<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Minimalist Learning Design: Another alternative to rapid e-learning</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/minimalist-learning-design-another-alternative-to-rapid-e-learning/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/minimalist-learning-design-another-alternative-to-rapid-e-learning/</link>
	<description>Performance by Design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 16:22:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Gram</title>
		<link>http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/minimalist-learning-design-another-alternative-to-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Gram</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gramconsulting.com/?p=426#comment-11</guid>
		<description>&gt;&gt;Clark

Thanks.  Even though the minimalist approach tends to focus on instructional documentation, I think it fits nicely with any task or problem based approach to learning design like those you mention and others.  

It&#039;s unfortunate that the e-learning mainstream is still so grounded in providing too much information with so little application.  It&#039;s understandable I suppose. We have a long history of subject experts designing training for classroom programs.  Rapid development tools have enabled the same approach to e-learning.  Not always a bad thing.  And the tools aren&#039;t fully to blame.  As always there is lots of room for better learning design.  Tom</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>>Clark</p>
<p>Thanks.  Even though the minimalist approach tends to focus on instructional documentation, I think it fits nicely with any task or problem based approach to learning design like those you mention and others.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s unfortunate that the e-learning mainstream is still so grounded in providing too much information with so little application.  It&#8217;s understandable I suppose. We have a long history of subject experts designing training for classroom programs.  Rapid development tools have enabled the same approach to e-learning.  Not always a bad thing.  And the tools aren&#8217;t fully to blame.  As always there is lots of room for better learning design.  Tom</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clark Quinn</title>
		<link>http://gramconsulting.com/2008/11/minimalist-learning-design-another-alternative-to-rapid-e-learning/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Clark Quinn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gramconsulting.com/?p=426#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Tom, love the focus here. Have been a fan of Carroll for years, similarly Schank and Goal-Based Scenarios, and Merrienboer; discuss them in my &#039;deeper ID&#039; talk.  Great stuff!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, love the focus here. Have been a fan of Carroll for years, similarly Schank and Goal-Based Scenarios, and Merrienboer; discuss them in my &#8216;deeper ID&#8217; talk.  Great stuff!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

