder if we in the learning industry are becoming “desensitized”, so to speak, by the proliferation of technology to the point that each successive elearning project has to be a new dizzying high, showcasing our elearning development and instructional design skills. At last week’s DevLearn 2008 in San Jose, CA, Ruth Clark’s session “Learning by Viewing vs. Learning by Doing” shared “research evidence showing that more passive instructional environments actually led to more learning than their active counterparts.” Just food for thought.

]]> By: Harold Jarche http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/e-learning-templates-and-standardsat-what-cost/comment-page-1/#comment-6 Harold Jarche Fri, 14 Nov 2008 22:32:59 +0000 http://gramconsulting.com/?p=388#comment-6 You have to check out Donald Clark's latest posts, especially Rocket Coursebuilder: http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/ You have to check out Donald Clark’s latest posts, especially Rocket Coursebuilder:

http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/

]]>